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

Agman and/or SH

Help Support Ranchers.net:

OCM: "Tyson, Cargill and Swift each buys a different kind of cattle. There is a little overlap, but not much. Tyson goes for yield, Cargill goes for grade and Swift is kind of in between."

That is ABSOLUTELY untrue.

One more baseless conspiracy theory to try to justify the packer blamer's anti competive - market manipulation brainwash.

All major packers pay premiums for choice cattle in a normal market (choice paid premium over select) and all major packers sell choice beef.

What planet are you from OCM? Wait, I think I just answered my own question.


Sandman are you really so dense that you cannot discern that packer price fixing (no competition between packers) WOULD NOT MANIPULATE PRODUCER PRICES???

Go ahead, if you are so stupid as to believe there is a difference between a packer price fix (competition between packers) and market manipulation to producer prices, LET'S HEAR IT!

How could anything be more elementary?

Watch the diversion folks .............

The PSA was most definitely initiated to maintain competition between packers BECAUSE A LACK OF COMPETITION BETWEEN PACKERS AFFECTS PRODUCER PRICES.

Only you would be so ignorant as to suggest that competition between packers is a seperate issue from producer concerns about market manipulation.

IF A DAMN PRICE FIX IS NOT MARKET MANIPULATION TO THE PRODUCER, WHAT THE HELL IS???

This is so typical of your strawman spin jobs on what would normally be a simple issue. Only you would think there is a difference between packer competition and market manipulation to producers.


The obvious is that we just saw a 50% - 60% advance in fat cattle prices in a single year WITH NO CHANGE IN PACKER BUYING PRACTICES.

MUST HAVE BEEN AN ILLUSION HUH PACKER BLAMERS?


Conman, your market manipulation conspiracy phychobabble is as worthless as your ability to discredit Jason. Jason has it figured out while you make sh*t up to sound impressive to yourself. Reality shows that you are the idiot that thought packers graded their own cattle and the idiot who thought packers trim lean carcasses. I have a hard time believing that you actually think anyone here takes you seriously anymore.

Nothing defines ignorance more than the inability to recognize ones own ignorance.

When you bring proof of market manipulation you will be taken seriously. Until then you are nothing more than an annoying vapor.


~SH~
 
Hey, SH, welcome back. Agman couldn't meet the challenge of actually quoting the act to prove it was about packer/packer and not packer/producer. Can you?
 
Conman, your market manipulation conspiracy phychobabble is as worthless as your ability to discredit Jason. Jason has it figured out while you make sh*t up to sound impressive to yourself. Reality shows that you are the idiot that thought packers graded their own cattle and the idiot who thought packers trim lean carcasses. I have a hard time believing that you actually think anyone here takes you seriously anymore.


SH, this is another one of those made up allegations you bring to the table. Quote me, if you can, but use the whole paragraph to do it so as to not lose the thought. No little out of context snippits.

Everytime a packer buys cattle in the price setting cash market there is an intuitive process in the buyer's mind on how that pen of cattle grades. Do you deny this? One of your arguments is that the buyers are not very good at it and formula pricing brings value to the market, so there is a reason for formula to be higher. If this was the case, the formula market would always be higher and you have stated yourself that this is not the case.

Since the grading is an intricate determinate of value in many of the pricing mechanisms in the market, I have argued for its transparency. Do I trust USDA inspectors totally on this one? I don't! I should have been born in Missouri. Show me!!!

Either prove to me that packers do not go through the process of estimating the grade on the cattle before offering a price for the cattle market or just stop lying about it.
 
Conman: "SH, this is another one of those made up allegations you bring to the table. Quote me, if you can, but use the whole paragraph to do it so as to not lose the thought. No little out of context snippits."

Oh so now you are going to try to deny saying that the packers graded their own cattle?

Are you going to deny saying that if packers paid more for leaner cattle that the trim would be free?

Are you going to deny saying your phone was tapped?


If I am going to retrieve every stupid quote you have made, you are going to have to deny making it first so I can prove to everyone who still hasn't figure it out, what a complete phony you are.


Conman: "Everytime a packer buys cattle in the price setting cash market there is an intuitive process in the buyer's mind on how that pen of cattle grades. Do you deny this?"

Of course not but that doesn't mean he knows exactly how they would grade and yield or there wouldn't be grid marketing would there? The buyer has to build in a safety mechanism which overpays the poor cattle and underpays the good cattle.


