What a Fascist sounds like when he opens his mouth

[BitWhys]

"beside the point" means it doesn't matter one way or the other because it doesn't change the issue. eg...

"The tire needs to be fixed"

"But I like whitewalls"

"That's beside the point"

It doesn't matter one way or the other if its protectionism. I'm not using it as an identifying feature and you already said yourself that its not a defining characteristic of Fascism.

NB. nothing in the example proves the tire that needs to be fixed is a whitewall.

 

[Zzarchov]

Well then, if it isn't a defining characteristic of Fascism (anymore apparently), then how can you decide that it is a form of fascism when it is used?

 

[BitWhys]

by not getting distracted by it.

 

[Zzarchov]

That isn't an answer to the question.

 

[BitWhys]

it isn't much of a question

 

[BitWhys]

You don't figure out a tire needs fixing by checking to see if its a whitewall.

 

[BitWhys]

...No, what he's doing expands upon that distinction. Before there was just the government, it WAS the owner of private individuals hard work, now you can choose to never deal with the government. Thus the line is less blurred....

Setting aside for the moment that you seem to be confusing authortarianism for Fascism (authortarianism predates Fascism which by you metric invalidates it as an indicator), you are failing to take into account the other side of the equation. Me. The average taxpayer.

Treasury Board guarantees under the old system are a zero-sum no-risk system since losses covered in one year are repayed in subsequent years. Under the new regime there is no way to ensure the Wheat Board turns enough profit to EVER pay back Treasury Board loans.

Strahl's salvation for farmers is a burden for everyone else. I can't even choose to never participate just because a bunch of farmers want me to. That in itself is undemocratic. What's worse, I'm forced to invest in barley by floating loans from the Treasury Board but have no vested interest in the Wheat Board turning a profit. Where's MY share of the profit?

You don't seem to get or want to get what I mean by the distinction. Government has NO place being in business in otherwise healthy economic sectors. Setting up the Wheat Board to be a competive business means THERE WILL BE NO DISTINCTION between government and private enterprise.

Strahl is bleating the Wheat Board better up the ante up. Why the hell SHOULD it ante up? Why should government tax dollars be involved in outbidding the private sector for business?

Farmers want to bust up the desk, great. I hope they enjoy their freedom. Tank the Board and put it out of its misery. Expecting it to behave like a regular business alongside private enterprise IS FASCISM and a recipe for disaster.

 

[Zzarchov]

Setting aside for the moment that you seem to be confusing authortarianism for Fascism (authortarianism predates Fascism which by you metric invalidates it as an indicator), you are failing to take into account the other side of the equation. Me. The average taxpayer.

No im not confusing the two, but lets continue with this flaw in your logic I already see brewing.

Treasury Board guarantees under the old system are a zero-sum no-risk system since losses covered in one year are repayed in subsequent years. Under the new regime there is no way to ensure the Wheat Board turns enough profit to EVER pay back Treasury Board loans.

WRONG. There was NEVER any zero-sum no-risk system. There was no guarantee the price of Wheat would not keep dropping. If it dropped really bad in fact it would impossible to make the money back, this kind of catastrophic catastrophe would simply make people switch to another crop since there was no way to force people to grow wheat (and good thing too). Under the new regime it is pretty much the same except that you don't continue to squeeze unfair money out of only certain regions, since in the current regime you are pitting an unfair and unsupported monopoly in the prairies against grain farmers in other provinces. You know, the very definition of economic fascism you've been throwing around here. That is the current system.

Strahl's salvation for farmers is a burden for everyone else. I can't even choose to never participate just because a bunch of farmers want me to. That in itself is undemocratic. What's worse, I'm forced to invest in barley by floating loans from the Treasury Board but have no vested interest in the Wheat Board turning a profit. Where's MY share of the profit?

Your share of the profit is in stable food supply. That is like asking why you have to pay taxes to education when you don't have kids. It helps you out by keeping the whole nation stable.

I fail to see what this big burden to you is, show some numbers here. Where is this undemocratic system in making prairie farmers the same as eastern canadian?

You don't seem to get or want to get what I mean by the distinction. Government has NO place being in business in otherwise healthy economic sectors. Setting up the Wheat Board to be a competive business means THERE WILL BE NO DISTINCTION between government and private enterprise.

You mean like the healthy wheat sector where it interferes under the old regime by competing the wheat board against eastern canadian wheat farmers?

You do know the wheat board already does not apply to all farmers in Canada right? Thus it already is violating that distinction you claim is there (which isn't).

Strahl is bleating the Wheat Board better up the ante up. Why the hell SHOULD it ante up? Why should government tax dollars be involved in outbidding the private sector for business?

If it wants to make money from it, it should. The Wheat board has been acting as a second layer of taxing, turning a profit from only prairie farmers, then competing with eastern farmers. If the Wheat board doesn't offer competitive prices then it will collapse on its own.

