What a Fascist sounds like when he opens his mouth

[BitWhys]

...As for personal remarks, you would have to know something about me for it to be personal, the word you are looking for "is blanket statements of bigotry"...

...You wanted the choice and freedom to make your own way in life but want a security blanket in case something bad happens and you fall on your face...

he who lives by the sword...

 

[Zzarchov]

Yes, and see how you post immediatly, with no purpose other than trolling and you admit it.

I notice I refuted your point, Im guessing you have no rebuttal then?

Its also against forum rules I believe, shall I check?

Edit (see, normal people edit their post, they don't double post)

As for the lives by the sword: Isn't that a bit out of context there? something you hark about?

How is that any different than any other form of welfare?

You wanted the choice and freedom to make your own way in life but want a security blanket in case something bad happens and you fall on your face.

Or Health Care, etc etc etc.

Quite frankly our food market does need some protection, because a nation that can't feed itself will quickly find itself being gouged and its wealth stripped away. Key industries need protecting, because other countries with half a brain would love to undercut and destroy them, making you reliant on them.

In the mean time though, seeing as the wheat board hasn't paid over market value in decades, I think I could go with the slight risk, that in the event of a massive depression where such becomes the case we keep our food industry afloat. As that would place the wheat in government hands, and thus keep the populace fed in such tough times.

 

[BitWhys]

...As for your belief in this fundemental difference why this was socialism and now is fascism, your kindly always choosing to forget, that the wheat board has ALWAYS competed with existing entities that provide the same service...

That statement is just plain wrong. Due to government regululation the Wheat Board presently HAS no other competitors for the supply of selected grains bound for export.

 

[BitWhys]

...Its also against forum rules I believe, shall I check?...

who died an made YOU hall monitor?

 

[Zzarchov]

That statement is just plain wrong. Due to government regululation the Wheat Board presently HAS no other competitors for the supply of selected grains bound for export.

And Again I have caught you speaking a lie.

Currently, the Canadian Wheat Board does not exercise authority over the marketing of wheat and barley grown outside of the four western provinces. While Western Canada, particularly the three Prairie provinces, produces over 95 percent of Canada’s wheat and barley for sale, wheat is grown commercially in all provinces with the exception of Newfoundland & Labrador. In Ontario, which produces approximately four percent of Canada’s total wheat for export, wheat is marketed through the Ontario Wheat Producers’ Marketing Board. The remaining provinces market wheat and other grains that are grown through a variety of marketing schemes. (There are no commercial agricultural crops grown in the northern territories).

Source: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/economy/cdn-wheat-board/what-canada-wheat-board.html

 

[BitWhys]

..What do you think the Wheat board does with the wheat? Pours it down a well? It resells it, in DIRECT COMPETITION with other similar businesses in Ontario and the Marintimes...

Again its besides the point since the issue is competition for supply not who its sold to, but do they have the financial backing of their respective governments?

 

[BitWhys]

And Again I have caught you speaking a lie...

and again you have to fail to get the point in order to keep on talking.

the issue is the supply of selected grains within the Wheat Board's domain.

 

[Zzarchov]

Again its besides the point since the issue is competition for supply not who its sold to, but do they have the financial backing of their respective governments?

Actually, that is NOT the issue. Since the Wheat board is a middleman, without it, they could sell directly to the whomever the wheat board would sell too.

This is you, being proven wrong, again, and trying to change the subject. Tough.


The Ontario "Wheat board" (the name is long) had legal backing for single desk from 73 to 2003, but hasn't since then. So in current practice there is already direct competition between the Western Wheat board and the Ontario farmers, there is also conflict between it and marintime farmers.

But hey, your talking with Authority, so how come you don't know any of this before speaking as if you did?

 

[Zzarchov]

and again you have to fail to get the point in order to keep on talking.

the issue is the supply of selected grains within the Wheat Board's domain.

And that domain, as a federal institution, funded by federal tax payers dollars, is Federal.

 

[BitWhys]

Actually, that is NOT the issue. Since the Wheat board is a middleman, without it, they could sell directly to the whomever the wheat board would sell too.

This is you, being proven wrong, again, and trying to change the subject. Tough.


The Ontario "Wheat board" (the name is long) had legal backing for single desk from 73 to 2003, but hasn't since then. So in current practice there is already direct competition between the Western Wheat board and the Ontario farmers, there is also conflict between it and marintime farmers.

But hey, your talking with Authority, so how come you don't know any of this before speaking as if you did?

Its entirely the issue even if you do choose to ignore it.

Competition (if you care to call it that since they sell different types of grain from different parts of the country) for sales is not the same as competition for supply.

and I knew the answer for Ontario already I just wanted to watch you bob and weave. the answer is "NO" although the board will advocate for farmers on CAIS issues.

 

[BitWhys]

And that domain, as a federal institution, funded by federal tax payers dollars, is Federal.

oh

so now you're telling me the Wheat Board has a monopoly on supply nation-wide?

 

[BitWhys]

...Since the Wheat board is a middleman, without it, they could sell directly to the whomever the wheat board would sell too...

Exactly my point. Under that business model there's no need for the Wheat Board so we'll all be better off just getting rid of it. If subsidies are necessary they can be supplied more equitably via the proper channels, not through some right-wing collectivist abomination that milks the taxpayer on the side.

 

[Liberalman]

With the Canadian Wheat Board gone then the processors win by offering lower prices to farmers because the farmers would have to find someone to sell too.

Processors will pay Board prices or better to get their product and once the CWB is dismantled then they will pay a lot less.

The farmer always loses even if they can join co-ops but they would have to pay more to sell their crops.

When the CWB is gone then they will have to compete globally to sell their crops.

If processors can get a cheaper price in another country then our farmers are out of luck.

Since America is just south of the border the processors will get a better deal but they have to wait until the Canadian Wheat Board is totally dismantled.

 

[BitWhys]

yeah

well

that's their problem. the veritcal multi's won't fallow the land. I'm more concerned about the public cash that's going to end up getting tossed around supporting this charade in the meantime.

 

[Zzarchov]

oh

so now you're telling me the Wheat Board has a monopoly on supply nation-wide?

No, thats why under your definition its "fascist" remember? how if a taxpayer funded entity competes with private enterprises from those same taxpayers its fascist by your definition.

Im wondering if you even know what you type of if you are some kind of advanced spambot.

Exactly my point. Under that business model there's no need for the Wheat Board so we'll all be better off just getting rid of it. If subsidies are necessary they can be supplied more equitably via the proper channels, not through some right-wing collectivist abomination that milks the taxpayer on the side.

Whether or not its better isn't whats being discussed. Whats being discussed is if this change makes it "Fascist".

Which it does not, not even by your definition.

 

[BitWhys]

No...

Then its not competing for supply within its domain. Yet.

 

[Zzarchov]

Then its not competing for supply within its domain. Yet.

Its domain is not where its monopoly is. It has a monopoly on the western provinces, its domain is federal.

If you follow your logic then it still has a monopoly even with it being optional as its new domain would be whoever chooses to use it.


Its domain comes from its funding, not from its customer base.


Competing for supply is also not a criteria under your definition of Fascism. Competing is. It is currently competing with private enterprises with public funding and a legislated monopoly.

 

[BitWhys]

...Its domain comes from its funding, not from its customer base...

Its domain is defined by the Act that empowers it.

Competition is where its found. Subsequent competition in other aspects of the business is irrelevant, albiet effected. Competing to buy a product and competing to sell the same product are two different things.

Using government resources to compete against private business entities in the same sector is Fascism. The sector of note is the aquisition of supply of product for sale. Regions under the act are presently not subject to such competition. Strahl is introducing competition to the sector (ie. aquisition of product for sale) without removing the Wheat Board's exclusive access to influential government resources. Ergo, the move to Fascism.

 

[Zzarchov]

Using government resources to compete against private business entities in the same sector is Fascism.

Most everything else in there was you trying weasel out or redefine the arguement to somethign im not debating, this is the only statement that matters.

Its the one where you admit you were wrong.

I accept your apology.

 

[BitWhys]

If you want to dance around claiming victory while the whole time all you can do is look stupid and cook up non sequiturs so be it. It helps me think anyways.

I never redefined anything. I clarified. The point you're refusing to debate is conveniently for you (since you're too stupid to be embarrassed about it) precisely the point I'm getting at and precisely the point that matters. I'm not the one being a weasel here.