• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Àre the new tax breaks a subsidy to business.?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • bucket
    Senior Member
    • Jan 2008
    • 17033

    #11
    Originally posted by sawfly1 View Post
    Are you guys sure about no recap.
    I kinda doubt that Part.

    What I got a kick out of was how they wanted exports up 150% by
    20something.
    How about moving the grain and oil we have now first
    When they go to match trumps plan for business....it seems logical they should match his agriculture plan as well...like about a 3 billion trade distortion plan for pulses and durum....

    If industrial companies are getting favourable CCA.....the why are farmers not getting it as well....

    I doubt there is such a thing as recapture for large corporations ....they never really sell out...
    Last edited by bucket; Nov 22, 2018, 12:10.

    Comment

    • Marusko
      Senior Member
      • Jan 2018
      • 232

      #12
      I chuckle whenever I read about subsidies to primary producers. Around here, they'd just get plowed into land, inflating the purchase prices and rent even further beyond what's reasonable. I know it sounds counter-intuitive to be against subsidies, but that's all it would really do. It's only good for the farmers who have stopped growing, or are retiring: they can pocket that money, and it increases their asset values. For the next generation, it's detrimental.

      Comment

      • bucket
        Senior Member
        • Jan 2008
        • 17033

        #13
        Originally posted by Marusko View Post
        I chuckle whenever I read about subsidies to primary producers. Around here, they'd just get plowed into land, inflating the purchase prices and rent even further beyond what's reasonable. I know it sounds counter-intuitive to be against subsidies, but that's all it would really do. It's only good for the farmers who have stopped growing, or are retiring: they can pocket that money, and it increases their asset values. For the next generation, it's detrimental.
        Then why does it work for businesses other than primary producers?

        Comment

        • farmaholic
          Senior Member
          • Sep 2010
          • 17483

          #14
          Originally posted by Marusko View Post
          I chuckle whenever I read about subsidies to primary producers. Around here, they'd just get plowed into land, inflating the purchase prices and rent even further beyond what's reasonable. I know it sounds counter-intuitive to be against subsidies, but that's all it would really do. It's only good for the farmers who have stopped growing, or are retiring: they can pocket that money, and it increases their asset values. For the next generation, it's detrimental.
          I think that's too general of a comment.

          Some would pocket it, some would do as you suggest and some would be able to farm another year because of it.

          Comment

          • bucket
            Senior Member
            • Jan 2008
            • 17033

            #15
            Majority of businesses have the ability to recoup their costs.....farmers do not have that luxury. ...

            Comment

            • Oliver88
              Senior Member
              • Dec 2012
              • 4688

              #16
              Originally posted by sawfly1 View Post
              Are you guys sure about no recap.
              I kinda doubt that Part.

              What I got a kick out of was how they wanted exports up 150% by
              20something.
              How about moving the grain and oil we have now first
              Solid points.
              Investments in rail and pipelines would benefit our economy.

              The USA is now discussing dredging the Mississippi River for a small $176 million price tag.

              Comment

              • bucket
                Senior Member
                • Jan 2008
                • 17033

                #17
                Originally posted by Oliver88 View Post
                Solid points.
                Investments in rail and pipelines would benefit our economy.

                The USA is now discussing dredging the Mississippi River for a small $176 million price tag.
                That's routine maintenance.....for a low cost publicly funded system...

                Comment

                • Oliver88
                  Senior Member
                  • Dec 2012
                  • 4688

                  #18
                  Originally posted by bucket View Post
                  That's routine maintenance.....for a low cost publicly funded system...
                  From the report I heard this project will greatly improve shipping but yes likely routine and happens every 5 years?

                  Comment

                  • Reply to this Thread
                  • Return to Topic List
                  Working...