Walmarted------->What's behind personal opinions.............

[LWeber]

Why not let parents mark their children’s exams while we are at it.

I’ve debated the KFT study with you before - so has Depape. You chose not to answer. That is a skill set you have.

While you continue to link supply management to the CWB - the Dairy Farmers want no part of this debate. All the lobbying they did on your behalf in the 90's is haunting them.

If durum was higher once in 10 years, does that take away a farmer’s right to manage their business themselves. Ask Cotton how that is working for him this year…

Changed their support? With a Chairman carrot; with a save my farm carrot? Lame.

I asked you this once before. See if you have the gonads this time to answer.

You lamented on another post about GM wheat. It indicates that you are on the outside looking in, naive or disingenuous?

Which is it?

There was on old poster in here by the name of Boone. He never died – just resurrected.

[gregpet]

chuck you discredit any study that shows the CWB reduces farmers income, why is that any
different?

Will you admit chuck that the CWB suppresses some farmers income while increases some farmers
income?

Why not enjoy a dual market where those that benefit from the CWB will and those that want
options can have them?

[jdepape]

chuckChuck:

You seem to like Richard Gray's barley study of 2005 (among others).

Would you still like it if you knew he and the Schmitz's had copied someone else's work? Would you still think it didn't deserve being discredited?

Can you spell "plagiarize"?

Would you still defend it if you knew that the work they plagiarized was the Sparks Barley study of 2004?

You didn't know? Well, you do now.

[oneoff]

chuck;;; How much "skin" have you got in the CWB monopoly control of wheat, durum and barley ie. outside the possible export "permits" that may be free or relatively very low cost. There's got to be somethings you truly fear losing; that is very important to you personally. I know that you are concerned about Walmart type control of any sector; how unlucky your kids might be; your fear of many becoming farm employees; land acquisition by those richer than you; the hypocisy of accepting government payments while voting Conservative etc. But there has to be some real burrs that make you put time into defending your position. Just give us one real issue the other side can epathise with.
But the CWB has had little to no effect on any of these trends. As was mentioned a few posts back; is it a legitimate policy of the CWB to attempt to redistribute wealth? Does Director Rod Flamans comments not make that totally clear. The answer in my books is that it flies in the face of a country which is striving for free enterprize principles. Or do you support the directors statemnets?
As for Canadian supply management for dairy and poultry..... USA fluid milk on the grocery store shelf is priced just as expensive as milk on the shelf 150 miles north in Canada ($4.85 US per US gallon and can be purchased for slightly less per 4 liters in Canada.) Unlike you; I can accept things which don't significantly differ; and instead save the words to report on what does differ in comparisons. When supply management is not serving the consumer well; then is the time to raise that issue. But when turkeys in Canada can be had in season for less than $1.00 per pound (in special promotions) and they are $0.88 or even 74 cents at the Walmart; near Thanksgiving; just what is the significant price difference. To bring this argument into the CWB debate is merely to inject fear and attempt gaining support for a commercial grain producer monopoly that provides no options for a significant number of farmers who wish your hand to be taken out of their pockets.

[oneoff]

"Sure there was a few farmers who sold at higher values but the overall price benefit was better in Canada. Why not acknowledge this? "

And there are a few (obviously including yourself) who benefit from the current CWB. Combined with your acknowlegement that a few could have sold at higher prices; the clear conclusion can only be that you have no problem with your benefit coming at the expense of those whom you have denied marketing options.

[tipsy]

chuck, here is a little information for you. It's in L Weber news letter dated nov 15/11 and comes from Henry Vos testimony at nov 2/11 ag committee meeting. His statement comes, protected by parliamentary privilege. I quote, "From the information I saw directly, I could never put my finger on net farm returns. Sure, there was talk about premiums and sales price advantages, but when you subtract the cost that were imposed on the system, cost imposed on farmers by the lack of flexibility in planning their business, I did not see a net benefit. That's an honest opinion of what I saw there".
It's easy to create a study and get the results you want when you pay someone to do a study. I respect Henry's view to be a far more accurate reflection of actual cwb business.
And btw chuck I would suggest you and all board supporters and the whole hearing. It was very startling as to what can be revealed when one is protected under parliamentary privilege.

[chuckChuck]

This issue is all about politics.

Rational,fair debate and an examination of the issues has long left the room.

Those who oppose the CWB basically want farmer input into the grain industry removed. They are fully prepared to hand all the power over to the multinationals and railways.

I am not blindly prepared to give it all away because why would any corporation that is mandated to maximize returns for shareholders give a rats ass about what happens to farmers as long as they continue to make money.

Farmers have been exiting the industry worldwide because of poor returns with or without the CWB. For a number of reasons. If it wasn't for direct subsidies or through supply management most Canadian farmers would be losing money or have very poor returns.

[chuckChuck]

Weber,
When have you ever debated any of the economists I have mentioned in a detailed public forum?

Why would you expect me to explain the work of KFT, Gray, Schmitz?

All I need to do is read their conclusions.

Academics have to back up their work and defend their work in front of their peers.

Where are your peer reviewed papers on the subject?

What are your qualifications? Do you have Phd in Ag Econ?

Do you not stand to benefit in an open market?

Supply management is part of ag. policy in this country. So is the CWB. What we have is an incoherant inconsistent ag policy in this country. Why is that not an issue worth discussing?

Why are their two classes of farmers, one protected by tarrifs and supply mangement and the rest of us. Why not bring back a domestic price for grains protected with tarrifs as well? If it increases dairy farm incomes why not for grains?

So I take it you want GM wheat even when the majority of our customers don't want it? Why doesn't the US introduce GM wheat first? What are they waiting for? Did you learn anything from the flax fiasco?

[LWeber]

You lamented on another post about GM wheat. It indicates that you are on the outside looking in, naive or disingenuous?

Which is it?

Answer this question, I will ponder answering yours...

[chuckChuck]

Weber I don't get your point on GM wheat.

Name me one business that trys to sell something to customers that don't want it? And when they say they don't want the product, tells them they are wrong and stupid and we know better.

The CWB played an important role in identifying the lack of demand for GM wheat. And the consequences of contaminating the whole supply.

Want to lose alot of customers for Canadian wheat? Just introduce GM wheat!

You can bet that pretty soon after the CWB one company will say we can contract GM wheat for our customer and keep it separate. Don't worry we have customers who want it.

If you think that is a good idea then you are a fool.