I didn't think we had a thread for this. 

Is Trudeau this out of touch or does he just not care?

 

Nothing like showing solidarity for losing civil rights as well as freedom of choice. Well done, clap, clap, clap. #ftmcmurray

Edited February 23, 20178 yr by SpeedFlex27

It's a symbolic gesture of support - why are you guys bothered by it? 

 

20 hours ago, Mark H. said:

It's a symbolic gesture of support - why are you guys bothered by it? 

 

Gesture in support of what though?

http://www.cheriberens.net/womenrsquos-march-towards-islam.html

24 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Gesture in support of what though?

http://www.cheriberens.net/womenrsquos-march-towards-islam.html

No kidding.  Then you have one of the Women's March organizers tweeting out that "Sharia Law is actually quite reasonable, people just don't understand the details."  What an absolute farce.

17 hours ago, Atomic said:

No kidding.  Then you have one of the Women's March organizers tweeting out that "Sharia Law is actually quite reasonable, people just don't understand the details."  What an absolute farce.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/02/ayaan-hirsi-ali-womens-march-co-chair-linda-sarsour-is-a-fake-feminist/

Nothing demonstrates the stupidity of these so-called feminists more than their embracing of the Hijab as a symbol of freedom.  It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.  And it must really strike at the heart of so many Muslim women who would love to have the freedom to throw it off.

Say what you want about Le Pen but when told she had to wear a Hijab or she wouldnt meet with officials in (was it Libya?) she turned around and walked out.  Meanwhile, in Ontario the Premier looks like an idiot being forced to sit at the back of the room in a Hijab and barefoot to show her "support" for Muslims.  Grotesque.

 

On 2/22/2017 at 0:52 PM, Atomic said:

This is so ****** up

These are quite literally the two dumbest women in Canada, posing with smirks on their faces.  Talk about bored housewives.  Do they not have the internet in their town?  And CBC's story is disgustingly one-sided.  I find it impossible to belief the reporter doesnt know the reality.

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

Say what you want about Le Pen but when told she had to wear a Hijab or she wouldnt meet with officials in (was it Libya?) she turned around and walked out.  Meanwhile, in Ontario the Premier looks like an idiot being forced to sit at the back of the room in a Hijab and barefoot to show her "support" for Muslims.  Grotesque.

 

Lebanon.

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/why-marine-le-pen-did-a-great-thing-by-refusing-to-wear-a-headscarf/news-story/0a8698d9276d1625e0f952974bf61cd2

5 hours ago, Mark F said:

 

side note.   Canadian farmers may  regret their man Harper destroying the Canadian Wheat Board. Wonder what Mark H thinks. or KBF from a farming background.

I'll ask my relatives.  I am also going to ask them how happy they are about the carbon tax.  Not sure if the government has thought of farmers and the onerous burden this useless tax puts on them - anyone know?

18 hours ago, Mark F said:

side note.   Canadian farmers may  regret their man Harper destroying the Canadian Wheat Board. Wonder what Mark H thinks. or KBF from a farming background.

As someone who grew up on a farm (and has followed food production with interest), I can tell you this much:  The nature of agricultural production and food supply pits various ag sectors against each other.  When grain prices are high, that hurts ranchers and other livestock/milk/egg production.  Grain price spikes usually occur in times of global shortages (usually weather-related), so as long as you're in a part of Canada that had good growing (and harvest) conditions, you might have a very good year.  If you are a buyer of feed grain, you'll still feel the pinch.  

Every sector seems to hate dairy farmers because they have a sustainable program that manages supply (and therefore guarantees reasonable income).  It's a system that has worked, but has also shown that if marketing boards are taken over by the biggest farmers, they can make the small ones go away (the same thing happened when Filmon removed the single desk sales mechanism for hog production, but to a greater extent-there are no small hog farmers anymore).  The Trump team has already said they will be going after Canada to end Supply Management (as most American governments have).  

Anyway, since farmers are divided by natural market forces, the have seemingly lost their ability to cooperate and form any kind of unified voice to advocate for themselves.  All the successful lobbying in the Ag sector is done by the processors now and producers are left on their own.  This forced independence has reinforced an almost Libertarian viewpoint (and I know there are exceptions).  Farmers really hate taxes, even though they have some of the most generous tax breaks available.  Since most farmers are now over 50, they are also very set in whatever ideology they have already had.

