Read this you Pro-socialist CWB commies

[parsley]

You are saying, jensend, in your world, the "show me the money" tactic works.

And I agree, that that tactic has worked, by inches, but it has worked, mainly becasue the Wheat Board would likely concede anything in those days, to not have any ripples in the water. The seed growers used it first. The feed mills used it. But it has taken thirty or so years.

When do people finally say, maybe we shouldn't kill any more buffalo? Of course, your argument would be "when it's no longer profitable"?

The Board has just swiped money, yes swiped, out of the pool accounts.

It is contrary to their promises that they would not take money from the pools.That principle has been abandoned. It is WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE THEY ARE.

Where is the NFU press realease even inquiring about the money being scooped out?

A principle should be protected. We know what is right and what is wrong.

The Wheat Board mentality is wrong. You cannot build upon wrong. You can prop it up, but you can't build on it.

Pars

[parsley]

Consider me stupid. Low IQ.

Perhaps it really is stupid to think farmers should not be jailed for selling what they grow.
Pars

[chaffmeister]

Jensend:

1. Trying to make options that are more market responsive is not what lost the integrity of the pools. Failing at it did.

2. The CWB lost $226 million last year in the pool accounts – you can try to blame the other “market responsive” options for this but they reportedly had nothing to do with it. Also - we have no idea what the CWB lost in previous years because they didn’t report it. (But I’ve heard rumours….)

3. You say “nobody’s happy”. That’s a good thing – there was too much complacency and too much blind faith in the CWB as it was. Hopefully, some people are waking up to the reality we’ve been “banging our head against the wall” about.

4. You say when the CWB is gone people can make or break on their own - as if there’s something wrong with that. But even so, you’re finally getting it. Much better to make-or-break on one’s own than to go broke because of someone else’s incompetence and mistakes. What’s worse, you can’t avoid the incompetence because there are farmers out there that cling to the CWB for their own purposes and you get dragged down with them.

You say you want a voluntary CWB. How would you go about getting there differently?

[mustardman]

classiscalliberal if your calling CWB supporters commies then What does that make you ? Maybe a jackbootin' Nazi ??

Quit your bitchin and take your ball and go home (stop growing board grains)

[mustardman]

We were better off when the Aussies had One grain seller. Now with multiple sellers they chase the price down much similar to our lentil exporters in 2005
Trouble with the board is they have too many programs. Just keep the pool system and forget all the rest. The only reason they got into them is to try to woo the anti-board types but that will never happen.

[charliep]

Just curious about your comment on the PPO programs and why you
would care.

Observations

PPO programs (as documented in the annual report) deposited
exactly the same amount into the pool as wheat sold into the pooling
system.

The loss of $226 mln (or $169 mln) has nothing to do with the PPO
programs. It is a performance measure used by the board of
directors to evaluate the performance of CWB management and
operations. If you think inappropriate, you should talk to your B of D.

The CWB is cash selling feed barley outside the traditional pooling
system for any business done in the next 6 months - because of PRO
forecast, pooling of feed barley is a non starter.

The only way to sell malt barley to the end of the crop year is
cashplus. I would encourage anyone who is thinking of growing malt
barley in 2009 to sign one of these contracts.

What the CWB needs to learn and practice is proper risk management
techniques starting with not trying to manage risk for the pool
accounts or PPO contracts across an 18 month window.

