The harm caused by government intervention in the economy

[blackbird]

Tragically the federal government announced they are shutting down a large number of open net fish farms on the B.C. coast.  This will put thousands of people out of work.  One native village said 200 of the 1200 people in their village work on the fish farms.  This will be a big hit to the BC economy and put many people out of work.

The rationale is that fish farms spread disease to wild caught salmon.   

But I think this is very hard to prove and even harder to prove that it is causing any significant harm.  The fact is the wild salmon numbers vary greatly every year.  Since these salmon go up rivers on the coast to spawn in large numbers and some years in smaller numbers, how could anyone possible prove it is caused by the open net salmon?

Secondly, and perhaps more important, wild caught salmon can only be harvested for a small limited number of weeks per year.  The cost of wild salmon to the consumer is I understand it several times the cost of fish farmed salmon.  For the rich people, this is probably no concern.  Famous people like William Shatner, who just came out with foul language condemning fish farms will never worry about the cost of wild caught salmon.  He is probably loaded with money as a movie star.

But ordinary people who do not have that kind of money should be able to access salmon from fish farms just as they do in the rest of world.  There are fish farms around the world.

Canada's governments ordain that driving a gas or diesel vehicle is bad because it causes more CO2 gas to be emitted, while our illustrious leaders jets around the world emitting more CO2 than anyone else on the planet.

Intervention is the energy industry is causing great harm as well and could cost Canadians billions in lost revenue, jobs, and prosperity.

These radical interventionists worship their god, Mother Earth, and have been able to cause great harm to the forest industry in B.C., the energy industry in western Canada, the general population through carbon taxes, and now they can add the fish farming industry to their list of victims.  Who is next?

[Michael Hardner]

I was expecting a thread about tariffs, corporate welfare and such.  Instead it seems to be exclusively about environmental regulations.  So you are against that domain of government control.

It doesn't make sense to me because at some level you would support government control over the environment, certainly.  As well, you would certainly disallow levels of economic interchange for illicit things

So what exactly is your guiding principle on this topic ?  Have you thought about that ?  

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Canada's governments ordain that driving a gas or diesel vehicle is bad because it causes more CO2 gas to be emitted, while our illustrious leaders jets around the world emitting more CO2 than anyone else on the planet.

Intervention is the energy industry is causing great harm as well and could cost Canadians billions in lost revenue, jobs, and prosperity.

I agree with you about air travel being a bad idea. With modern communications, Prime Minister Poilievre will be able to have a face to face meeting with our King or the President of France without having to leave his office. 

[ExFlyer]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

Tragically the federal government announced they are shutting down a large number of open net fish farms on the B.C. coast.  This will put thousands of people out of work.  One native village said 200 of the 1200 people in their village work on the fish farms.  This will be a big hit to the BC economy and put many people out of work.

The rationale is that fish farms spread disease to wild caught salmon.   

But I think this is very hard to prove and even harder to prove that it is causing any significant harm.  The fact is the wild salmon numbers vary greatly every year.  Since these salmon go up rivers on the coast to spawn in large numbers and some years in smaller numbers, how could anyone possible prove it is caused by the open net salmon?

Secondly, and perhaps more important, wild caught salmon can only be harvested for a small limited number of weeks per year.  The cost of wild salmon to the consumer is I understand it several times the cost of fish farmed salmon.  For the rich people, this is probably no concern.  Famous people like William Shatner, who just came out with foul language condemning fish farms will never worry about the cost of wild caught salmon.  He is probably loaded with money as a movie star.

 

 

First of all, get smarter about your accusations. The "rational is valid. If your town places it's entire economy on one indistry and that is a failure...perhaps poor town planing is at fault?

...."In addition to risking both fish and environmental health, aquacultural practices endanger human health"

https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/312/aquaculture/human-health-risks

"Open-net salmon farms are large cages or nets rearing hundreds of thousands of fish in coastal waters. These farms cannot contain or control the outflow of waste from their facilities, releasing deadly parasites, pathogens and pollutants into B.C. waters."

https://pacificwild.org/campaign/fish-farms-out/

 

In a new study published in Science Advances, we found that a salmon virus that is common on fish farms was introduced to southern B.C. roughly 30 years ago and is continually transmitted between farmed and wild salmon.

https://theconversation.com/fish-farms-transmit-viruses-to-endangered-wild-pacific-salmon-new-evidence-shows-158691

As for the rest of your rant.... it is off topic...your topic LOL

Edited June 21, 2024 by ExFlyer

[blackbird]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

So what exactly is your guiding principle on this topic ?  Have you thought about that ?  