So to make a long story short, the ones in favour of disbanding the Wheat Board will tell you it was a great move regardless of how it has actually effected them (another farmer trait).  They won't mention that they are happy paying for private companies operating expenses as well as their profit margins instead of only covering the CWB's operating expenses.

The farmers against the disbanding of the CWB are either fighting for a return or have likely moved on to other crops and are saying "I told you so" (another farmer trait).

It's hard to find published statistics on wheat production since 2012 (Wikipedia can get you up to 2014), it's also really hard to say how prices (more importantly, income) have been effected, because it's now up to individual farmers to market their crop.  Wheat prices are a commodity, so the prices are set.  How it grades at the elevator and what each farmer has negotiated in his contract is a whole other unquantifiable (at least based on the info I have tried to find) answer.

Don't think I even came close to answering the question...

 

 

19 hours ago, Mark F said:

side note.   Canadian farmers may  regret their man Harper destroying the Canadian Wheat Board. Wonder what Mark H thinks. or KBF from a farming background.

My main issue with the CWB dismantling is how it was done. Whether they kept it or dismantled it should have been decided by the producers, not the ******* politicians. 

The CWB is a pretty heavy topic but historically it was a very good organization that put control of the commodity in the hands of the producers and stabilized the wheat market through some very rough periods.  Harper did his biding and destroyed it using questionable tactics on behest of the multi-national ag, companies that he represented. 

What's done is done, and if the wheat growers ever tried to re-establish even a shadow of the CWB it would be blocked at every turn through the courts and the task would be insurmountable.  The table has been set for corporate farming so that money can flow more efficiently up the pyramid with as few farmers as possible getting their grubby hands on it.

3 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

My main issue with the CWB dismantling is how it was done. Whether they kept it or dismantled it should have been decided by the producers, not the ******* politicians. 

The American government went after the wheat board time and again, and lost. Then the job was done for them by the Canadian government.

Just the fact that the Americans wanted it gone, tells you a lot.

The producers wanted it gone more than anyone

12 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Some producers wanted it gone more than anyone, except the Grain elevators, they wanted it gone the most.

Fixed for accuracy.

Edited March 17, 20178 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

On ‎3‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 0:24 PM, Atomic said:

The producers wanted it gone more than anyone

still haven't gotten around to talking to my relatives on this one, but the above statement does ring a pretty large bell.  I know farmers were getting arrested for going across the border to sell their grain.  It ain't right to stop farmers from marketing their grain on their own, and especially ain't right turning them into criminals for trying.

On 17/03/2017 at 10:45 AM, Wideleft said:

As someone who grew up on a farm (and has followed food production with interest), I can tell you this much:  The nature of agricultural production and food supply pits various ag sectors against each other.  When grain prices are high, that hurts ranchers and other livestock/milk/egg production.  Grain price spikes usually occur in times of global shortages (usually weather-related), so as long as you're in a part of Canada that had good growing (and harvest) conditions, you might have a very good year.  If you are a buyer of feed grain, you'll still feel the pinch.  

Every sector seems to hate dairy farmers because they have a sustainable program that manages supply (and therefore guarantees reasonable income).  It's a system that has worked, but has also shown that if marketing boards are taken over by the biggest farmers, they can make the small ones go away (the same thing happened when Filmon removed the single desk sales mechanism for hog production, but to a greater extent-there are no small hog farmers anymore).  The Trump team has already said they will be going after Canada to end Supply Management (as most American governments have).  

Anyway, since farmers are divided by natural market forces, the have seemingly lost their ability to cooperate and form any kind of unified voice to advocate for themselves.  All the successful lobbying in the Ag sector is done by the processors now and producers are left on their own.  This forced independence has reinforced an almost Libertarian viewpoint (and I know there are exceptions).  Farmers really hate taxes, even though they have some of the most generous tax breaks available.  Since most farmers are now over 50, they are also very set in whatever ideology they have already had.

So to make a long story short, the ones in favour of disbanding the Wheat Board will tell you it was a great move regardless of how it has actually effected them (another farmer trait).  They won't mention that they are happy paying for private companies operating expenses as well as their profit margins instead of only covering the CWB's operating expenses.

