blueblood

McGuinty also said on TV that he was shifting heavily towards cellulosic biofuels which is alright too. Mind you that was on CBC and they didn't mention your article. Why did the Libs wait until 05 when they were in a minority government. I'd bet there was significant influence from the tories there, but I'm speculating. If there was another large right wing party that supported biofuels and the Tories didn't (which they do support, according to CBC last night and the enviro minister in QP). The tories could get in hot water. I seriously think Dion's promise is like a lot of politician's promises, full of hot air. The tories only implemented a small portion of our crops to biofuel because they crunched the numbers and Canada could only sustain 5% ethanol and 2% biodiesel. The overproduction is used up, farm machinery dealers are sold out, jobs are made, and food is still affordable. People in Canada are winning. Layton has pretty much written off his rural supporters. JRI already owns a test farm south of Winnipeg, what's stopping them from buying everyone out? Probably because they can make the most money by being the middle man instead of producing their own. If you pick up a copy of this week's Manitoba Cooperator, there are a few articles in there that outline the ethanol debate. The prof of agricultural economics at the U of M, and the columnist who writes the crop markets column agree with me.

So the head honcho for JRI can't buy farmland? Or members of the board for Viterra? The biofuel policy started with the Liberals? THAT is total bunk, they had 13 years of low prices to implement it and did nothing except watch farmers go broke and laugh that they don't have to pay subsidies for a ridiculous cheap food policy. The Tories after 2 years implemented it, and we now have a booming rural economy and the country as a whole is richer and better off. Don't worry, your Liberals jumped ship on the ethanol plan. They must not like getting elected in Western Canada.

The cheap food policy forcing farmers in 3rd world countries out of business is a much bigger disaster. If people don't want grain going into biofuels, by all means you can pay for it yourselves and do what you want with it. Modern farming practices have been around longer than biofuels, your argument makes as much sense as Greenpeace trying to ban the GMO's; Greenpeace likes seeing little Asian kids running around blind I suppose. If all the farmers adopted this hippie farming style nonsense, there would be much more food shortage problems than there are now.

If commodity prices are going up besides from ethanol, than it isn't a problem then. The tories do not want expensive food, when they thought the biofuel strategy, they put in low numbers needed so that there is still food availible. The Canadian ethanol plan wasn't needed?, I sure don't want to go back to the days of half assed Liberal ag policy and a gutted rural and Manitoba economy thank you very much. So those adds for land for sale are false? Any one person can buy land. If the oil company subsidies were so bad, how come the Albertans elected another Conservative government with a larger majority. Oh those Albertans, the few and far between who voted otherwise. Look the biofuel plan has had a very positive impact on the economy of Manitoba and people are getting richer because of it. It's bad when people have to resort to fear tactics so that their cheap food doesn't go away. Cheap food being produced at below cost is unsustainable, non efficient agriculture. The Tories have found the perfect balance of producing affordable food, cleaning up the environment, and rejuvenating the rural economy and the economy of Canada as a whole. The tories aren't going anywhere, and anyone who runs against this ag policy will lose. Scare tactics didn't work the last time, and they won't work for this. The Liberal ag policy of having western canadian farmers as peasants who are forced to give away their crops and not get paid for them while farmers in other countries do is finally gone. And the Liberals wonder why Western Canadians hate them...

Whether or not it is better for the environment is debatable. It's more than a farmer welfare system. There is a cheap food policy in the industrialized world and food is heavily subsidized, The Liberal Party of Canada beat that system by getting cheap food and not having to pay for it, thankfully they were thrown out of office. Now with this in place everyone in rural Canada is doing better, and the economy of Manitoba is stronger than it was 5 yrs. ago. The Canadian biofuel plan, and I emphasize Canadian is the most efficient way at delivering somewhat a cheaper food policy, and at the same time paying a fair price for it also providing spin of jobs as a consequence, you cannot say Manitoba is worse off with this. The already much higher valued land is music to the ears of the provincial government. Just wait till second gen. biofuel comes in, Winnipeg won't have to worry about stubble burning and it would be of economic benefit to clean up the algae on Lake Winnipeg. Corporate owners won't buy land for grain farming, it's too risky and they can't grow as much product as many farmers running their own. They "farm the farmers" and have been doing so for years. Wait a minute, taxes are already being lowered. By creating a market that is friendly to do business in, it boosts the economy of the area and makes its inhabitants richer. Alberta isn't certainly poorer off with its oil subsidies and is the best economic region on the continent. If the government has to spend 100 dollars in order to get 200 back, then why not?

