Some insight into problems with market economy

[parsley]

The basic model has to be property rights. Which includes regulatory functions that enable, not disable.

Owning your house.(Not being zoned where you do not want to live based on your weight or religion))
Owning your land.(not being taxed 95%)
Owning the wealth one producers.(Not being subject to overnight Cuban type expropriation)
Owning your crops(Not being denied permits to sell yoour crop)

If you don't pillar any of them on private ownership, wealth creation lags, the people with money move, or operate on a live-out-of-a-suitcase basis, and we become committed to a communist, a socialist or a fascist sociiety. Pars

[AdamSmith]

Vagabonddreamer, as I am sure you can sense, you have entered a bewildering and baffleing world in which logic and common sense get sucked into a votex of mind numbing babble, where words and statements appear in a kalidascope of nonsense and confusion.

When one enters in with an issue of economics, the spinning and churning process begins at once to produce fear and greed emotional resposes, when one enters in with a philisophical querry the the gears automatically re-adjust once again, with the speed and precision of a well tuned balanced and bluprinted engine, to produce a long economic diatribe of made up facts and seventy year old anacdotes.

Welcome to the twilight zone!

[tower]

I suggested earlier that what we have to do is make thew economics fit the ecologics. I expect that might complicate things a great deal, eh?

It would definitely be easier if we could keep it simple..... make up the history, and ignore the facts.

[vagabonddreamer]

vagabonddreamer roars with laughter WITH adamsmith...twighlight zone...yes...however...not an unexpected twighlight zone...

the pro-cwb lobby seems to operating on pure emotion...which makes it very difficult for them to see both sides of the issue...the anti-cwb side believes their rights have been infringed upon making THEM emotional and uable to see both sides of the issue...lovely vortex...

both sides are passionate and have valid arguments...i just wish the discussion was kept in the context of lively (friendly) debate...there are ways of conveying distaste with an opinion without resorting to blatant name calling and vociferous CAPITAL letters..lol...just as Winston Churchill did...never more capable a statesman, at friendly chastisment and belittlement existed...

both sides should consider many things about our political system in Canada...there are many things of contention and there always will be in a democracy...just an example...

everyone pays taxes which largely fund our medical system...there are those who believe that not only should drinkers and smokers NOT have access...anyone who takes part in a physically (or mentally) challenging activity...hockey, rodeo, football, rugby, lacrosse etc...should not have access if their particular injury occurred during the activity...

also...the education system is funded largely through taxation...why should old people who's children have left home..or single people who HAVE no children be forced to pay for the education of OTHER peoples (mistakes..lol)...

on another thread someone mentioned that the CWB vote should come down to who has the most land gets the most votes...i hypothesized that this might not work if it was carried to the extreme...ie...those with the most money get the most votes in an election...(am i NUTS????? that is how it unofficially works now...lol...)

i cant IMAGINE in the cattle industry if votes were made based on numbers of head...so...there will always be people in a democratic system who feel they are getting the short end...

adamsmith...YOU seem at least capable of a view on both sides....i realize you favour voluntary...if 10% of farmers opted out given the choice...do yo suppose it would damage the integrity of the status-quo CWB..given the world market...

tower you are absolutely correct in your assertion that the ecology must be brought into the mix...we are not living a hundred and fifty years ago...(i SHOULD have been living a 150 years ago or MORE i think)...can you explain how that factors into the discussion???

parsley...who TRULY has property rights in Canada?? you are WAY too smart to fall into the illusionist trap that you have property rights??..just ask developers that want to take a piece of land...and build on it...the amount of regulation and red tape...the different levels of government control...you are allowed to use your property...until you decide to actually DO something with it....vs

[tower]

In the discussion of insights into problems with the Market Economy, here,
https://www.agriville.com/cgi-bin/forums/viewThread.cgi?1236788897

Vagabonddreamer suggested that I try to explain how ecologic considerations should factor into the discussion of, or a modelling of, the impact of going to a volunteer Wheat board. Here's a beginning.

It seems to me that our wonderful era of cheap oil that has made farming such a treat for the last sixty years is packin' it in. As well I think that farmers have every right to be royally ticked off at low grain prices for the last thirty years. I know I am.

The study of the system, (ekos logics is the study of the house, ekos nomics is management of the house,) should reveal that we are our own worst enemies. We try to farm according to the needs of the market. We've been subsidizing consumers with off farm work, cheap labour from our kids, lost generations of farmers and their experience, and reduced expectations.

We've bought into the economies of scale argument and the green revolution by purchasing bigger machinery and farming more land, using fertilizers and pesticides for the convenience of it, and for the increased yield that drives down the price that we receive for our product. Ain't the market place a great thing though.

With that buy in we also bought increasing prices for machinery, parts, fuel, seed, fertilizer, pesticides, and the neatest part of all, food. We farm huge tracts of land and maximize our returns to pay for it, rather than in the hope for society of ecologic sustainability.

With a world wide glut of grain on the market, at least this is what the marketplace tells us, the price can't come up. So we have low prices and who do we get paid from? the board. Who do we get ticked off at? the board. Ironic eh?

As we figure out how to feed the increased population of the next generation, on reduced fossil fuels, soil that is addicted to manmade inputs, and more expensive energy, perhaps we will find that the glut has disappeared, the cheap oil has disappeared, and our soils natural fertility has disappeared all at the same time.

The Wheat board could be a meeting place between the market, society, and farmers in an effort to solve those constraints.

[classicalliberal]

I couldn't care less about where the owners of the companies are from, as long as they do a good job and have lots of competition, then greedy governments and greedy "multi-national" companies can't take advantage of anyone.