The farmers against the disbanding of the CWB are either fighting for a return or have likely moved on to other crops and are saying "I told you so" (another farmer trait).

It's hard to find published statistics on wheat production since 2012 (Wikipedia can get you up to 2014), it's also really hard to say how prices (more importantly, income) have been effected, because it's now up to individual farmers to market their crop.  Wheat prices are a commodity, so the prices are set.  How it grades at the elevator and what each farmer has negotiated in his contract is a whole other unquantifiable (at least based on the info I have tried to find) answer.

Don't think I even came close to answering the question...

 

 

Eggs, broiler chickens, turkeys, and milk are all under the supply management system. They all turn a profit regardless of feed prices, it's not just true of dairy. Example: an efficient egg producer can currently produce eggs for $0.64 per dozen. He will receive $1.90 - $2.50 per dozen for his eggs under the Canadian supply management system. A U.S. producer will receive less than a dollar per dozen for his eggs. When corn prices rise, he will make pennies on the dozen or even lose money.

There is really no comparison to be made between hogs and dairy. Hogs were sold through a single desk but they were never supply managed. Small hog farmers were phased out partly because of the single desk, but also because they were producing poor quality hogs. Today's consumer demands lean meat. If you're going to raise hogs in the barnyard, they will be fat, it's their protection against the elements.  If you feed them food scraps and garbage, they will put on even more fat. The modern hog industry has reached the point where some producers are able to raise hogs without antibiotics, due to stringent hygiene and biosecurity standards.

As for the CWB - they did a great job marketing hard spring wheat, got good prices for farmers, and helped the small farmers stay competitive. However, in the ever diversifying agricultural landscape of the prairies, they remained stagnant. Farmers were growing winter wheat, malting barley, soybeans, and corn, just to name a few of the newer crops. The CWB continued to market only hard spring wheat. Had they been more diversified and consequently more relevant, it would have been much harder to remove them. 

 

 

17 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

Eggs, broiler chickens, turkeys, and milk are all under the supply management system. They all turn a profit regardless of feed prices, it's not just true of dairy. Example: an efficient egg producer can currently produce eggs for $0.64 per dozen. He will receive $1.90 - $2.50 per dozen for his eggs under the Canadian supply management system. A U.S. producer will receive less than a dollar per dozen for his eggs. When corn prices rise, he will make pennies on the dozen or even lose money.

There is really no comparison to be made between hogs and dairy. Hogs were sold through a single desk but they were never supply managed. Small hog farmers were phased out partly because of the single desk, but also because they were producing poor quality hogs. Today's consumer demands lean meat. If you're going to raise hogs in the barnyard, they will be fat, it's their protection against the elements.  If you feed them food scraps and garbage, they will put on even more fat. The modern hog industry has reached the point where some producers are able to raise hogs without antibiotics, due to stringent hygiene and biosecurity standards.

As for the CWB - they did a great job marketing hard spring wheat, got good prices for farmers, and helped the small farmers stay competitive. However, in the ever diversifying agricultural landscape of the prairies, they remained stagnant. Farmers were growing winter wheat, malting barley, soybeans, and corn, just to name a few of the newer crops. The CWB continued to market only hard spring wheat. Had they been more diversified and consequently more relevant, it would have been much harder to remove them. 

 

 

There you have it, right from the horse's mouth.

EI premiums rise. Increase in tax on booze. GST applies to Uber. 

Ending Canada Savings Bonds. 

15 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

EI premiums rise. Increase in tax on booze. GST applies to Uber. 

Ending Canada Savings Bonds. 

Ending the Canada Savings Bonds just makes sense.

GST should apply to Uber.

Not too happy about the EI premium increase but really like the idea of spreading out parental leave to 18 months.

Increase tax on booze? I don't like that.

1 hour ago, JCon said:

Ending the Canada Savings Bonds just makes sense.

GST should apply to Uber.

Not too happy about the EI premium increase but really like the idea of spreading out parental leave to 18 months.

Increase tax on booze? I don't like that.

I dont mind sin taxes.  Sure, I wish booze was cheaper.  But if I can afford to buy bottles for a party, then I can afford a slight increase in tax.

Dont like the EI Premium increase because its a tax hike on everyone.  Taxes are high enough.  Taxes should be reduced not increased. 