I would say there is no absolute rule but when people like the dishonest politicians claim that man is causing climate change and man can control the climate, I would dismiss that as a fraud.  There is no justification for carbon taxes.

Fish farms fall under the same category.  I doubt it is the fish farms that cause the variations in the number of wild salmon to go up the rivers and the number being caught.  This again is most likely built on speculation.  All the environmentalists and some commercial fisherman jumped on it and make the phony claim although they themselves know nothing about it.  They are just parroting what they heard some say.  

Many of the government actions are built on the herd mentality.  The carbon tax is the biggest fraud going and proves the government can't be trusted.

This government has proven it's complete lack of morals with the endless scandals, foreign interference, abortion, MAID, lack of support for the Canadian Armed Forces, and waste of billions of dollars of taxpayer money.  The just can't be trusted with anything.

Edited June 21, 2024 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

1. I would say there is no absolute rule but when people like the dishonest politicians claim that man is causing climate change and man can control the climate, I would dismiss that as a fraud.  There is no justification for carbon taxes.

2. Fish farms fall under the same category.  I doubt it is the fish farms that cause the variations in the number of wild salmon to go up the rivers and the number being caught.  This again is most likely built on speculation.  All the environmentalists and some commercial fisherman jumped on it and make the phony claim although they themselves know nothing about it.  They are just parroting what they heard some say.  

3. Many of the government actions are built on the herd mentality.  The carbon tax is the biggest fraud going and proves the government can't be trusted.

1. I know that you don't accept the science on climate change.
2. I now know you don't accept the conclusions of marine biology (?)
3. I now know you don't trust the government.

All I get from this is "no absolute rule" which, in legal terms, means "no rule".  So you don't agree with environmental regulations I assume.  Correct me if I'm wrong and if I am, try to state a principle even in general terms.

[blackbird]

21 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

All I get from this is "no absolute rule" which, in legal terms, means "no rule".  So you don't agree with environmental regulations I assume.  Correct me if I'm wrong and if I am, try to state a principle even in general terms.

No, what I am saying is I don't accept the decrees and findings by completely immoral and untrustworthy people.

"Canadian actor William Shatner has waded into the debate over open-net salmon farming with a profanity-laced video for Pacific Wild."   

It would be foolish to take seriously anything coming from the mouth of someone who made a profanity-laced video.

Environmentalists are worshipers of Mother Earth and blame anything man does as immoral or wrong.

Every human activity has some side effects on the environment.  Simply living affects the environment.  That is the way the world is.  Mother Earth worshipers don't accept it.

There is no science that proves man is causing excessive CO2 and excessive climate change.  There is no scientific proof that man can control the climate.

The majority of Canadians do not belief the government is taking foreign interference seriously.

The majority of Canadians believe Canada's bilingualism is a myth.

Edited June 21, 2024 by blackbird

[blackbird]

Every industry that man is involved in has some effect on the environment.

The energy industry, forestry, fishing, manufacturing, etc. all have some effect on the environment.

The same situation exists with fish farming.  It may have some effect, but just how much is debatable.  Those that want to get rid of it claim it is having a dire effect on wild salmon fishing.   Just how true is that and how serious is the effect?  Wild salmon fisherman have a reason to be biased because farmed salmon are a fraction of the price of wild salmon.  They are a tremendous benefit to society and producing them creates a lot of jobs.  But of course it is some competition for fishermen.  But is that a reason to ban an industry?  I don't think so.

How is it possible to get an honest opinion on this subject.  Not very likely.

How many or what percentage of wild salmon are actually affected by the fish farms?  That should be the question, not whether a tiny percentage may be affected.  As I said, everything man does has some affect.  Just how much of an affect is the real question.

Edited June 21, 2024 by blackbird

[blackbird]

The fact is overfishing is a major problem with the wild caught salmon fishing industry.  They need to look at themselves for a change.  Are they themselves depleting the fish stocks by over fishing?
 

The Consequences of Overfishing and its Impact On B.C. Salmon  – Blog – Evergreen Collective

[Michael Hardner]

34 minutes ago, blackbird said:

1. No, what I am saying is I don't accept the decrees and findings by completely immoral and untrustworthy people.

1. Simple then.  Pass a law saying immoral and untrustworthy people can't make policy.

None of the rest of your post is about your principle behind Environmental Laws.  I'm just going to assume you don't think it's possible to articulate such a thing, which is fair.  But even you can see the impracticality - political and otherwise - of removing all environmental laws.  

Let me know if you come up with a better way to frame this question.  I'll wait on that.

[herbie]

Evil Government Shuts Asbestos Mine, Thousands Out if Work.

OMG hates anything to do with environmental protection yet wants the horrible interfering govt to 'fix' housing and inflation. Schizoid.

They have 5 years to move inland. 5 whole years. 5 years to comply and continue, 5 ears for workers to look for new jobs, 5 years for natives to appeal and probably win exemptions. But NOOO it's another Apocalypse Today!

 

[blackbird]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

But even you can see the impracticality - political and otherwise - of removing all environmental laws.  

I am not the creator of the laws.  But I just believe a lot of them are extreme with no proof.  The carbon tax is the most obvious scam imposed by a radical extremist government.  Putting an environmental extremist in charge of an environmental department of the federal government doesn't help either.  A guy who illegally climbed the CN Tower in Toronto for Greenpeace is put in charge of the environment and climate change.  What do you expect would happen?

 

[herbie]

Putting the Chair of Monsanto as head of Environment Canada is more to his liking. Why that extremist can't possibly know anything about the environment he's as non-credible as David Suzuki.

[Nefarious Banana]

7 hours ago, blackbird said:

Wild salmon fisherman have a reason to be biased because farmed salmon are a fraction of the price of wild salmon.  They are a tremendous benefit to society and producing them creates a lot of jobs.  But of course it is some competition for fishermen.  But is that a reason to ban an industry?  I don't think so.

How is it possible to get an honest opinion on this subject.  Not very likely.

How many or what percentage of wild salmon are actually affected by the fish farms?  That should be the question, not whether a tiny percentage may be affected.  As I said, everything man does has some affect.  Just how much of an affect is the real question.

Numerous studies/examples of effects on wild salmon stock . . . results are of no benifit to the wild stock.

Farmed salmon taste off . . . there were package warnings about eating it too often.  The cat wouldn't touch the stuff.  Good enough product to ship to the easterners who couldn't tell the difference between salmon and salami.

 

[blackbird]

4 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Numerous studies/examples of effects on wild salmon stock . . . results are of no benifit to the wild stock.

Who said farmed salmon were supposed to be a benefit to wild salmon stock?   Nobody.  

What benefit are wild salmon to fish farmed salmon?  None.

People buy farm raised salmon instead of wild caught salmon because it is much less expensive.

I doubt the taste is that much different than wild caught but I have not compared them myself.

Canada imports a number of different fish and people buy it all.

The availability of fish-farmed salmon at a lower price makes it more affordable for a large portion of the population who would otherwise not buy any salmon.  Not everyone can afford the high cost of wild caught salmon.  It is quite expensive and only caught during a short period each year.

There are many foods we eat that are not the healthiest foods in the world and too much of certain foods may be bad for our health.  That probably goes for salmon and other fish.  But eating it only occasionally is probably not harmful.

Should government intervene in the market place and ban all foods that are less than ideal?  I doubt it.  If they did, they would probably have to get rid of a large part of the foods in the market.

If government should get rid of foods that are not too healthy for people, they would have to get rid of all fatty foods, all deep fried foods, perhaps many meats that are loaded with fat, perhaps many baked goods, and foods with cholesterol and many other things.  Liquor can be a bad thing and is very harmful to many people.  Why doesn't government shut down all liquor stores and ban booze?  That is something that is far worse than any fish from a fish farm.

The question is how far do you want government to control everyone's life?  Government is supposed to be a servant of the people, not a master.  The cabinet ministers are called ministers and not masters for a reason.   The word minister means servant.  Therefore the Prime Minister is supposed to be primarily a servant of the people.

[Nefarious Banana]

6 hours ago, blackbird said:

 I doubt the taste is that much different than wild caught but I have not compared them myself.

Canada imports a number of different fish and people buy it all.

The availability of fish-farmed salmon at a lower price makes it more affordable for a large portion of the population who would otherwise not buy any salmon.  Not everyone can afford the high cost of wild caught salmon.  It is quite expensive and only caught during a short period each year.

Calm down Mr. Zealot . . . fish farm salmon is a poor product.  Fish farms have brought disease and parasites to numerous pristine spawning streams/rivers.  

Taste and compare . . . 

[eyeball]

On 6/21/2024 at 10:42 AM, ExFlyer said:

In a new study published in Science Advances, we found that a salmon virus that is common on fish farms was introduced to southern B.C. roughly 30 years ago and is continually transmitted between farmed and wild salmon.

Notwithstanding introduced diseases, the concentrated population density found in a farm probably put the fish in them at greater threat from disease than wild salmon.