Conman: "One of your arguments is that the buyers are not very good at it and formula pricing brings value to the market, so there is a reason for formula to be higher."

I didn't say the formula would be higher. Making sh*t up again?


Conman: "If this was the case, the formula market would always be higher and you have stated yourself that this is not the case."

I never said the formula is higher. The formula determines the base price. The premiums and discounts are added to that. You are confusing the issue here with your ignorance again by comparing the grid premiums and discounts to the cash price. A formula BASE PRICE might be lower than the cash price but if the cattle grade real well with a wide choice/select spread, the losses on the formula BASE PRICE could be easily offset by the grid premiums.

You have to understand grid pricing to discuss this and you obviously don't.


Conman: "Since the grading is an intricate determinate of value in many of the pricing mechanisms in the market, I have argued for its transparency. Do I trust USDA inspectors totally on this one? I don't! I should have been born in Missouri. Show me!!!"

What bias could the USDA inspector have when a higher grading carcass is more valuable to the producer and packer?


Conman: "Either prove to me that packers do not go through the process of estimating the grade on the cattle before offering a price for the cattle market or just stop lying about it."

Oh, so now the biggest liar on this forum diverts attention from his ignorance by accusing me of lying WITH NOTHING TO BACK IT, AS USUAL!

If packers could accurately predict what cattle would grade THERE WOULD BE NO GRID PRICING WOULD THERE??????

Too much for you to comprehend again, I know!



~SH~
 
SH:Quote:
Conman: "Everytime a packer buys cattle in the price setting cash market there is an intuitive process in the buyer's mind on how that pen of cattle grades. Do you deny this?"


SH:Of course not but that doesn't mean he knows exactly how they would grade and yield or there wouldn't be grid marketing would there? The buyer has to build in a safety mechanism which overpays the poor cattle and underpays the good cattle.

Econ: So you are you admitting that the cash price is intuitively underpriced because of cattle buyer's inability to "grade" cash market cattle? In that case you are admitting that allowing the cash price to be next week's formula price is discriminatory from the start. Agman can not explain that away with his little demand fluctuation theory.

[/quote]

SH: I never said the formula is higher. The formula determines the base price. The premiums and discounts are added to that. You are confusing the issue here with your ignorance again by comparing the grid premiums and discounts to the cash price. A formula BASE PRICE might be lower than the cash price but if the cattle grade real well with a wide choice/select spread, the losses on the formula BASE PRICE could be easily offset by the grid premiums.

You have to understand grid pricing to discuss this and you obviously don't.
Econ: If the formula determines the base price, then all of the premiums and discounts are skewed downwards if the formula price was based on a discriminated cash price the week before. Do you understand the formula price system?

SH:
Quote:
Conman: "Since the grading is an intricate determinate of value in many of the pricing mechanisms in the market, I have argued for its transparency. Do I trust USDA inspectors totally on this one? I don't! I should have been born in Missouri. Show me!!!"


SH: What bias could the USDA inspector have when a higher grading carcass is more valuable to the producer and packer? [/quote]

Econ:The USDA inspector could give the carcass a Yield Grade 2 instead of yield grade 1. The inspector could give a high select grade when the cattle were really mid choice. There are a lot of other combinations that would give the packers preference. Must I go into all of them, or can you put your thinking cap on?


[/quote]Quote:
Conman: "Either prove to me that packers do not go through the process of estimating the grade on the cattle before offering a price for the cattle market or just stop lying about it."


SH:Oh, so now the biggest liar on this forum diverts attention from his ignorance by accusing me of lying WITH NOTHING TO BACK IT, AS USUAL!

If packers could accurately predict what cattle would grade THERE WOULD BE NO GRID PRICING WOULD THERE??????

Too much for you to comprehend again, I know!


SH, I have no problem with grid pricing. It is its use as a market manipulation tool that is in question. Grading of the animials in the Grid pricing should be open to ANY inspection by ANYONE in the cattle business. What if the USDA is not grading the cattle properly? Do you think that has never happened? Transparency is required. Whether or not grid there would be grid pricing should be determined by the market participants.

Whether or not the grid, formula, or any other marketing mechanism is violating the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 is up to the 12 members of the jury, not some judges who think they know it all. The founders of our country did not trust institutions like the judges in the judicial system and that is why we have juries of 12 regular people instead of just judges to hear cases. If a judge overturns a jury verdict, they better have a darn good reason. Judge Strom nor the 11th circuit had that. They have turned our federal court system into Kanagaroo Court and the members of the Senate Judiciary Commitee as well as those apointing the judges and those who approved those judges, have allowed this to happen. \

It is all to give advantages in our economy to some very wealthy and political giving families and corporations.

It creates economic deadweight losses to our economy, and it promotes mercantilism at the expense of producers.

It should be stopped.
 
Econ101 said:
Whether or not the grid, formula, or any other marketing mechanism is violating the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 is up to the 12 members of the jury, not some judges who think they know it all. The founders of our country did not trust institutions like the judges in the judicial system and that is why we have juries of 12 regular people instead of just judges to hear cases. If a judge overturns a jury verdict, they better have a darn good reason. Judge Strom nor the 11th circuit had that. They have turned our federal court system into Kanagaroo Court and the members of the Senate Judiciary Commitee as well as those apointing the judges and those who approved those judges, have allowed this to happen. \

It is all to give advantages in our economy to some very wealthy and political giving families and corporations.

It creates economic deadweight losses to our economy, and it promotes mercantilism at the expense of producers.

It should be stopped.

Econ, you covered a lot of ground here. In one paragraph, I read about grids / formulas, the countries founders, the judicial system, juries, P&S, senate committees, and ended with deadweight losses and mercantilism. Those damn grids and formulas really get you going, don't they!

Here's an analogy, just so you know what this paragraph sounded like. If your television system is like mine, I can count on the following movies showing at least 50 times a month: The Blue Brothers, Grease, Pure Country, and Animal House. In Animal House, while the fraternity is before the review board, Otter---in his testimony while pleaing for the life of his frat, states that "an indictment against our fraternity is like an indictment against the USA". The analogy was truely hilarious.

Kinda like what you just stated.

Beefman
 
Beefman said:
Econ101 said:
Whether or not the grid, formula, or any other marketing mechanism is violating the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 is up to the 12 members of the jury, not some judges who think they know it all. The founders of our country did not trust institutions like the judges in the judicial system and that is why we have juries of 12 regular people instead of just judges to hear cases. If a judge overturns a jury verdict, they better have a darn good reason. Judge Strom nor the 11th circuit had that. They have turned our federal court system into Kanagaroo Court and the members of the Senate Judiciary Commitee as well as those apointing the judges and those who approved those judges, have allowed this to happen. \

It is all to give advantages in our economy to some very wealthy and political giving families and corporations.

It creates economic deadweight losses to our economy, and it promotes mercantilism at the expense of producers.

It should be stopped.

Econ, you covered a lot of ground here. In one paragraph, I read about grids / formulas, the countries founders, the judicial system, juries, P&S, senate committees, and ended with deadweight losses and mercantilism. Those damn grids and formulas really get you going, don't they!

Here's an analogy, just so you know what this paragraph sounded like. If your television system is like mine, I can count on the following movies showing at least 50 times a month: The Blue Brothers, Grease, Pure Country, and Animal House. In Animal House, while the fraternity is before the review board, Otter---in his testimony while pleaing for the life of his frat, states that "an indictment against our fraternity is like an indictment against the USA". The analogy was truely hilarious.

Kinda like what you just stated.

Beefman

Beefman, it all ties together. Animal House was a funny movie. What is happening in agriculture is truely scandalous. There is enough blame to go around to all of the people and places I mentioned. They all have some responsibility that is being ignored. If they are not doing their jobs, then why pay them?
 
Sandhusker said:
agman said:
Sandhusker said:
Where is the word "competiton"? Who do you think would be the target of manipulated or controlled prices or a monopoly?

Packers - thus the name Packers and Stockyards Act.

You're doing a masterful job of dummying up, Agman. Packers the victim of a packer's monopoly? :lol: Kind of like SH trapping himself! :lol: I believe you are in a tree.

What did you say just yesterday about perpetuating a lie?

Talk about dummy... preventing a packer monopoly and collusion protects the producer. Can't you figure that out? I believe that is what the courts have interpreted. You argument holds as much water as your silly "low" definition in Cebull's ruling that got crushed. Have you forgotten that defeat?
 
