Ranchers.net Bull Session

SAY nr DO YOU REMBER THAT OLE WOMAN THAT CALLED HERSELF MRJ

A friendly place to talk about the weather, tell jokes and post cowboy poetry.
HAY MAKER
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 8800
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:53 pm
Location: Texas

Postby HAY MAKER » Mon Feb 21, 2005 5:24 pm

WELCOME back MRJ several of us missed you, tell us how the convention went and what you learned ,did you get to eat out in the river walk?.......good luck ps what do you think of the new RANCHERS NET?

User avatar
rancher
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 1059
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 8:12 pm

Postby rancher » Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:55 pm

Welcome back, what did you think of the NCBA flip flop?
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr. Seuss

Oldtimer

Postby Oldtimer » Mon Feb 21, 2005 11:09 pm

rancher wrote:Welcome back, what did you think of the NCBA flip flop?


Thats what I've been waiting for-- an NCBA convention report and your feelings on the new NCBA stance-- Is it just a whitewash to keep from losing more members to R-CALF ? Or do they really want to again represent the cattleman? My check is made out- just haven't dated and signed it- waiting to see if they really follow up on what they said........

Cal
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 3599
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Southern SD

Re: Welcome back MRJ!

Postby Cal » Mon Feb 21, 2005 11:41 pm

cal I could say the same thing about your dumb ass,she is back aint she..............good luck[/quote]


HAYMAKER, anyone who thinks the beef industry would benefit by having the LMA handle the checkoff has no business calling anyone a dumba**.

BradS

Postby BradS » Tue Feb 22, 2005 2:17 am

Here's the deal. I support the checkoff, and haymaker, I guess you don't. We both raise cattle, and can have an honest difference of opinion. Even checkoff abolitionists must reluctantly agree we've seen a positive return from the monies collected. Hell haymaker, I'm even with you resenting the draconian enforcement of the checkoff - I've never warmed up to putting cattlemen in jail. BUT you're not thinking clearly with regard to LMA. The LMA has no place in this discussion - NO STANDING. They're simply exploiting an honest difference that you and I have to their own purpose. Look at it this way. Suppose a woman had a husband and an extramarital boyfriend, and the hubby comes home and catches the boyfriend with the ho. So the 2 guys are getting ready to fight, and the ho puts a gun in one of their hands. Just like that, one dies, one goes to jail, and the snide keeps all the assets. LMA is only interested in excessive turnover of cattle that will necessarily harm BEEF PRODUCERS, and to this end they'll gladly finance opposition to the chckoff.

Oldtimer

Postby Oldtimer » Tue Feb 22, 2005 2:31 am

Checkoff has been a good thing for the cattle and beef industry- Problem came about when NCBA would not bend and look at a little change or even the question of a producer referendum- this may result in the death of the checkoff.... But I agree it needs some changes in administration and implementation to make it fair and viable- right now it operates under a cloud of impropriety.....

If it stands the court challenge let ALL those that pay it decide who gets to contract and administrate the funds-- Not just the NCBA.......

HAY MAKER
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 8800
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:53 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Welcome back MRJ!

Postby HAY MAKER » Tue Feb 22, 2005 7:47 am

Cal wrote:cal I could say the same thing about your dumb ass,she is back aint she..............good luck



HAYMAKER, anyone who thinks the beef industry would benefit by having the LMA handle the checkoff has no business calling anyone a dumba**.[/quote]

cal you are hard headed or short on memory I have said this at least a dozen times but because I believe you to be slow ILL repeat it again,:I WANT TO SEE MORE THAN ONE PLAYER CONTROLLING THE CHECK OFF .I support the check off and I would support it if it was $5 a head but listen closely conpetion breeds fairness give the cattle man the option plan A controlled by the ncba or plan B controlled by the LMA..............good luck PS I believe even you can understand that???

User avatar
Big Muddy rancher
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 21285
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Big Muddy valley
Contact:

Re: Welcome back MRJ!

Postby Big Muddy rancher » Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:56 am

HAY MAKER wrote:
Cal wrote:cal I could say the same thing about your dumb ass,she is back aint she..............good luck



HAYMAKER, anyone who thinks the beef industry would benefit by having the LMA handle the checkoff has no business calling anyone a dumba**.


cal you are hard headed or short on memory I have said this at least a dozen times but because I believe you to be slow ILL repeat it again,:I WANT TO SEE MORE THAN ONE PLAYER CONTROLLING THE CHECK OFF .I support the check off and I would support it if it was $5 a head but listen closely conpetion breeds fairness give the cattle man the option plan A controlled by the ncba or plan B controlled by the LMA..............good luck PS I believe even you can understand that???[/quote]


Haymaker your the hard headed one. I'm not even from the states and I understand how your check off is controled. The CBB in each state which is made up of many cattle orgs. You can be so pig headed at times.

:cowboy:
Avatar by Haymaker

I can't tame wild women.

But I can make tame women wild.

User avatar
Faster horses
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 27776
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:21 pm
Location: SE MT

Postby Faster horses » Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:01 am

Welcome back, MRJ. Many times I WISHED you were here, so I'm happy getting what I wished for.