The worst threat to wild salmon from farms are from sea lice that are also found in greater densities around farms. Adult salmon can survive being fairly heavily infested with lice but even just a couple can kill a smolt. When smolts swimming out to the open sea pass farms along the way they stand a good chance of becoming infested.

[eyeball]

On 6/21/2024 at 12:51 PM, blackbird said:

They are a tremendous benefit to society and producing them creates a lot of jobs.  But of course it is some competition for fishermen.  But is that a reason to ban an industry?  I don't think so.

No one is talking about banning fish farms. They're only being asked to grow their fish in closed containment systems so the pollution they cause, and the lice and pathogens they spread can be filtered out and the water can treated before being put back into the sea.

Existing farmers are complaining closed systems will cost them too much and that they'll simply move to some other country that will let them do what they want.

Meanwhile...

Closed containment salmon farmer sets sights on British Columbia

https://www.fishfarmingexpert.com/akvafuture-as-british-columbia-canada-salmon-farming/closed-containment-salmon-farmer-sets-sights-on-british-columbia/1542735

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

No one is talking about banning fish farms. They're only being asked to grow their fish in closed containment systems so the pollution they cause, and the lice and pathogens they spread can be filtered out and the water can treated before being put back into the sea.

Existing farmers are complaining closed systems will cost them too much and that they'll simply move to some other country that will let them do what they want.

Meanwhile...

Closed containment salmon farmer sets sights on British Columbia

https://www.fishfarmingexpert.com/akvafuture-as-british-columbia-canada-salmon-farming/closed-containment-salmon-farmer-sets-sights-on-british-columbia/1542735

Interesting article.

[blackbird]

13 hours ago, eyeball said:

No one is talking about banning fish farms. They're only being asked to grow their fish in closed containment

Actually the government announced they are shutting down fish farms.  So yes, they are talking about it and beyond that they have decided to shut them down.

I think the government should subsidize converting the fish farms to closed containment fish farms.  The federal government gives billions of dollars to subsidize the auto industry, and billions for new EV battery plants being built in Ontario.  They give Quebec billions of dollars for various things.  So they should help convert the fish farms if they are opposed to the open net fish farms instead of just shutting them down.  There are thousands of jobs at stake.

[blackbird]

If the government wants to get rid of open net fish farms the solution is obvious.  The federal government should put up the money to convert them to close, containment fish farms.  That is an expensive thing to do.  It is a total rebuild of the fish farms and the open net fish farmers do not have the money.  The government gives billions to build the EV battery plants in Ontario.  Why don't they similarly help the fish farm industry convert their fish farms?  That would be the logical solution.

On 6/22/2024 at 7:51 AM, Nefarious Banana said:

Calm down Mr. Zealot . . . fish farm salmon is a poor product.  Fish farms have brought disease and parasites to numerous pristine spawning streams/rivers.  

Taste and compare . . . 

The government gives billions to build the EV battery plants in Ontario.  Why don't they similarly help the fish farm industry convert their fish farms?  That would be the logical solution.

[blackbird]

Ontario and Quebec receive billions in financial support of their industries.  What about the B.C. fish farm industry?

[herbie]

On 6/22/2024 at 1:32 AM, blackbird said:

The question is how far do you want government to control everyone's life?  Government is supposed to be a servant of the people, not a master.

Which is what they are doing in this case. BC is the last place on the West Coast to ban open net farming and that does have the support of the vast majority of the population. The harm to wild salmon stocks far outweighs the benefit of cheap fish that can still be raised by other means.

The taste of farmed salmon isn't that bad, if you're into mystery meats try McDonalds fish sandwich or Highliner Fish Stix. They're even cheaper if that's what's important to you.

 

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, herbie said:

Which is what they are doing in this case. BC is the last place on the West Coast to ban open net farming and that does have the support of the vast majority of the population. The harm to wild salmon stocks far outweighs the benefit of cheap fish that can still be raised by other means.

The taste of farmed salmon isn't that bad, if you're into mystery meats try McDonalds fish sandwich or Highliner Fish Stix. They're even cheaper if that's what's important to you.

 

So why don't you advocate the federal government subsidize the conversion of open net fish farms to contained fish farms if it is so bad?  The federal government pays billions for EV plants and other things in Ontario and Quebec.  Why don't they treat B.C. the same way?

[herbie]

12 minutes ago, blackbird said:

So why don't you advocate the federal government subsidize the conversion of open net fish farms to contained fish farms

Yeah and I should have advocated the govt subsidize the computer store I used to have too? They're corporate entities. If their ROI doesn't warrant it, they don't do it.

And guess what, in some cases they will, and you can squawk about that too as they'll be native owned fisheries and not white owned companies.