blueblood Posted September 1, 2008 Report Share Posted September 1, 2008 Again, you are using more fuel than you making (according to the figures you quoted in your last post). You may be right that producing grain to rot would waste more, but that is a lousy argument. It is like choosing between coke and speed. If I can't choose something productive, choose nothing at all. If there is no market for something then don't make it.Because if I produce nothing it is a hit to the economy, if many farmers produce nothing it's a bigger hit to the economy. Agriculture and Agribusiness are the third largest employer in the country, it makes sense to have that industry profitable. Then why are you not using this wonderful cheap fuel in your farm equipment ? Take away the subsidies and it cost more than $4 to make. Make the consumer pay the real price (no subsidies and the same tax as gas) and nobody will use ethanol again. In 2010-2012 I will be using this wonderful cheap fuel in my equipment, there are other farmers who have their own crushers and processers to make their own diesel fuel. You forget when those plants are paid off, there is a new cash cow on the block, the GOP aren't fools when it comes to which projects they fund. I disagree that the subsidy was a good idea. But thats beside the point. The subsidy was used to jump start a technology that had the potential to be profitable. No, that is my point, this subsidy also is being used to jump start a technology that will be profitable. Corn ethanol will never be a suitable fuel. Its not a matter about how you refine it, its a matter of the energy in the plant. It's suitable enough that the Americans are buying into it hook line and sinker Because you are paying them to waste money!. What does Canada get for its 2 Billion ? Why not take that 2 Billion dollars and pay farmer to bury a few million Canadian Tire power boxes in their fields. Canadian tire stock will go up, farmers will make money. Canada gets a more viable Bay Street, more money from income tax returns, more money from sales taxes on farm inputs, the province gets more money from property tax, and the businesses where I spend my money do better. Canada is doing pretty well thank you. 2 billion divided between all the farmers in Canada amounts to chump change, 2 billion invested in plants which buy grain and raise commodity prices makes me, a plant worker, and a shareholder good money. Besides what you are proposing pollutes the ground, mine doesn't add any pollution at all. Why not spend the money to try to come up with a viable technology. Cellulose ethanol will be a game changer once it is perfected. Why not spend the money there. I don't care if they spend the money on cellulose technology, the world is thirsty for energy, it won't replace grain just work with it, plus I will have a profitable solution to my straw nightmare. Then there is the problem with clearcutting forests for the insatiable appetite for fuel, do you have a problem with that??? Making ethanol is not doing your part to improve the environment. As for other things farmers do.......I think the tax should be aimed at those people who have the ability to change. I really don't know enough about farming to say how farmers can improve fuel consumption, but if there is little they can do, there is little point in taxing them under a carbon tax plan. (which again, is too blunt an instrument). I would support an idiot tax. Want to buy a Hummer, here is your tax. New home built with poor insulation - here is your bill. Just bought a tank water heater -here you go. Want to use those old light bulbs ? Its gonna cost you. Zero-till, GPS autosteer, geothermal, producing biofuel, land use agreements with environmental agencies, new farm equipment are what I do for the environment what's yours?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted September 1, 2008 Report Share Posted September 1, 2008 (edited) dp Edited September 1, 2008 by blueblood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 I found this thread title. The answer, as of the last election is no. We did not underestimate Dion We overestimated him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 We overestimated him. Likewise Layton overestimated himself as the next prime minister. He couldn't even manage third place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 I found this thread title. The answer, as of the last election is no. We did not underestimate Dion We overestimated him. I certainly did underestimate him. He did much better than I thought he could. I was certain he'd lose about 8-10 more seats to the CPC, and 12-15 to the NDP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 (edited) Thats not gain. The energy density of ethanol is much less than diesel. You could travel farther on the barrel of oil than you could on the 8 barrels of ethanol. Energy density of crude is maybe 50% more or so. So 7 barrels of oil would equal 10.5 of ethanol in terms of energy. (yes, its more complicated than that but this is the readers digest version)If there is no market for something, it shouldn't be made. The tortilla give away was dumb idea, but not any dumber than the biofuel idea. According to your own figures above: You take a 7 barrels of oil and turn it into the energy equivalent of 5.5 barrels of oil. You no doubt spend a lot of time and energy doing this. You may make a profit at it, but in terms of Canada as nation, you are doing worse than wasting your time. You are being paid to waste energy. GOOD!, lets let private industry solve the problem and end the subsidies!! No! My point is , ethanol is a bad idea. You can argue all you want that there are dumber ideas, but that doesn't make yours (ethanol) less dumb. If we want to grow are own energy, we should be spending our money trying to make it produce a clear energy gain and be profitable. Every dollar we pay ADM to waste money and energy could be better spent trying to find a way to convert cellulose into fuel in an economical way. amelaise and yeast. Some animals, particularly ruminants and termites, can digest cellulose with the help of symbiotic micro-organisms that live in their guts. Get a whole bunch of em and make termite energy. Or why not process it at a nuclear station? 320 °C glucose units by treating it with concentrated acids at high temperature Not only energy but alcohol... then you can use that as a fuel or social drink that is after its half lives end. But hold on radiation is energy too. So double the bang for the buck. Or what about biofuel after collecting cow dung? Using a methane pump? Edited November 2, 2008 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 Likewise Layton overestimated himself as the next prime minister. He couldn't even manage third place. I think it was quite clear. Harper ran for Prime Minister... was and is...... Dion ran for Prime Minister....wasn't, isn't and ain't gonna be. Layton ran for Prime Minister...wasn't and isn't and will be around in the minority parliment. May ran for Dion.... see Dion above. Duceppe was not running for Prime Minister. I believe the difference is... People in the media, and Liberals said, don't underestimate Dion. Essentially saying he had a Bush like ability for people to "misundestimate" (BUSHISM) him and for him to come out on top. This did not materialize. Infact Dion performed poorly and made many strategic and tactical decisions. He lived in a "knowitall" bubble regarding his campaign. Harper ran a smooth Campaign. 