If 1/3 of corn was just going to sit in a pile than it is a good thing. Have you not seen demonstrations in Italy, they live in a first world country and are wanting cheap food made at a loss. If there was no cheap food policy without subsidies we wouldn't need help. There may be sellers, but there is not so much now, especially when it is lucarative. Favorable tax policies and favorable industrial policies produce the most job, refer to Alberta. Don't worry, the subsidy will be gone when the industry is established.

There is a body of research that says it is a viable energy source and helps the environment. City people can't also keep switching between capitalism and socialism as saying farming is a business, yet not want to pay for our product. With higher commodity prices it will keep most conglomerates at bay because a smaller guy can make money and doesn't need a buyout in order to start over. If a conglomerate came to me now with high prices, I'd tell him to piss up a rope. I don't need to get bought out, I have a better cash flow. There is much less land for sale now than there was 5 years ago. Large set asides don't provide spin off jobs. It would be much more expensive than ethanol, due to the fact they have to convince x amt. of farmers to take land out of production. Also, the same thing happens with ethanol, there is much less grain to go around. The ratio is better for setting up plants resulting in higher prices than taking land out of production resulting in higher prices. People would still complain about that too. In argentina, everyone lost with the farmers and city people clashing. their city people demanded cheap food and put a huge export tariff on agriculture products, their farmers went on strike and argentina had to import food driving prices even higher. The farmers lost in that they don't get paid. You keep refering to the U.S. biofuel plan, I'm referring to the Canadian one, and there is nothing wrong with that one, no one in Canada is rationing anything. We as a country are benefitting from this. Poor countries in time will also benefit form this by finally having a productive ag industry. That having been said, there isn't much more ethanol plants springing up and the ones that do will be doing the cellulose technology, the city of Winnipeg would be very very wise in investing in one of these due to the stubble burning controversy. This will also save the forestry industry. The only thing I see which would drop prices would be a market meltdown in Asia and I hope that does not happen.

If you want a cheap food supply you are going to have to cough up a subsidy because what happened in the 90's to 06 was a completely unsustainable agriculture policy. It's much cheaper to pop up ethanol plants than to subsidize every farmer in Canada 300 dollars an acre so you can enjoy food at rock bottom prices and the convenience of not growing it. It's also better policy to have smaller, more efficient farms which produce every year. Because if farms get large enough, they can afford to shut down when the prices are in the tank; which would also disrupt your food supply. This is what was happening. Saying ethanol is harming the Canadian food supply is like saying the sky is falling. They don't need much grain to meet the biofuel mandate. The LPC solution during the Chretien-Martin mandate was completely unsustainable and devestating to the rural economy. I'd like to hear what your solution would be.

We aren't talking about outsourcing, not at all, quite the opposite, which is expansion. By making grain more valuable, farmers who own their own farms can now make a go at agriculture without cheap subsidized grain being dumped on them. It's hardly outsourcing at all. Shouldn't third world countries be allowed to work? Canadians aren't cutting production, we're just cutting the waste. The only thing being "cut" is the mountain of unused grain that sits there, rots, and is given away to third world countries. Using up that mountain of grain raises prices, and uses up the excess grain otherwise dumped.

I believe a major reason why the U.S. is so proactive in its foreign policy because of the mess that happened before world war II, I think appeasement was the foreign policy of the day and a mad man took advantage of it. The free world won't make that mistake twice a recent example being the end of Sadam Hussein. Getting a mad man out of power was well worth it, who knows what he might have done had the U.S. done nothing.

Does that guy from popular mechanics think that before ethanol farmers used horses and oxen and spread seed with their hands? I've burned tens of thousands of dollars in fuel every year for the past 20 years. Cheap food policy without a direct subsidy is the wrong policy if I want to see high prices in the first place. Oil industry in Alberta was "subsidized" look at all the jobs there. The subsidy pays for itself in revenue generated through higher income, sales, and higher property taxes. More food would be grown in urban areas if I didn't "subsidize" their "food lifestyle". Hmm. I went to the grocery store and bought a large bag of flour, no rationing there. Saying that the average Canadian is going to starve with this policy is flat out fear mongering. So let me get this straight you want farmers to grow a pile of food, but not use marginal land (which cuts production). At the same time with this alleged pile of food made, which results in a low price you somehow magically expect farmers to get a fair price out of this. Talk about having your cake and eating it too. This is the Liberal cheap food policy; have other countries subsidize their farmers and flood the market, then with prices in the tank encourage Canadian farmers to maximize their production without magically harming the environment in order to try and pay the bills. It's win win for the LPC, they deliver cheap food and nobody pays. And Liberals wonder why farmers hate them? And you say the ethanol industry is unsustainable. The tories and republicans finally threw that policy under the bus and rural north america is finally prosperous again and nobody is starving. With the tory biofuel plan, the waste grain is used up which boosts prices and returns, jobs are created, oil reserves are prolonged, and there is still enough grain produced in Canada for food and fuel. Canadians are coming out of this much better off. I'm not saying we should ethanol should replace oil, but ethanol has a role to play in improving our economy. Also with biofuels the farmers from rich countries are not putting the farmers from poor countries out of business.