Spreading out Parental Leave is fine because it leaves the choice in the hands of the parent to take less pay over a longer period.  But that causing my premiums to go up is not cool.  And I know several people who paid into EI for years that, when they needed it, couldnt get it.  So not a fan.

They should increase the TFSA contribution limit too, like the Cons had done.

9 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I dont mind sin taxes.  Sure, I wish booze was cheaper.  But if I can afford to buy bottles for a party, then I can afford a slight increase in tax.

Dont like the EI Premium increase because its a tax hike on everyone.  Taxes are high enough.  Taxes should be reduced not increased. 

Spreading out Parental Leave is fine because it leaves the choice in the hands of the parent to take less pay over a longer period.  But that causing my premiums to go up is not cool.  And I know several people who paid into EI for years that, when they needed it, couldnt get it.  So not a fan.

They should increase the TFSA contribution limit too, like the Cons had done.

I can afford the slight increase too and, in general, agree that sin taxes are fine. Let's just get those mary jane taxes flowing already.

Agreed.

I would be curious to examine this issue further. I'm all for EI reforms to help all workers.

Yes, and yes. But, I'm also in a position to put lots away, so it benefits me directly. I'm not sure what the latest info and statistics are the on people taking advantage of this tax avoidance program.

1 minute ago, JCon said:

I can afford the slight increase too and, in general, agree that sin taxes are fine. Let's just get those mary jane taxes flowing already.

Agreed.

I would be curious to examine this issue further. I'm all for EI reforms to help all workers.

Yes, and yes. But, I'm also in a position to put lots away, so it benefits me directly. I'm not sure what the latest info and statistics are the on people taking advantage of this tax avoidance program.

I know the criticism on TFSA is that it helps wealthy people.  But I know many people who are not wealthy that use them including myself.  If the government is serious about people saving for their own retirement then they have to make it easier to do so.

Plus, you still pay tax on the money you put into the TFSA.  So the government gets their cut.  But why punish me for saving by also taxing the interest I make on saving that money?  In the end, Im going to spend it anyway...and pay tax on it.

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I know the criticism on TFSA is that it helps wealthy people.  But I know many people who are not wealthy that use them including myself.  If the government is serious about people saving for their own retirement then they have to make it easier to do so.

Plus, you still pay tax on the money you put into the TFSA.  So the government gets their cut.  But why punish me for saving by also taxing the interest I make on saving that money?  In the end, Im going to spend it anyway...and pay tax on it.

I don't disagree with any of this, I'm just curious who is taking advantage of the program. I never had a problem being taxed on interest but like this program as a long-term savings program. It's easy to get in and has low barriers. It's far less complicated than RRSPs to explain to a layman.

I think the made it unnecessarily complicated, making it difficult to move the money around between institutions but that's a mechanical thing that could be fixed. There should be a wall, where you can move money in and out and, as long as it stays behind that wall.

5 minutes ago, JCon said:

I don't disagree with any of this, I'm just curious who is taking advantage of the program. I never had a problem being taxed on interest but like this program as a long-term savings program. It's easy to get in and has low barriers. It's far less complicated than RRSPs to explain to a layman.

I think the made it unnecessarily complicated, making it difficult to move the money around between institutions but that's a mechanical thing that could be fixed. There should be a wall, where you can move money in and out and, as long as it stays behind that wall.

I wish they made the whole tax code simpler.  I *want* to put more into TFSA but I have to use my RRSP to decrease my tax burden every year.  But I've read some stuff from people far smarter than me that implores people to max out TFSA first before RRSP's. 

I think you're right about RRSP's being complicated to people and it has this sort of magical aura that if you contribute you will be rich when you retire and TFSA seem so much smaller but the way they work can create a lot of money down the road...and since you've already paid tax, its "free" money.

For my elderly parents, its annoys them that they have to convert their RRSP's because if they ddnt have to, they wouldn't right now.  But they've got into the habit of taking the minimum RIF and dumping as much as they can into their TFSA.  They arent rich, just very careful. 

It all gets more complicated when you factor stocks.  For example, my job allows you to buy stocks and the company matches a percentage.  I dont get it.  But I know I have stocks in an RRSP account so, bully for me I guess.