Cargill and Farmers Health

[agstar77]

The future of farmers health will soon be passed on to companies like Cargill. In a news item on Larry Webbers newsletter, Cargill U.S. will contribute to a health fund for farmers when they promise to deliver a portion of their crop to Cargill. Un f... Believable!! Maybe that is the future of Healthcare in Canada too. I knew the feudal system would be back. For those of you that didn't believe that someday we would be just workers with the Cargills and Bunges as our bosses or Lords, this is a rude awakening.

[lakenheath]

Companies like Cargill are bound to farmers through faith, trust, harmonious relationships and goodwill. Like a father and mother tend to their children, Cargill will tend to the farmer.

Yes, sarcasm.

[JD4ME]

Maybe monsanto would like to contribute a portion of the premium too.

[Southpaw]

Here is a company offering a benefit to farmers and what do we say?!! You still bitch and complain. If you don't like the program then I would suggest that you make your business decisions with a different company!!

[lakenheath]

Brilliant assessment of our ananlysis Southpaw. Settle down and think before you post ignorance.

[lakenheath]

Southpaw is just like the uninformed people who support Wal-Mart and get mad when you challenge how they conduct business.

[parsley]

lakenheath,

Every contribution/ opinion to this forum has value and deserves tolerance.

That include's Southpaw's post.

Walmart is a popular stop during our trips to the city, and our neighbors regularly do the same. We often support Walmart with our dollars.

lakenheath, if every multinational (MN)moved out of Canada, I presume that would make your day.

On the other hand, many farmers buy from MN's, do business with MN's, buy shares in them, and don't want them to leave.

That view of the world is pretty much incompatible with your view of the world, isn't it?

Parsley

[lakenheath]

Yes, Parsley, pretty much.

&*$@ the Multi-Nationals.

I assume you have never blasted back at any posts on this site before. By the way, I didn't insult Southpaw, so settle down. I'm sure he will be just fine.

And keep supporting Wal-Mart it will do wonders for your local rural grocery stores and the Canadian economy.

[agstar77]

I don't have a problem with multi-nationals as long as there actions do not infringe on the rights of others or usurp the the jurisdiction of our elected officials. There is however something about too much concentration of power in one organization. If Walmart was the only game in town would it set the lowest prices they could for the consumer? Would they pay fair wages to their employees if they were the only employer? When you have a great deal of power it tends to blind you to the opinions and needs of others. This holds for large corporations and political parties. Multi-nationals are useful in creating projects which are too large for national firms and they do have efficiencies of scale. The Cargills of the world should stick to creating new uses and markets for farmers products so that they can afford healthcare, because that is their role. If they can make more profits for themselves and farmers, more the better.

[parsley]

I've got elction fever, lakenheath.

Southpaw just appeared out of the blue, and I had visions of a 21 year old with his laptop filled with spring projections, venturing out into the Agriville "regulars" war zone, and what being with all the election excitement going on, thought I'd better fire off a defensive word-missle.

Being so young myself, I cannot resist this question to you lakenheath:


If you had your choice to live in a province with 750 large corporations, or in a province with 7.5 large corporations, which would you choose?

Parsley

[lakenheath]

I see your point Parsely and it has some merit. I know that multi-naitonals are a huge part of our economy. I just think that with more awareness that the common person could keep corporations more accountable.

Rather than acting like drones, blank minded customers and consumers, we should be more informed.

I like when people are quick to criticize policy and challenge the big boys. Playing the role of devil's advocate isn't all that bad of a thing.

There is nothing wrong with a little bit of suspicion.

[Vader]

Nothing wrong with multi-nationals as long as you understand what drives them. Their fiduciary duty is to their shareholders - pure and simple. If they see that protecting customers is in the best interest of shareholders then they will do that. If they see that shareholders interests are best served by reducing their service to customers then they will do that also.

Someone compared corporations to tigers. It is in a tigers nature to eat things. For that reason they must be caged if they are to cohabit with human beings.

We can live alongside multi-nationals as long as there are rules in place. Right now the rules are a bit weak.

Rod Flaman

[lakenheath]

You're damn right the rules are weak. Just like there is no specific rules against corporations funding political capaigns (political bribery). It creates a bastardized version of capitalism. Which is many times worse than socialism. It destroys all corporate accountability.

[charliep]

Just curious as to which rules are weak. Many would argue that regulation in Canada is excessive already.

[Vader]

Competition law. Just look at the AU divestiture. It's been going on for so long and AU is trying to get the order thrown out.