All makes sense except for the taking away of subsidies resulting in lower food prices. The only way to reduce food prices is to produce more. It's like gasoline, the voting public can demand lower prices, but the gov't can't lower gas prices unless it wants to bring in an NEP type of deal, screwing over the oil companies. Having the third world producers get online with valuable grain will result in more production and will cool prices off. And if they get cold, they can pop up ethanol plants of their own to soak up the "waste". By the time they are able to afford their own plants, their food supply will be secure enough to do so because of the impending lower prices.

Marginal farmland and swamps have been drained and used since the thirties. Blaming ethanol on that is ridiculous. I've been doing so for twenty years. An enviro group offered me 100 bucks an acre one time to not have the trees in my ravine logged, if that was 100 bucks an acre every year I'd go for it. I and other farmers support biofuels because I am now getting paid. Taking your position would be like me saying I don't like money and I like being broke. Having a cheap food policy is subsidizing consumers for not growing their own food. I mean if some people are so adamant having a cheap food policy, by all means buy land and sign a contract to a miller for a reduced price. We are still prolonging our oil reserves with this. This is the same argument concerning high fuel prices. You cannot have a cheap food policy which subsidizes urban people's lifestyle choice without ripping off the producer, it can't happen. With a cheap food policy you must subsidize the producer because he is operating at a loss. If someone wants food without growing it themselves, they have to pay. There are job opportunities created by ethanol plants too, should those people not be allowed to have jobs? With prices high and excess grain being used up, farmers in other parts of the world now have a chance to make money at it and not have to compete with subsidized grain being dumped into their countries. Canada is doing it's part in not dumping, and we can with modest amounts of grain going to biofuels, we are not starving, we are prolonging the oil supply, and the market is finally balanced. Saying that Canada is in a food crisis, is scare tactics, you will never see a breadline in Canada even when the biofuel mandate is met. If other countries would improve their farming practices, then they wouldn't have to worry about starving.

and the left wing doesn't care about the economy and efficiency. With cellulose ethanol coming in, expect to see piles of forests on crown land turned into tree farms as junk wood will just be thrown into the chipper. There is lots of people in the logging industry who would like this to happen and save their business. There is nothing stopping people from growing their own food. Pop up hydroponics in the basement and grow veggies then. I butcher my own steers and save a fortune on meat every year. Farmers in Argentina rioted, went on strike, looted stores because their government is ripping them off; the people of Argentina are worse off now than paying their farmers. In Canada we have the perfect balance for biofuels, not too much but enough to tie up the excess overproduction. Nobody in Canada is going to starve or have their food rationed. Not that it matters anyways because Canada will be so awash in money that it still won't be a problem. Perhaps with agfriculture now more profitable, there will be funds to research higher yielding crops, research desaliniztion plants to provide seawater for irrigation instead of ground water. Just remember though that food does trump biofuel production, a lot of plants have been called off due to high prices. Biofuels were meant to keep a few barrels of oil in the ground for longer, not replace oil, and to make the agriculture industry profitable so that farmers can afford to grow massive crops which end up getting sold for food a lot of the time. We can't give our stuff away, we have bills to pay. The world has been in a food crisis since the second world war. Personally I grow #1 CWRS wheat, it does not go into biofuel. What the ethanol industry has done to benefit me is that I get paid more. When I get paid more, I get better machinery, better fertilizer, better spray which results in a larger and better crop the next time around, which means I feed more people. Before biofuel under the Liberals, I had to run old junk and nickel and dime around which meant that I couldn't grow as good a crop as I could have, which means I feed less people. The crops used for biofuel are "junk" as far as my standards go now there's a market for them and that drags everything up.

