Some insight into problems with market economy

[tower]

gregpet, just because a concept is simple doesn't make it correct. It is true that that the CWB has an aspect of enforced co-operation. So does hockey, medicine, and being in the Canadian Military, what's new?

The larger the co-operative body the more protection provided by the rules. Farmers allowed to drop out of the Board will be swallowed in no time flat by conglomerate farms, making the remaining farms less viable.

[gregpet]

I see Tower, just like happens in the U.S., Australia and all the other countries without a monopoly. Oh, wait we are the only country with a so called monopoly (actually monopsony). I didn't realize all the farms in the U.S. were gobbled up. I missed that one.

[vagabonddreamer]

tower...i appreciate you trying to explain...but i am still unsure as to how a minority of famers leaving the CWB will negatively affect the majority...lets use a number like 10%...in relation to the entire grain production of Canada...so...assume that 10% of farmers opted out...whether it is more or less is immaterial at this point...

i understand there is a PERCEPTION that it will weaken things for the remaining farmers...but run it through an economic model for me and show me a non-emotional and more technical analysis....thx...vs

[tower]

Run it through an economic model? why sure enough, let me run up my handy dandy modelling progams.. This may take a while. While I'm at it I'll run it through my ecologic models as well.


I think it would be a mistake to think that you can or should, delete emotion from any issue. You end up with a shallow discussion.

Farmers have seen over the last fifty years how the rise of centralized decision making, minimization of competition, and higher corporate power have sucked the life out of farming and farm families. Not just grain, but pork, beef, poultry, et al. If there is money to be made corporatism holds that corporations should get it all, regardless of the consequences.

Talk about killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

[vagabonddreamer]

lol...you DO have an economic model...we will call it "TOWER of power economic modelling inc"...(i always think in "inc" at the end makes it sound important)...this model is very rough and inaccurate..kind of a Tandy computer...but it makes for good conversation...all i need is some of the facts and figures to plug into our "TOWER of power" model...

-the most contentious and valuable grain that you guys grow

-the (average) world supply

-the (average) yearly CANADIAN contribution

-the total amount of farmers growing the crop in canada..

something tells me YOU mr tower have that info right at your finger tips...then it will be easy to run through the "TOWER of power" (inc) economic model (good thing it is not the vagabonddreamer economic model...that is an abacus and stone slate and hammer and chisel)...

seriously...i am just curious...i have never seen an issue that raises MORE ill feelings than this CWB thing (amongst like minded and individualistic people)...and you are right...we will leave the emotional part of in place...vs

[tower]

I think that anyone on here has those kinds of stats at their finger tips. You take wheat as the primary crop handled by the board, which is the contentious bit. But is the contentious part the high protien, #1 cwrs? or the bigger quantities of #3, or the soft white feed?

Is average world production relevant today or in five years? How do you decide what the number of farmers growing the crop are when some grow small quantities, others big? What sort of relationships exist within the industry?

I'd be curious about a modelling program that could handle the intricacies involved, and I'd be happy to work on the details, but a simplistc cookie cutter won't cut it.

[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