Will our government ever support us?

[gwynplaine]

Never once did I say to cut social programmes. In fact, I believe I was the one who said to raise teachers salaries (I'd like to do the same for doctors and nurses). I beleive there is, in fact, a surplus of teachers who can't find work, so I'm not entirely sure how the ATA has created a shortage of teachers who demand 6 figure incomes. Especially seeing as the numbers of Education graduates seem to be increasing. My feeling is we spend a lot of money on the supply side of social programmes, when there is an almost unlimited demand for services that must be addressed before we can call our system sustainable. Does this mean user fees for routine services? Perhaps, and I for one would be glad to pay them.
I will, as well, be the first in line to accuse 'our' government of not doing anywhere near enough to protect capital ventures in Canada from unfair competition. This should be one of the only two mandates our federal government has - providing us with protection from Military attack, and economic attack due to unfair trading. Everything else, under our very own constitution, falls into the juristiction of the Provinces.

That being said, yea, it is in fact true there are places in the world that are able to more efficiently produce then we can. Is it fair for Canadian Citizens to support unprofitable businesses, simply because they are that demographics chosen way of life? Would (or do) you support government bailouts of unprofitable, non-ag businesses, simply because that is their chosen line of work? Air Canada and Bombardier leap to mind, as does the CWB. Do you like your tax dollars going to support unprofitable Chrysler or Ford plants, simply to employ people who have chosen auto manufacture as their career? Why should Ag be any different? Honestly. Take a step back and look at it. Why should we expect it to be our right to farm and make taxpayers subsidize it? This may sound vicious, but why do we, as an industry, feel we are more special than any other segment? I know, I know - we grow the food. In the grand scheme of things, so what? Until people are willing to pay more for food (which can, in fact, be produced more efficiently elsewhere. Simple fact.), we have no right to expect to be supported. Find other avenues for income. Value added avenues, for example. I would like to remind you, gentle reader, this is our CHOSEN way of life. There are other choices available. Not everyone gets to do exactly what they want. Can I expect the government to support me, if I wanted to be a professional wrestler, in the absence of talent and - to extend the metaphor to agriculture - luck? (I'm sure you'll agree there's a fair bit of Luck involved in Profitable farms)

I'm sure I'll get criticised heavily for this posting. I will close with three simple points.

1. We choose to farm, and we choose to farm in Canada (with all the disadvantages - ie; cold weather and socialist government) We know what's involved. There are other career choices, and other, warmer, countries we can re-locate to, in order to farm.

2. There are profitable farms out there, of all sizes, and in Canada. I work with them, regularly, and am from one. Perhaps we should analyze what these operations are doing right, and what we're doing wrong, before we demand money to marginally extend the life of an unprofitable venture.

3. We will be far better off with less restriction and legislation concerning production (quotas, single desk selling), and more Government protection and trade action to ensure fair production. Granted, Canada's voice is small on the world scale, but we've got the gas, oil, and Lumber to leverage it.

I eagerly await reply...

[gwynplaine]

I do agree with some of your comments, however, when things happen that are beyond the control of anyone within an industry (eg: BSE) which create financial hardship, telling these folks that they chose to be farmers does little to solve the current situation. Governments will have to consider whether the cattle industry in Canada, and most particularly in Alberta, is worth saving or not, and that includes the spin off industries and the jobs they create.
Many of the people who face extreme financial challenges now, weren't in this position prior to BSE, and were likely able to say that they too, were successfully in agriculture.

[cowman]

Gwynneplaine: I agree with you! Get rid of all those whining snivelling farmers! We'll buy our food from South America and turn the whole shooting match back to the Indians.
Some how I don't quite get what social programs have to do with paying doctors, nurse, teachers more? Maybe they need the latest BMW or something? Or did I misread you and you meant we need more of them so they can bleed the system a little heavier?
You seem to be saying we don't need to be involved(as a country) in keeping a viable agriculture industry going, but you support a state sponsored industry in education and health care? I would ask you why do we need a state run education/health care system? Let's get rid of them too, and then all us little capitalists can pay no taxes and get rich? Let the idiots who choose to have kids pay for their education and let the sick pay their own way or die! And let the old people float off on icebergs or something?
I mean what is food, right? Just another commodity we can buy... wherever? And why do we need all these stupid little towns on the prairies anyway, when we could be saving millions by buying from foreigners?
Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. You kill your ability to feed yourself and you are going to pay somewhere down the road...or so I believe? But then what do I know, right? I'm not a highly paid, well educated professional like you...but I do know how to make a buck and I've done fairly well in my lifetime.

[gwynplaine]

Yes. You misread me. Never once did I say we should get rid of farmers. Nor have I ever said I was well paid, nor did I accuse anyone of not being so. I think if you read my postings as something other than a personal attack, you'll find some consistancy in my argument that only promotes sustainability, of both Agriculture and our social programmes that people seem to value greatly, but refuse to entice good staff with better pay. To me, sustainability doesn't mean "maintain the status quo", or involve direct government handouts. It means finding other ways, within the industry, to be sucessful. I'm reading attempts at this in other discussions ridiculed, by some names in this forum. Obviously, the way things are going now isn't working for everyone. I could sit back and criticise everyone else for not helping me, or I could take care of myself, in ways that do not require the creation of a Welfare Ag Industry (the USA, the EU), or direct government payouts (More USA).

