Selling to the US without the CWB

[parsley]

Hi ianben,


Lord William Rees-Mogg wrote something interesting.....

"Markets always place the greatest pressures on the weakest holders. Indeed that is part of their virtues. They promote eficienecy by removing assets from weak hands."

Parsley

[ianben]

Hi Parsley

The law of the jungle!

Keep your claws sharp and dont get injured
Perhaps we are back to square one. Seems a pity.

Good luck out there

[TOM4CWB]

Thalpenny and the CWB...

I wrote;

"Rather call in customs agents, and send folks to jail, than respect and honour those who they were supposed to support and share burdens with!

Why is it so imposible to get the cash price that the CWB gets each day...

Unless the CWB knows this revelation will insure the CWB's death itself... "

Now if the Single desk monopoly is so great, and you know this to be true...


Give us cash prices... let us take these prices to the bank...

Or let those who would prefer to risk manage thru the pool... pool. You can contract pool sales, cherry picking is not a problem if pool sales are contracted in the same process as you do with PPO and the pooling system today.

We as farmers need to see the cash, where is it?

[parsley]

ianben,

Beneficiaries of organized compulsion find it difficult to accept the concept of "equality of opportunity" for everyone. The view is firmly based in co-operation as opposed to Equality's coercion. The view is firmly based in inclusiveness as opposed to Equality's exclusiveness.

One views the cup half full, one views the cup half empty.

One wants equality of opportunity for everyone, the other wants equality for a only a certain group.

Many describe "equality of opportunity", as a jungle where everyone needs claws, ianben. Certainly in Saskatchewan, Nettie Weibe, who was the leader of Canada's National farmers Union, publically urged the Government to jail all the farmers crossing the border without export licenses. She described them as greedy. Nettie Weibe wanted everyone to be equal, where nobody got more than anyone else. And she advocated imprisonment to enforce her point of view.


Wiebe got her wish, and 211 civil cases, and 216 criminal cases have either been completed or are still going through the court system. 427 families have been or are to be jailed and fined and coerced and intimidated because they want to market what they grow, and they want everyone else to have the equality of opportunity to do the same. These farmers do not advocate force, nor jail nor compulsion for anyone.

The beneficiaries of organized compulsion advocate equality and equality is enacted through 'civilized' force ... coercion and jail and favoritism and patronage and lies and coverups and fines

The jungle looks damn good to me

Parsley

[parsley]

tom4cwb - I think what you described looks like the producer direct sale process. Now you are starting to get it. The PDS process allows you to get a cash price from the US, but you have to put down your money in the form of the PDS to ensure you aren't undercutting the CWB's price. If you can beat the CWB's cash price in that market, you keep the differential. That is capturing the pecuniary benefit of having the single desk, so your neighbors who sell through the CWB don't have their market diminshed by your actions.

Some of the statements made here include that people don't want to get rid of the CWB, if their neighbors want it that's fine, etc. But by removing the single desk, you remove the financial advantages. Take a look at any grain company that offers a pooled price for special crops alongside cash prices. They always face the risk of unavailable supply for the pooled contracts if the price rallies.

So again, parsley and others couch their language in this never-never land of 'just give us no-cost export licenses' and everything will be the same for those who want the CWB.

It is fraudulent and misleading at best and downright conniving at worst. They know if they called this by it's true name - an open market - that it would not sell because farmers support the single desk and the benefits of price pooling. Farmers know that exactly what ianben describes is what will happen.

Tom

[JD_GREEN]

CHARLIEP

AGREE WITH YOU ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AND YES WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF ANYONE GOES BROKE OVER THE COMING WINTER AND ITS RESULTS

[parsley]

thalpenny,

You continue to talk about "capturing the pecuniary benefit", but the pecuniary benefit requirement was put in the Licensing part of the Act which applies to ALL applicants actoss Canada. Not just the West.

Therefore, the "pecuniary benefit" requirement must be applied equally to every province, and you do not do this! You are trying to apply it to only Western Canadians. Naturally, you wish that this "pecuniary benefit" requirement is in the Marketing part of the Act that only applies to the West. It is not.

For you to pretend that the Licensing tariff fee that Parliament states is to be applied to all exporters, is a fee targeted only at the Western farmer, is best described as "fraudulent and misleading at best and downright conniving at worst".

Now, if you would be so kind as to answer the following question, thalpenny...so that we can do this one step at a time...

Does the 14(b)requirement, which is the pecuniary benefit phrase, lie in the Licensing Part IV or in the Marketing Part III?

