NFU joins carbon tax fight

[SASKFARMER3]

The answer is real simple chuck like you there not.

[chuckChuck]

Canada is a resource based exporting nation, when our main competitors buy in, and pay a carbon tax, in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, (and the smaller FSU nations gaining momentum). Australia, Brazil, Argentina and USA, and the table is level let us buy in, but not a tonne before.

Besides that Western Canadian farmers engage the sustainable practice for decades with reduced tillage, we use equipment which now comes with pollution controls, practice integrated production technology to grow the most units per acre, while sequestering carbon, how will a carbon tax encourage us to do better.

If we drive a gas burner car, we can buy a hybrid. We can move to a smaller home, we can buy less consumables as individuals to reduce our footprint. But what can we do in Ag to reduce our carbon footprint, pray tell? If there is a model, other than stopping planting, we should know: perennial wheat not invented. And, grazing will not work because that is beef and indeed the greens would say this is bad, beef is bad but alas dairy (high intensive dairy farms) are well worth defending. It seems necessary to ask, what is the road map, to green that a carbon tax will bring.

Surely the wise folk can tell us: Chuck Chuck? Anyone? Give me the map.

I like solutions, in ag we all seek them everyday, all the time but alas this is confusing, in today's competitive global market, the last thing we need is more tax, we have done our part and if we had a nation with a view of the future, then ag would have a full exemption not just fuel, and if a carbon tax, why are we not insisting on offsetting carbon tax credits?

Farm income dropped this year, & next year the carbon tax will take another bite. Its a risky business, made even riskier by made in Canada by a policy of increased taxation.

Taxation is not the reason farmers are not making money. This site is full of complaints about low prices and marketing issues. It is also full of complaints about the high cost of inputs. This is what happens when you let the input and marketing sector dominate agriculture at the expense of farmers.

The seed and chemical companies are making sure that the cost of seed will go up. They're excuse is we need to invest more. The real reason is they want to make more profit.

It's hard to get innovation when agronomic improvements that could reduce input costs never get researched because there is no profit for input suppliers.

The chemical companies are not interested in intercropping research that reduces the need for fungicides. Derek Axten and Colin Rosengren have developed intercropping that does just that.

To assume that agriculture has reached its peak of efficiency and innovation is wrong. There is more that can be done. Autonomous diesel electric prototype systems to handle seeding etc. are already here. The next generation may be fuel cell electric. Most manufacturers have been working on this already.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Taxation is not the reason farmers are not making money. This site is full of complaints about low prices and marketing issues. It is also full of complaints about the high cost of inputs. This is what happens when you let the input and marketing sector dominate agriculture at the expense of farmers.

The seed and chemical companies are making sure that the cost of seed will go up. They're excuse is we need to invest more. The real reason is they want to make more profit.

It's hard to get innovation when agronomic improvements that could reduce input costs never get researched because there is no profit for input suppliers.

The chemical companies are not interested in intercropping research that reduces the need for fungicides. Derek Axten and Colin Rosengren have developed intercropping that does just that.

To assume that agriculture has reached its peak of efficiency and innovation is wrong. There is more that can be done. Autonomous diesel electric prototype systems to handle seeding etc. are already here. The next generation may be fuel cell electric. Most manufacturers have been working on this already.

And how would either of those technologies reduce emissions of your dreaded CO2? I'm sure you believe all the hype and believe that fuel cells are a form of energy generation, and that electricity all comes from green sources.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

And the reason why oil CEO's are jumping on the CO2 bandwagon, is the myth called social license. Same way the Alberta NDP gutted our economy in the name of social license, because that was the only thing stopping pipelines. Trouble is, the lack of support for pipelines had nothing to do with social license and everything to do with money from those who stand to gain by us not exporting, so no amount of social license is going to rectify that, as should be obvious by now and the complete lack of progress or support in spite of all of the virtue signalling Alberta has done.

[wd9]

The chemical companies are not interested in intercropping research that reduces the need for fungicides. Derek Axten and Colin Rosengren have developed intercropping that does just that.

The latest foolish religion. Regen and intercropping.

[Guest]

and that folks , is why the NFU has never amounted to SFA, and never will .
bunch of ndpers grandstanding for personal gain
message to NFU ; do not ever speak for me , a real farmer

[sumdumguy]

They never represented farmers - never will.

[Oliver88]

Is there any producer group that is against both royalties and Carbon Tax? Guess you would have to be kinda misdle of road and we all know that isn't possible.

Yes there is, one large group is APAS.
(I’m assuming SARM and others are as well but haven’t heard regarding seed tax.)

Any group that publicly promotes a carbon tax or a seed tax hasn’t consulted very many farmers for their opinion.

