for beef guys

[grassfarmer]

Yes true...good point grass farmer....but I think you realize I am talking about the environment and I don't think Canada is a major polluter compared to other countries...

And if the alarmists would take us off a per capita basis for pollution ...many would realize this...

Or if canada had 150 million people ...what would the results be....

World wars then, climate change now - both the biggest challenges facing mankind in their respective eras so the comparison is valid.

With 0.5% of the world's population and producing 1.66% of the world's emissions we are one of the nations with the highest per capita emissions - you can't deny that. When we are talking about the problems caused by man made GHG emissions and how to address that problem of course we talk about per capita emissions - it makes no sense to talk about geographical size of the country.
If you're in favour of moving to a per acre basis to quantify emissions are you also in favour of splitting the total federal taxation burden by the acre or do you prefer it to be per person?

[bucket]

World wars then, climate change now - both the biggest challenges facing mankind in their respective eras so the comparison is valid.

With 0.5% of the world's population and producing 1.66% of the world's emissions we are one of the nations with the highest per capita emissions - you can't deny that. When we are talking about the problems caused by man made GHG emissions and how to address that problem of course we talk about per capita emissions - it makes no sense to talk about geographical size of the country.
If you're in favour of moving to a per acre basis to quantify emissions are you also in favour of splitting the total federal taxation burden by the acre or do you prefer it to be per person?

Maybe you would prefer to go on a per animal in herd for methane emissions. ?

Holy cow ...you want the UN determining your business?

[furrowtickler]

World wars then, climate change now - both the biggest challenges facing mankind in their respective eras so the comparison is valid.

With 0.5% of the world's population and producing 1.66% of the world's emissions we are one of the nations with the highest per capita emissions - you can't deny that. When we are talking about the problems caused by man made GHG emissions and how to address that problem of course we talk about per capita emissions - it makes no sense to talk about geographical size of the country.
If you're in favour of moving to a per acre basis to quantify emissions are you also in favour of splitting the total federal taxation burden by the acre or do you prefer it to be per person?

If prefer if Quebec would pull their weight and quit leaching of the rest of Canada with a false economy run by the mafia and the Hells Angels

And for not only us crop producers but all cattlemen not to get all this false negative environment b/S slung on all of us just trying to raise families as responsible as possible of the land growing some of the healthiest food on the planet.
That would be great 👍

[shtferbrains]

They sure made a difference it two world wars. Good job for the world that they didn't sit on their hands then and say they couldn't do anything (and with an even smaller population back then)

I have to call foul on that one grassy.

For sure WW1 the Canadians were more or less cannon fodder (Shock Troops?) commanded by much smarter British Generals and signed up under extreme propaganda. They did preform much abouve expectations for a bunch of Knuckle dragging red necks.

I expect the Scotchmen were more savy?

WW2 started the same but at least they ditched the Limey Generals later in the war.

The results weren't trivial and could be measured an multiples of the old guard at times.

Again lots of propaganda (BS?) involved.

How did the Scots react to the British propaganda machine? They had a lot more at stake.

[shtferbrains]

I have to call foul on that one grassy.

For sure WW1 the Canadians were more or less cannon fodder (Shock Troops?) commanded by much smarter British Generals and signed up under extreme propaganda. They did preform much abouve expectations for a bunch of Knuckle dragging red necks.

I expect the Scotchmen were more savy?

WW2 started the same but at least they ditched the Limey Generals later in the war.

The results weren't trivial and could be measured an multiples of the old guard at times.

Again lots of propaganda (BS?) involved.

How did the Scots react to the British propaganda machine? They had a lot more at stake.

I use the "much smarter" as a reflection of where we are today.