Answer with either Licensing OR Marketing, if you would be so kind

Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Thalpenny;

Are you smart like a fox, or do you still not understand what a cash price is...

CASH, is CASH, TO take to the bank, deposit, pay bills, and buy groceries.

A CASH price that reflects a premium price, that you say the CWB extracts...

A cash price avaliable at my local elevator, so I can be environmentally responsible, a cash price that I don't have to truck my grain 500miles one way to recieve!

You wrote;

"Take a look at any grain company that offers a pooled price for special crops alongside cash prices. They always face the risk of unavailable supply for the pooled contracts if the price rallies."

Thalpenny, how many pools alongside cash price systems have you been involved in exactly???

What risk are you talking about?

If I run a pool, I decide exactly who to let into my pool, and what are the terms of my pool. The people in my pool, are in the pool for the whole crop year, or they aren't in the pool at all, for the specific portion of crop they decide to market in my pool.

This is not rocket science...

Sask. pulse processors run pools, and they satisfy the needs of those in the pool, as do bean processors/marketers for growers in Southern Alberta!!!

And growers decide how, where, and when to market their products...

Practical experience totally debunks the myth you have just tryed to pass off as fact, and what you say is not possible happens every day.

In fact other products that I grow, market, and deliver to my customers, that in turn deliver world wide to quality concious consumers of these my products, are more often pooled than sold cash in these specialty markets!

Fescue, timothy, straw, hay, seed barley, seed wheat, canola, einkorn, peas practically every non-board crop grown on my farm has been pooled in one fasion or another.

And none of us involved in these my pools, ever did the any of transactions against our wills, except with the CWB!

Section 32 of the CWB Part III give the CWB authority to market grain through the CWB Pools, IF it is "offered" in the manner specified in Part III of the CWB Act.

Part III, which is specifically and only for grain produced in the "designated area".

Is threatening jail terms and fines, to force farmers into the CWB Act Part III, actually a farmer "offering" grain to the CWB???

[ianben]

Thalpenny
The MMB like the CWB, appears to be doing, caused its own demise by not listening to its farmer customers.

I am not saying to MMB was good and should have carried on as it was.

Just that change could have been handled better if we had seen the pit falls.

Enlightenment on both sides is needed.

The CWB could also learn much from our mistakes.

Is anyone there actually listening to what these farmers are saying?

If parsely is cherrypicking you are surely on the gravy train!!!

Is not learning and comunication what got us out of the jungle into supposed civilization

[ianben]

Parsley
You obviosly hold strong beliefs and I respect you for that.

I am never sure how much is in my glass till it is empty.

I would pay the fine and get on with my life rather than go to jail.

I would be perpared to compromise for a workable solution.

I just want a future for farmers everywhere.

[Everest]

thalpenny

I think you are refering to me when you say that some people in this thread would leave the CWB in place only for those that want to use it. That part of your comment is absolutely correct. I do not advocate getting rid of the CWB. I advocate making it voluntary.

However where you are absolutely incorrect, is in your statement that it removes the "financial benefit". Tom, for me, and for lots of other farmers, the CWB provides no financial benefit. There is a cost. That is a FACT.

For others, who percieve that they would attain a lower price if they marketed direct, there arguably may be a benefit. But it would only be a benefit above what THEY could achieve...not what everybody could achieve. For them, my desire is to leave the CWB in place. It will (or may) net them more $$ than if they had to operate without it. It should be their choice.

But Tom, do YOU think it is legitimate for me to be forced into the compulsory marketing regime, when it does not meet my needs, and costs me money? And secondly, do you think it is legitimate for those who would remain in the CWB system to have the right to force me in as well, and thereby force me to accept less for my grain because of it?

[parsley]

thalpenny,

Several times, you have referred to a "no cost export licenses", as you again did on this thread.


Just so that we are on the same page, I would hope that I have not expressed what you refer to as:
,
'just give us no-cost export licenses'


I try to be more careful than that, thalpenny.

A no-cost export license actually means selling to the Board, and going through the buyback and making sure that the market price minus the initial price equals zero.

I NEVER mean to advocate this, and if I have made a mistake by doing so, let me correct it at this time.

I advocate a NO-BUYBACK export license. NOT a no-cost export license. A No-buyback export license means I bypass CWB marketing and pooling. It means I do not jump through the Board's buyback policy. It means I sell directly to my buyer.

I'd appreciate it if you'd file the difference for future reference.

Looking forward to the answer to the question I asked,
As Always, Parsley