The left wing is going to get itself in trouble if it wants to hinder economic growth as well and forcing is to give our products away. And what was Canadian grain doing before ethanol? It was sitting in piles until the CWB gave it away to countries. Rural Canada's economy was in the tank. The taxes being collected from the ag boom are paying for the production. I don't see how this is a problem when people in the world were starving 5 yrs. ago when Europe and the States had a land set aside program (not use farmland) and massive subsidies forcing poorer countries out of business. With higher grain prices, farmers in countries like India can finally afford proper machinery to farm much more efficiently. They can't even store grain properly.

I wouldn't say ethanol is doing more harm to the environment. Any issue of the western producer explains both sides of that argument. Everything costs a pile of money in Canada. The federal government is not ridiculous in this approach. They only suggested small percentages to make sure the country won't starve. Shell Canada has invested in a new technology to make gasoline out of straw and wood which should come online in five plus years, which will be another benefit, plus it would be able to be piped and not trucked. If consumers are so concerned about it, it might be time to rip up the backyard and grow food or get hydroponics or buy shares in Ag companies. Argentina tried a cheap food policy which implied steep export duties, and that is turning into a disaster. Rural Canada is doing well now, there is a lot more opportunity than there was 5 years ago when agriculture was in the tank. Everytime that another plant goes up, jobs are created. The ethanol program works the exact same way as a land set aside program, but more people benefit other than the farmer. If the people want cheap food in this day and age, then put grain farming under supply management then. The ag policy under wayne easter and the liberals was completely ridiculous and useless. Now the farmers have money, jobs are created, and in spite of all that food is still not priced out of this world.

How many jobs are provided because of ethanol? Lots. For the first time ever John Deere has sold out of combine harvesters until December 2009. The cattle industry is at the "low part" of the cattle cycle. Canada could not hit the high part due to BSE. The prairie provinces have much stronger economies and everyone is getting richer due to high oil and high grain prices. My cattle herd is bare bones right now and I haven't bought feeders since spring 03. Farmers all over the world are going to benefit from this and perhaps the other countries will be able to remove their ag subsidies. Running our ag industry into the ground because people in central canada and the cities want cheap food is assinine. Call it a subsidy if you want, but there are some who bitch about Alberta giving out subsidies to oil companies. How well is Alberta doing?

this is crazy. What this person wants is a cheap oil policy, which will ruin the economy of western and eastern Canada. That makes as much sense as having a cheap food policy, which we don't have anymore, thank God. High commodity prices are very good for Canada and it is rapidly improving our economy and making everyone richer. Time to start buying shares in oil companies if you don't like the massive profits.

The gov't subsidizing post secondary is a bad idea. I relate it to the minimum wage deal. If everyone is getting post secondary degrees, then it's not worth anything. In a few years a degree might not be worth anything, and then it might work up to PhD's. 50 years ago, having a grade 12 was a big deal and I don't think people in those days were worse off than we are now. Having more and more people rot in post secondary accumulating all that debt is one way to hold people back. I find it one of the bitter ironies of our country today.

Imagine of police forces became unionized...

What's the big deal, if the Honda and Toyota plant workers don't want a union the union should butt out, I thought that's why the employees work there instead of the big three. If workers want the union, go work for the big three. If Honda or Toyota gets unionized, I can see those plants going to Mexico pretty fast.

If the cops wanted to, could they keep the guy pulled over on the road for the time it takes to get a warrant? I know it's dirty, but is it legal?

I have had the ultimate displeasure in owning Canadian made farm machinery from a Canadian company. It is low quality, high maintenance, crap. Union made to boot. That was the last time I bought from them, unfortunately that company went out of business. God help the big 3 if Toyota makes a 3/4 ton and a 1 ton diesel.

Sorry I'm a law abiding citizen, I don't break the law no matter how much I disagree with it. My mistake, Emery didn't have to go to a trial because he did the cowardly thing and plea bargained. Emery didn't even want the trial. Boy he was sure oppressed. If you would talk to Walker's daughter now, she thanks her dad for saving her life. I don't think Walker should have got off, but he had a good excuse to save his kid's life. He faced his jail time like a brave person, and didn't plea bargain, unlike Emery. It's people like you who make it a whole lot easier for lawmakers to keep pot prohibition on the books, and keep the fight with pot and not the next stuff up. People like you who say they don't push their crap on people is like saying Evangelists don't push their crap. It's funny, pot activists are on the same level as cult leaders. Nobody is forcing you to stay in Canada, if you believe the law is so oppressive, by all means leave.

I know, just my observation of things.