I am a supporter of the checkoff and as for more people/organizations having a say-so in how the funds are handled, all it will do is slow down the process. The few of us on this board can't agree to much, how in the world would the check-off fare any better? Action is better than no action because of too many trying to make a decision. There will always be the ones who say "we shudda done this"...sometimes they don't know the situation, but they have a big (mouth) voice.

Just my thoughts.

It took awhile, but I think we see/realize the results of the checkoff regularly. (And I don't belong to NCBA.)

HAY MAKER
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 8800
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:53 pm
Location: Texas

Postby HAY MAKER » Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:21 pm

faster horses explain to me how competition has ever slowed the process?cant believe you said that...............good luck

HAY MAKER
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 8800
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:53 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Welcome back MRJ!

Postby HAY MAKER » Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:43 pm

Big Muddy rancher wrote:
HAY MAKER wrote:
Cal wrote:cal I could say the same thing about your dumb ass,she is back aint she..............good luck



HAYMAKER, anyone who thinks the beef industry would benefit by having the LMA handle the checkoff has no business calling anyone a dumba**.


cal you are hard headed or short on memory I have said this at least a dozen times but because I believe you to be slow ILL repeat it again,:I WANT TO SEE MORE THAN ONE PLAYER CONTROLLING THE CHECK OFF .I support the check off and I would support it if it was $5 a head but listen closely conpetion breeds fairness give the cattle man the option plan A controlled by the ncba or plan B controlled by the LMA..............good luck PS I believe even you can understand that???



Haymaker your the hard headed one. I'm not even from the states and I understand how your check off is controled. The CBB in each state which is made up of many cattle orgs. You can be so pig headed at times.

:cowboy:[/quote]



You can be so pig headed at times.

yes I suppose I can,but there are thousands of cattle men that must be pig headed too because we are all wanting change ,and I personally believe that the ncba should handle the check off as usual,and any body that wanted to could participate,but I also believe the ones that wanted another optition,should be able to participate in another plan . COMPETITION CREATES FAIRNESS ...............GOOD LUCK

mrj
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 4503
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:19 am
Location: SD

Postby mrj » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:00 pm

Haymaker, first off, NCBA does NOT control the Beef Checkoff! Second, there IS more than one player controlling the beef checkoff! The CBB has representatives from many organizations. While I do not have the number breakdowns as to organizations represented, I don't believe NCBA members are a majority on the board. The CBB makes all the decisions as to which projects from which potential contractor will get the jobs, that is, CBB makes ALL decisions on where/how/for what the money goes. BTW, even your treasured LMA is represented on the CBB. However the desire of some of their members to spend the money for lobbying would be illegal under the checkoff law.

BTW, Haymaker, I did explore the River Walk and some other places in San Antonio. Missed that great Museum of TX Cultures this trip, but did quite a lot of touring the area between Ft. Worth and Frederiksburg and the 'scenic' route from there through the mtns. to San Antonio, then south east to Corpus Christi and Kingsville, then back along the coast and up to Houston before heading for Jackson, MS. Also spent a few hours at the stock show on Sunday before leaving SA. Saw some very impressive Brahma cattle. We had fantastic steaks at Texas Land and Cattle Co. steakhouse on the Riverwalk. Even got to be a 'good samaritan'. Two little boys, not over six and eight years of age were lost and asked for directions. I sent them into the TLC we had just walked out of to ask directions, telling them we didn't know the area well. I knew a law officer was just inside the door as he had given us directions for a short-cut to our hotel. Moments later he came up beside us with the boys in hand, telling them how dangerous it is to "just decide to go for a walk" without your parents when you are a tourist in town and of their ages. Really scary to think of them going off alone like that, as they were a long way from where they said they were supposed to be, and it was getting dark.

FH, I understand your point that having too many people making decisions is 'untidy' at best. Representative governance is the alternative to chaos. Just read the letter to ed. in Tri-State Livestock News this week contrasting the NCBA and R-CALF conventions to get the full meaning of that statement! The complex system of the two divisions of NCBA and the CBB is that way in order to gain the most representation of the most cattle producers making decisions in the most fair, yet workable manner. I know there are people who choose not to believe that because they have another agenda not well served by that system.

Re. the NCBA convention......there is a lot in the Ag media of reports of the action taken, speakers, workshops, etc. We saw/heard most of it and thought the educational stuff was tops. The meetings went smoothly. I did miss some of the discussion forums due to inability to be in two places at the same time. It seemed that people were pretty focused on studying issues and hopefully, decisions arrived at were mutually satisfactory where there was any differing opinions. That was reflected in the general session. Of course one person could not attend every committee meeting, but didn't hear of much discord, though generally there is strong discussion on at least a few issues in committee. The crowds were huge, with many standing-room only sessions and scrambling by staff to get more chairs, larger rooms, etc. to accomodate drop-in attendees. People were pretty mellow, maybe due to good prices, mild winter for most, etc. Sure did like the British born newsman who subbed for Chris Matthews. His talk was an inspiring cheering session for the values and the people of this, his adopted country.

MRJ


Return to “Coffee Shop”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests