• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

4 more, but where is NCBA?

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA was pleased to learn that on Friday, Nov. 7, 2008, four more state attorneys general – from Arizona, Connecticut, New Mexico and Mississippi – joined the U.S. Department of Justice in its complaint against Brazilian-owned meatpacker JBS’ attempts to acquire National Beef Packing Co., the fourth largest meatpacker in the United States. Thirteen other attorneys general – from Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming – signed on when Justice filed its original complaint on Oct. 20, 2008.

“We are grateful these other attorneys general have joined this fight and hope this action stops the trend toward more and more concentration, and less and less competition,” said R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard. “With the recent acquisition of Smithfield Beef Group by JBS, our cattle market in the U.S. is now so highly concentrated that only four firms control about 85 percent of the steer and heifer slaughter, which means we now have only a marginally competitive market left for independent U.S. cattle producers. The remaining packers are able to exert monopoly type power to exploit producers and consumers.

“With respect to U.S. antitrust laws, the agency charged with enforcing those laws is the Justice Department, but states also have the authority to enforce U.S. antitrust laws when those laws affect the citizens of their respective states, giving those state attorneys general tremendous authority to protect the economic interests of the citizens within their states,” he continued. “What R-CALF has done is explain to them how this proposed acquisition will adversely affect cow/calf producers all across the U.S., and they understood the problem and agreed to step to the plate to defend the interests of cattle producers and consumers. We are surprised the state of Nebraska didn’t join and hope to see that change in the near future.”

It is important to understand that those individuals at the grassroots level – those in agriculture – produce new wealth every year in this great nation, and that these participating states have realized the importance of ensuring that those who generate such wealth receive a competitive value for the products they sell, and that this commerce is what drives and supports Rural America’s ability to generate new wealth and to create a vibrant economy, Bullard noted.

“A competitive marketplace is not one where you have just a handful of corporations controlling the entire market,” he emphasized. “A competitive market is when you have all the participants in the marketplace with an equal opportunity – equal access to the marketplace itself.”

Bullard also remarked that R-CALF USA took the lead as soon as the mergers were announced to begin informing Justice and the state attorneys general on how the U.S. cattle markets function and how the proposed mergers would further disrupt cattle markets, including JBS’ proposed acquisitions of Smithfield and Five Rivers Ranch Cattle Feeding. He said that cattle producers should take note that R-CALF USA’s competitor - the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) – stood on the sidelines of this compelling merger without taking a position until after the government and 13 states stepped forward to announce that this merger would result in lower prices paid to producers and consumers.

“The addition of these new states further demonstrates that the proposed merger would have widespread negative impacts on the U.S. cattle industry,” Bullard pointed out. “Many of the states that have joined this lawsuit represent cow/calf production and not feeding operations, indicating that these states understand how reduced competition at the packer level will harm their respective constituencies. This is a watershed moment for the cattle industry as it clearly shows that the conventional organizations, which have consistently supported policies advocated by the packers, have been ignoring the economic interests of cattle producers.

“Theodore Roosevelt once said it is the obligation of people in business to support their trade associations, and this should give producers and business people out there a stark contrast as to which trade association is truly representing their interests,” Bullard asserted. “Clearly, on this JBS issue, R-CALF USA has been front and center from the start representing the interests of farmers and ranchers who raise and sell cattle and the rural communities they support.”
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
"Our goal is to promote prosperity- and to guarantee that prosperity is spread around"
Theodore Roosevelt

I believe in corporations. They are indispensable instruments of our modern civilization; but I believe that they should be so supervised and so regulated that they shall act for the interest of the community as a whole.
~Theodore Roosevelt

We demand that big business give the people a square deal; in return we must insist that when any one engaged in big business honestly endeavors to do right he shall himself be given a square deal.
~Theodore Roosevelt

We wish to control big business so as to secure among other things good wages for the wage-workers and reasonable prices for the consumers. Wherever in any business the prosperity of the businessman is obtained by lowering the wages of his workmen and charging an excessive price to the consumers we wish to interfere and stop such practices. We will not submit to that kind of prosperity any more than we will submit to prosperity obtained by swindling investors or getting unfair advantages over business rivals
~ Theodore Roosevelt
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
When a single company gets so big that its economic sector will suffer severely if it fails and the government can't/won't let it fail, we no longer have capitalism!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
When a single company gets so big that its economic sector will suffer severely if it fails and the government can't/won't let it fail, we no longer have capitalism!

You would think that we would be learning something from the AIG bailout.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
RobertMac said:
When a single company gets so big that its economic sector will suffer severely if it fails and the government can't/won't let it fail, we no longer have capitalism!

You would think that we would be learning something from the AIG bailout.
Like, the more you give them, the more expensive their parties!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
RobertMac said:
When a single company gets so big that its economic sector will suffer severely if it fails and the government can't/won't let it fail, we no longer have capitalism!

We haven't had true capitalism in this country since 1789 and George Washington signed the first law singling out the carriage and whiskey industries to be the ones to be taxed to pay for the war costs...

Since then the rules and tax's and loopholes and exemptions have just continued to build- which allow certain entities to get preferential treatment or a government influenced advantage...One of the best examples is this NAFTA law....

I believe in corporations. They are indispensable instruments of our modern civilization; but I believe that they should be so supervised and so regulated that they shall act for the interest of the community as a whole.
~Theodore Roosevelt
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
canadian angus said:
OT you don't want to touch Nafta, come on give it a try!

CA

CA- for starters I would want to guarantee that no agreement takes any sovereignty of US and State voters/Congress to pass laws as they wish (like M-COOL)- and like the WTO agreements do now on other issues (ex.-gambling)---- or that require we accept everyone from Mexico/Canada that they certify as being competent without further inspection like is occurring with the Mexican trucking law now...Also many of the subsidy laws- like the Mexican fuel subsidy that has put many southern border truckers out of business....The disparity in numerous pharmaceuticals and chemicals that really don't allow free trade...
Lots of things have changed in 15 years-lots of things need to be relooked at-- especially with the southern border- and the huge monetary drain Mexico and the illegal invaders have been on the US..
 

canadian angus

Well-known member
OT pick on the poor Mexicans, you know if reopened, better start cutting wood to keep warm, oh ya you can keep warm rubbing your hands together over Obama's win.

Nafta has been good for all, but when protectionism kicks in, oh dear lets play with our own toys.

CA
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
How about any FTA having a fixed monetary exchange rate?
Canada is a great neighbor...but remember, y'all get paid for all that energy that comes south! :)
 
Top