[grassfarmer]

message to NFU ; do not ever speak for me , a real farmer

Well technically they never did - they speak for their members, who are also real farmers - but maybe with different views to you on some issues.

[furrowtickler]

Michael Chong who ran for the Leadership of the Conservative Party and is a sitting Conservative MP supports a carbon tax as do many business leaders including several representing the oil industry. Also Preston Manning.

There is support in the conservative movement because a carbon tax is a market based approach that lets consumers and industry decide how best to reduce emissions instead of governments telling them what to do.

Even if it is rebated to consumers it still works because it is in your interest to reduce energy use that lowers how much carbon tax you pay and you still get a rebate.

All businesses can pass the cost of the tax along to the consumer.... no net cost to them . Of course they would not oppose it .
Pass on the cost , then ask for rebate ... double win 🙄

[Guest]

Well technically they never did - they speak for their members, who are also real farmers - but maybe with different views to you on some issues.

just really frustrating grass. I was really starting to think I had misjudged them .
did they have a vote on this very issue ? I highly doubt it ?
and they are speaking for farmers , read climate barbies ad
I gaurantee if all farmers were allowed to vote on carbon tax there wouldn't be 2% for it
it can't work when we're competing against countries that don't have it .
and it's progressive , first on oil production . then it gets taxed again at the refinery , then again when you burn it in a vehicle . same can be said about everything you do , eat or drink . it will be a disaster
are you happy with the way any govt throws YOUR money around ? I'm not
certainly don't want to give them more

[grassfarmer]

did they have a vote on this very issue ? I highly doubt it ?

All their policy comes from the members through resolutions passed at Regional/National meetings. It is a democratic organization run from the ground up not from the top down like most. I believe there is a far higher proportion of farmers concerned about climate change and prepared to pay to mitigate the risks than is portrayed by the majority of posters on Agriville. The vast majority of farmers I talk to don't waste their time arguing that climate change isn't real, or isn't happening they accept the science as does most of the general population.

[shtferbrains]

So what have you got planned for your livelihood Grassy?

Forget the solar panels, EV's, wind farms, etc.

This is what needs to be done to save the planet;

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/10/huge-reduction-in-meat-eating-essential-to-avoid-climate-breakdown

The researchers found a global shift to a “flexitarian” diet was needed to keep climate change even under 2C, let alone 1.5C. This flexitarian diet means the average world citizen needs to eat 75% less beef, 90% less pork and half the number of eggs, while tripling consumption of beans and pulses and quadrupling nuts and seeds. This would halve emissions from livestock and better management of manure would enable further cuts.

In rich nations, the dietary changes required are ever more stark. UK and US citizens need to cut beef by 90% and milk by 60% while increasing beans and pulses between four and six times. However, the millions of people in poor nations who are undernourished need to eat a little more meat and dairy.

Reducing meat consumption might be achieved by a mix of education, taxes, subsidies for plant-based foods and changes to school and workplace menus, the scientists said.

All I can say is it is starting to remind me of the Cultural Revolution or Pol Pot's Cambodia.

Central planing for the good of a few.

A whole new economy. Just be happy eating beans.

[Hamloc]

All their policy comes from the members through resolutions passed at Regional/National meetings. It is a democratic organization run from the ground up not from the top down like most. I believe there is a far higher proportion of farmers concerned about climate change and prepared to pay to mitigate the risks than is portrayed by the majority of posters on Agriville. The vast majority of farmers I talk to don't waste their time arguing that climate change isn't real, or isn't happening they accept the science as does most of the general population.

So I am curious Grassfarmer what are you planning for your next occupation? It is becoming abundantly clear that one of the planks of the climate brigade is to greatly reduce meat consumption to lower emissions from domestic livestock(personally I think wild animals fart as well). Are you going to break up your land and grow pulses and beans? Or are you delusional enough to believe you will be part of the 20 or 30% of remaing beef farmers? One other question don't Hindu's in India worship cows? I wonder if they will have to be terminated as well. And I have to disagree that farmers are interested in paying more taxes, I think you will find a very large majority against Justin Trudeau on this. There certainly is going to be a great deal of enforced change and a lowering of our standard of living the next ten years, just my opinion. Enjoy your day.

[grassfarmer]

So what have you got planned for your livelihood Grassy?

Forget the solar panels, EV's, wind farms, etc.

This is what needs to be done to save the planet;

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/10/huge-reduction-in-meat-eating-essential-to-avoid-climate-breakdown

Or maybe not:

“Between 1990 and 2005, the world cattle population rose by more than 100 million head (according to FAO statistics). During this time, atmospheric methane concentration stabilized completely. These empirical observations show that livestock is not a significant player in the global methane budget. [Glatzle, 2014]. "