I do apologize if I have offended, or made my arguments seem like a personal attack. The replies, however, seem to be personal... I was under the impression that, in a free society (and I use the term "free" sparingly), there was room for different opinion. Perhaps not.

[gwynplaine]

Oh, yeah:

Emrald1: I completely agree! The BSE crisis, however, is most certainly not a health or safety or science issue, it's a non-tarriff trade barrier. (Canada, however, has a few of those herself... we're kind of the Black Pot, over here... topic for another day) THIS is where government belongs. And what have they done? Next to nothing.

I have a solution: Test evey exported animal for BSE, we'll find some. Burn those carcasses, assign no blame, just get them out of the system. Get the Japanese (and other) markets back, beat the Americans to the punch, by only exporting certified, BSE-Free beef (I'll get my tattoo artist to design the stamp)... Why do we think the only place we can send our beef is South of 49? They sure don't want it, as shortsighted as R-CALF and Tom Daschle are. It may cost a few dollars per head, but at least the Net Revenue would increase... would it not? I'm not in the Slaughter industry, not too familiar with the Logistics, so help me out a bit here. I await reply...

[cakadu]

In the education argument, it depends on which side you listen to. The ATA says for example, that if they hire back 250 teachers in the Calgary district, then they are still 50 short because they laid off 300 at the end of June 2003. Who is included in this 300 - substitute teachers, regular teachers - how is the number made up? I'm still unclear as to how class size has become such a big issue because for years many of us grew up in classes over 30 and I for one don't think my education was hurt any by it. The flip side of that is that there seem to be more problems in the classroom these days and teachers do have to contend with parents who believe little Johnny or Jane couldn't possibly be the bad apple the teacher say he or she is. Couple that with the meteoric rise - right or wrong - of cases of Attention Deficit (5% in the 1960's compared with over 30% today) and you do have teachers dealing with more than before. (The ADHD argument is another one that could be postponed for another day and thread.)

It would be interesting to find out what is preventing recent education graduates from finding work - are jobs really that scarce or just jobs in popular locations i.e. the city vs rural areas?

I agree that we don't want to become wards of the government and dependant on them to get by in the farming community. One of the ways that government could help without us becoming too dependent on them is to enact policies and infrastructure that will make it so that our value-added industries could run more efficiently.

Many of our policies favor the big 3 in livestock for example - beef, pork, chicken - yet there are niche markets that could be filled with other meats, or even the big 3 for that matter, if there were different policies in place. I'm not suggesting for a moment that we do anything to compromise food safety or environmental stewardship, just look at ways to make even moving product east to west easier.

I also wholeheartedly agree with not being able to understand our almost complete reliance on the American markets. Yes, they are close, yes they buy a great deal from us - how much of that is related to our lower dollar is a subject for debate too. Every time our dollar goes up in comparison to the US dollar, purchases go down.

I understand many of the points you've made gwynplaine and certainly don't take any of them personally. I may not necessarily agree with some of the points you've made, however, that is what makes it an exciting and challenging discussion.

[gwynplaine]

Cakadu: Thanks, and I agree with you.

The Education issue, to me, boils down to the lack of value society places on teachers. We support paying them what we figure they're worth; to me a lot. To others, they're glorified babysitters. And, that scares me. There is a lot of innefficiency in the system that needs to be trimmed, however when there's a budget cutback the first thing that goes is teachers, not administration. Huge admin costs, in every government department.

Anyways. I'm out of time, I'll be back soon.

[cowman]

In a round about way I do agree with you on a lot of things! For example, that the BSE crisis has nothing to do with science or food safety, and everything to do with non-tariff trade barriers and muscling us out of a market.
I also agree that our federal government has done little to live up to their responsibilities for trade and food safety! Two areas that they are directly responsible for and are paid very well for!
Now somehow or other our various governments, over the course of the last several years, have decided that health care and education are their responsibilities? And I will agee they did it with the support of the majority of the people. Thus today we have the "nanny" state? I wonder if we had a real "free society" what a teacher/doctor would make? If the whole thing was wide open with no union saying who could teach and who could heal? I watched a show the other day on tv where some kid cured Ronnie Hawkins of pancreatic cancer after the doctors sent him home to die. Now if this kid tried to hang out his shingle as a doctor, how long do you think he would be allowed to practice? And yet he has a gift that no other doctor has?
Do you think we should have the right to seek out what we believe is in our own best interests, or does the government know what is in our best interests?
Given the situation in agriculture today in Canada I agree we all need to realize that we have to do what we think is best for us. When we have a federal and provincial government that have no intention of living up to their responsibilities, I would suggest we need to consider how viable of an industry it is? Maybe we all need to go back to school and become teachers, doctors, government experts etc.? Apparently that is what is important in Canada today?