3rd try, and he messes up less and less each time. Layton, campaigned for Harpers Job. As far as I know, he is still one step closer then Dion. Dion will not be campaigning for the position of Prime Minister again. The NDP campaign did get it right that Jack would be stronger then Dion. The NDP also got it right that the LPC would be engaged in a new leadership campaign after this election. The NDP adds didn't seem to be rushed, so they pretty much had their scripts made up before the election, but I am not certain. May campaigned for 13 seats, then within hours campaigned for none. She campaign for strategic voting, against strategic voting and for strategic voting and against it and for it, and then blamed everyone who voted for not voting for her in Central Nova. Some would think campaigning for a handful of seats would be easier then campaigning for Prime Minister, but she proved everyone wrong. Special deals, $4million spent and nothing to show for it. Meanwhile independents managed to do what May couldn't. Get elected. Dion was viewed as weak for teaming up with May. May was viewed as electorally challenged, both in strategy and platform. Dion was Electorally challenged in Strategy and Platform. May had some media savy. Dion had some CTV difficulties. We didn't underestimate Dion. The Media did OverEstimate May. Politics is like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 Layton ran for Prime Minister...wasn't and isn't and will be around in the minority parliment. Because his party seems content on staying in fourth place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 Because his party seems content on staying in fourth place. Then there was no underestimating... But Dion wasn't underestimated by the public. He was over estimated by his party and as such is the only Leader falling on his sword. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 Then there was no underestimating... I don't know about that. I think that Layton and many in the NDP think they will supplant the Liberals by staying a protest party. But Dion wasn't underestimated by the public. He was over estimated by his party and as such is the only Leader falling on his sword. All the other leaders could point to modest gains or holding the line. I don't think Dion fell on his sword. He was pushed. It was Martin that fell on his sword. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 Then there was no underestimating...But Dion wasn't underestimated by the public. He was over estimated by his party and as such is the only Leader falling on his sword. I can tell you that most party members were gob smacked (and none too happy) when Dion won. I can also tell you that I believe the fundraising issues will disappear once the party has its house in order and a new non-impotent leader is chosen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 I don't think Dion fell on his sword. He was pushed. It was Martin that fell on his sword. I will concur with that assessment over my previous statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 (edited) ... Edited November 4, 2008 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 I was reading some random entries on wikipedia and found this. I immediately thought how much it sounds like The Liberal Party of Canada. I am convinced that the la large portion of the LPC suffer from a mental disorder. Here is a test doctors use to test if people are suffering from ...Narcissistic personality disorder.Take a look.... Now look how many similarities there are, it's almost eerie in nature. It lines them out perfectly. Mr Canada. One day you are oozing with Maple syrupy goodness, praising glorious leader. Definitely good on pancakes, but in moderation (IMHO) However you use salt on French Toast. Where, where is the maple syrup for the French Toast? Did you use it all up on your loving praise of all things Harper? I know I said DION IS TOAST...., but I thought then you might have saved just a bit, you know, share a little of that syrupy goodness, before he gets tossed aside. Seriously, if you are so quick on the Report button, you best moderate your own posts. Otherwise, get a thicker skin, cause most people here are pretty good all around. (Except for.....well, those guys, er know who they are, UM dancering around, and dobbining the hard questions) That said, Dion still owes money, the Liberals are broke, and, Manley has just said no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 (edited) ... Edited November 4, 2008 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 ...I was reading some random entries on wikipedia and found this. I immediately thought how much it sounds like The Liberal Party of Canada. I am convinced that the la large portion of the LPC suffer from a mental disorder. Here is a test doctors use to test if people are suffering from ...Narcissistic personality disorder.Take a look.... DSM Criteria A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:[1] 1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance 2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love 3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique 4. requires excessive admiration 5. has a sense of entitlement 6. is interpersonally exploitative 7. lacks empathy 8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her 9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes SOURCE This is exactly as many have described them at one time or another we have all read these things used to describe the LPC. Is this policy of the LPC? If the LPC does in fact attract Narcissistic people we should examine as to why this is. Also we should try to locate some reputable doctors who accept OHIP to get them the help they may need. Mental illness is no laughing matter. Is there some reason that you deleted your posts from this thread, in order to create a new post with the same content in a separate thread. Are you trying to cover your tracks .... its called bait and switch. People could tire of your games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 (edited) Is there some reason that you deleted your posts from this thread, in order to create a new post with the same content in a separate thread.Are you trying to cover your tracks .... its called bait and switch. People could tire of your games. I thought it was funny, the mods did not share my sense of humour so I removed it. EDIT - you still haven't answered me as to why you always go on about Maple syrup which has nothing to do with the topic and is trolling. Edited November 4, 2008 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.