Another Climate Alarmist Admits Real Motive

[farmaholic]

That was a little harsh Larry.

[blackpowder]

How can u not get really angry reading that article? Canada is well on its way to 'europeonization'.

[farming101]

Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country. William Jennings Bryan

[foragefarmer]

Larry that was harsh, very unprofessional on your part. I doubt you'd talk like that in public.

[tweety]

Harsh, but accurate.

[seabass]

Thanks Larry! Chuck u must be under some illusionthat all farmers want these programs. Just pay us what our products are actually worth. I believe a whiny bitch like u would be paying a helluva lot more for your food if that was the case. U would be glad to keep us on the welfare line just to feed your appetite at the cheap rate.

[bucket]

Weber has a better handle on ag logistics than anyone on this forum.

We would be lucky to have him comment more often in any language.

Understand what he is saying not how he says it.

[chuckChuck]

Larry you must be having a bad day!

You know it is okay to have a difference of opinion.

I see the value in many of the wealth transfer programs for farmers (subsidies). Some are good policy, some not so much.

But if you are going to criticize carbon taxes on the basis of it being a wealth transfer program then you better be able to defend the programs that subsidize or support your industry.

[blackpowder]

Similar or worse was said by chucks team back in the day.

[chuckChuck]

Oneoff. A lot of what we purchase in the form of food, consumer goods, automobiles come from regions or countries that have lower wages and lower standards of living than we do do in Canada. So when you talk about exploitation it should include the word we as we are all guilty.

[oneoff]

Personally I try to stick to saying I for the reason that I don't want to be speaking on behalf of you and they and anyone else.

At least not without their permission. However in my opinion; it is often the case (and should always should be the case)that that which affects others; also are the same regulations and laws that affect me. Thus the fact that WE are all in this together. That should go without saying.

Of course WE know (or have pretty good ideas who others are.

Opinions should be considered in the context of where they are coming from; the motives and special interests behind the statements and quotes of others; and whether those opinions are based on beliefs; faith and myopic consideration of only evidence which supports what one already knows.

It gets real trying to hear the same old story repeated as the last word; without even a hint of acknowledgment that the proposed solution may have at least some flaws; if not fatal flaws with ruinous potential results....all being prematurely proposed before the technology is advanced enough to be proven workable.

And residential energy needs aren't all that drives the economy and standards of living.

And lower wages work only with lower standards of living. Is that what is being proposed in Canada's carbon taxes.
I don't see any support for that; even from those who pretend or think they support the recent initiatives.

[checking]

Oh, you are delusional cc!

Farming contributions to that list is well funded because as farming taxpayers through our wealth creation, we are multiple times contributors over any pittance that some legislation returns.

Indeed, some of us (hands up, not out) don't subscribe to much on your list.

Mark me down as a net contributor with a social conscience.