[jensend]

no chaff you don't get it. just because i don't agree with everything you say doesn't mean i disagree with everything. you know it's that zeal - intellect thing. you say the pools failed. what constitutes this failure? not selling the whole crop in the top ten per cent of the price range? who does that year after year? when there are other options for pricing besides the pool then there is internal competition and it becomes a race to the bottom. this is why the cwb has been crippled beyond repair. you're right - dissatisfaction can lead to better efforts but by the tone of the debate here i would say it is only leading to wishing failure for anybody who doesn't agree with you. i don't know why you say i don't think people should make or break on their own. i think that is good but don't stand there with your hand out for a subsidy when it doesn't work out for you. think about this: the farmers who did a good job of marketing over the previous five years probably didn't ring the bell this past year. like the cwb they probably were sold out too early. they sold into a rising market and didn't count on having to take advantage of price extremes but like the previous five years they made a profit and are probably overall in better shape than farmers who followed a more risky marketing plan for the previous years. what will happen when the cwb disappears? coffee sales will go down across the prairies and a bunch of very vocal guys will have to find something else to bitch about. and likely some of the bigger problems facing agriculture will have to be considered.

[cottonpicken]

When i'm watching a fist fight or in a fist fight i like to see a level playing field.

And let darwins chips of evolution fall where they may.

If the board makes my competitor more money the playing field has been skewed,unless of course my competitor wants to share his fruits.

[chaffmeister]

Jensen, you wrote (aimed at me): “you say the pools failed. What constitutes this failure?”

Correction: I said, trying to make “market responsive options” failed.

Regarding the pools, I said only that the CWB reported a $226 million loss in the pool accounts - according to the CWB it was “due to discretionary commodity trading” and not the PPOs. I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether the pools failed for you.


You also said: “when there are other options for pricing besides the pool then there is internal competition and it becomes a race to the bottom. This is why the cwb has been crippled beyond repair.”

Internal competition? Race to the bottom? Where do you guys get this stuff? Please explain to me how that works.


Contrary to your comment, I don’t wish failure upon anyone. Even you. Believe it or not, that’s why I argue for a voluntary CWB – because everyone will gain by it. Everyone.


You also said: “I don't know why you say I don't think people should make or break on their own.”

I’ll tell you why I thought that. It was because you wrote the following:

“when the board is gone the other real world can take over (and burbert isn't that far off, read about more fert. consolidation) and people can make or break on their own. don't confuse zeal with intelligence.”

That tells me that you think Burbert’s negative view of the world will prevail without the CWB and people will have to fend for themselves because they won’t have the CWB to take care of them. It was that zeal vs intelligence thing that convinced me. Sure seems to me you’re saying to be careful what you ask for (and you’d be an idiot to ask for the demise of the CWB – something like that).

[checking]

Damn interesting reads on this thread, but I'm not getting what I want to hear out of Burbert. I'll, therefore, go to what is truly bothering him. He got his feelings hurt for thinking he was being labelled a communist - socialist for supporting the CWB. Burbert retaliated by calling opportunity seekers rednecks that he could spot a Trudeau mile away. Well, Burbert, the term redneck was pinned on union coalminers from the hills of the eastern U.S. who marched into non-union coal mine areas to aid in battles to get those mines unionized. To keep from being clobbered by their own supporters they tied red handkerchiefs (snot rags) around their necks to identify themselves. The CWB is one big union, right,(in this case, left), so Burbert tie a red rag over your eyes because I wouldn't want you to beat the snot out of Wilagro and Mustardman as they march out of the hills from a kilometer away.

[Fransisco]

I don't see trying to get farmers not to grow wheat in protest as particularly workable. It's basically a version of the "focus on sabbatical" plan which never got off the ground.

We can't even get half the eligible guys to mark a number one on a directors ballot that is mailed to them. Getting them to change what crops they grow, I imagine, would be even more of a challenge.

[classicalliberal]

We didn't grow any board grains this year mustardman, take your ass and go farm in Russia with the rest of your comrades. With regard to the Nazi comment, the only difference minus the racism between communism and nazism (facism) is that you can own property and business is less restricted.

One of you talked about how the Australian prices are going down because of competition, well I guess in one of the few places that has competition in grain markets, the US, the prices would spiral downward forever by your line of thinking and I think it has done the opposite. Sounds to me like you are angry that you didn't sell grain forward at good prices but bought your fertilizer at the top of the market and now you want the wheat board or some all knowing big brother to take care of you.