Farmers want to bust up the desk, great. I hope they enjoy their freedom. Tank the Board and put it out of its misery. Expecting it to behave like a regular business alongside private enterprise IS FASCISM and a recipe for disaster.

Still not Fascism, as for it to be a sign of fascism there would previously have been a free market or a closed market. Previously there was the Wheat board with more control as a public enterprise competing with private enterprises in the rest of the country. Now the control of the Wheat Board has been weakend. Thus it is less able to compete against private enterprise .

 

[BitWhys]

...
Your share of the profit is in stable food supply...

Fascist.

 

[Zzarchov]

Great comeback.

I could call you an anarchist, since apparently you think funding anything for society which you are not using at this moment is bad.

Health care when your not sick, Fire protection when your house isn't burning, Police protection when you don't need someone arrested...

And the worst of them all, Public Education.

Stop throwing around words you don't understand.

 

[BitWhys]

You have no clue what Fascism is. Government enters sectors of the economy to correct inadequacies. That is acceptable. Governments DO NOT enter sectors of the economy to compete.

period.

and your justification of Strahl doing so demonstrates MORE than only economic fascism. It has the sociological and nationalist aspect written all over it.

 

[BitWhys]

and for you to honestly think that what's happening to the Wheat Board is on par with the public school system is beyond the pale. the school system is in place because otherwise there would be insufficient supply to meet demand. in Strahl's system supply and demand both already exist and he and you are both expecting some sort of crown monstrosity to play middle man in a market that doesn't need it.

 

[Zzarchov]

Oooh, testy when the flaws in your arguement are brought to light.


If your logic is because there is demand there is no problem (as you are stating with the school system), then there is no problem with the Wheat Board.

Afterall, everyone could use Home schooling or private schools (no shortage of homeschool ability), but the government provides schooling for everyone (competing with private schools) because its for the greater good, and you have to pay for it to boot.

The difference being no one is gonna jump around all sensationalised if you try and say public schools are fascist, they will look at you funny.


Now your claim, is that by the government reducing its role in the market (thus not entering it, the Wheat Board was already competing in the market against Private firms from the rest of the country), is the same as entering the market is fairly absurd. Even you don't have any rational defense beyond simple name calling.

and I quote, your entire defense hinged on:

Fascist.

And thats not out of context, that is your whole rebuttal...name calling.


You then spout rhetoric about the status quo (the wheat board being a government middleman) and then imply that has to do with the change, when it doesn't.

 

[BitWhys]

...
And thats not out of context, that is your whole rebuttal...name calling...

The government competes in the international market from a single desk in order to leverage the additional revenues that are realized by a monopoly. It does not rely on domestic competition to maintain its viability.

Telling me the government getting into a business more properly handled by the private sector is for my benefit is the epitome of Fascism. If the shoe fits, wear it.

 

[BitWhys]

...
You then spout rhetoric about the status quo...

That's the first time anybody has ever told my wanting the Wheat Board to get out of the barley business altogether now that change is immenent is somehow wanting to maintain the status quo.

 

[Zzarchov]

The government competes in the international market from a single desk in order to leverage the additional revenues that are realized by a monopoly. It does not rely on domestic competition to maintain its viability.

Telling me the government getting into a business more properly handled by the private sector is for my benefit is the epitome of Fascism. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Except, that just proves you don't understand the Wheat board. The government does not handle ALL wheat, only from some regions. It already competes with private business.

Now it no longer uses a government regional monopoly to compete with domestic business.

That's the first time anybody has ever told my wanting the Wheat Board to get out of the barley business altogether now that change is immenent is somehow wanting to maintain the status quo.

Again, see above.. You are refering to the government competing with private business as if its some new change, signalling fascism. When in fact, the government is phasing out of that business.



So you resort to name calling and mostly nonsensical replies.

 

[BitWhys]

I never said it was a national monopoly.. Now you're resorting to misinterpretation and putting words in my mouth. Its still a monopoly. Its a regional monopoly. for now.

and contrary to your shallow analysis its not the change I take issue with, its what its changing into.

 

[Zzarchov]

And what is it changing into?

It was a government competitor against private business, now its being phased out and turned into the equivalent of a subsidy in case of bad years.

If you have some detailed analysis lets hear it.

Right now all you've spouted is mostly the term "fascist" and unsupported claims.

 

[BitWhys]

...
It was a government competitor against private business...

Until now it didn't have to bid for product. Now it will be competing for product with taxpayer financial backing. Fascism.

Privatize it.

At the very least drop the Part III guarantees (they're doomed anyways thanks to NAFTA tick tick tick) and don't put a plug nickel of taxpayer's dollars into restructuring.

 

[Zzarchov]

Yes, you did have to bid for product.

Again, the Wheat board did not apply nationwide, so you still had to bid. I really don't know how you can comment on the Wheat board when you apparently know nothing about it.

As for being doomed thanks to NAFTA, been there, done that.. The USA would have to abandon their direct subsidies first, and no politician is going to do that.