Beefman said:
Econ101 said:
Whether or not the grid, formula, or any other marketing mechanism is violating the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 is up to the 12 members of the jury, not some judges who think they know it all. The founders of our country did not trust institutions like the judges in the judicial system and that is why we have juries of 12 regular people instead of just judges to hear cases. If a judge overturns a jury verdict, they better have a darn good reason. Judge Strom nor the 11th circuit had that. They have turned our federal court system into Kanagaroo Court and the members of the Senate Judiciary Commitee as well as those apointing the judges and those who approved those judges, have allowed this to happen. \

It is all to give advantages in our economy to some very wealthy and political giving families and corporations.

It creates economic deadweight losses to our economy, and it promotes mercantilism at the expense of producers.

It should be stopped.

Econ, you covered a lot of ground here. In one paragraph, I read about grids / formulas, the countries founders, the judicial system, juries, P&S, senate committees, and ended with deadweight losses and mercantilism. Those damn grids and formulas really get you going, don't they!

Here's an analogy, just so you know what this paragraph sounded like. If your television system is like mine, I can count on the following movies showing at least 50 times a month: The Blue Brothers, Grease, Pure Country, and Animal House. In Animal House, while the fraternity is before the review board, Otter---in his testimony while pleaing for the life of his frat, states that "an indictment against our fraternity is like an indictment against the USA". The analogy was truely hilarious.

Kinda like what you just stated.

Beefman

You really need to quit deceiving readers with you position that jurors are absolute in their verdict. The legal systems says that is not always true. Thus, the law allows for a judge to void the verdict when there is compelling evidence that if the jury understood the testimony they would not have voted the way they did. The evidence was so overwhelming that the Appellate Court upheld Judge Storm ruling unanimously. Furthermore ALL judges in the 11th district rejected completely the request for an en banc hearing by the plaintiffs. We are supposed to believe they are all wrong and your are correct. Give the world a break from your fantasies.

No more real knowledge than you have ever demonstrated about the cattle business there is no reason for anyone to believe your interpretation of legal events and the law.

The plaintiff's case got crushed just as your phony and unsupported accusations get crushed daily on these forums. You continue to fool no one.
 
The plaintiff's case got crushed just as your phony and unsupported accusations get crushed daily on these forums. You continue to fool no one.

That's for sure. I started reading Econ's posts, thinking that I could learn from an intelligent/experienced poster who just came on board, but as the days go by, well I have only been reminded that in this world there are people who are so closed minded, they are not willing to see anything different.

I think less and less of his knowledge and experience in the beef industry. I still think he is a paid hack of RCALF!!! Sales and marketing are not one of ECON's strengths!

How else can someone, who is getting paid to teach economics, have so much time on this forum?
 
Agman, "The plaintiff's case got crushed"

12 jurors voted unamiously for the plaintiff. The judge then said PSA was about competition between packers - and you couldn't bring forward anything from PSA that would support that. Who are you trying to fool?
 
Sandhusker said:
Agman, "The plaintiff's case got crushed"

12 jurors voted unamiously for the plaintiff. The judge then said PSA was about competition between packers - and you couldn't bring forward anything from PSA that would support that. Who are you trying to fool?

You are the only one who is fooled by your private interpretation of the law as you wish it to be.

Answer these question? Does the law allow a jury verdict to be voided by a judge? What are the grounds for such a dismissal? Do you know, yes or no? Did Judge Strom violate the law when he voided the jury verdict? Did the appellate court violate any law when they unanimously upheld Judge Strom's ruling? Did ALL the federal judges in the 11th district violate any law when they ALL refused to even call a vote on an en banc hearing requested by the plaintiff's lawyers? Do you believe ALL these federal judges are wrong and only you are right?

If you think you are right and they are wrong are you willing to bet that $100 dollars against my position that the Supreme Court will not even consider a review the Pickett case?
 
Conman: "SH, I have no problem with grid pricing. It is its use as a market manipulation tool that is in question."

Until you have proof, you have nothing!

In other words, YOU HAVE NOTHING!


Conman: "Grading of the animials in the Grid pricing should be open to ANY inspection by ANYONE in the cattle business."

I know many cattle producers that have watched their cattle graded by USDA inspectors.


Conman: "What if the USDA is not grading the cattle properly? Do you think that has never happened? Transparency is required."

That is why USDA has periodic audits of their graders. If you weren't so ignorant of this industry, you'd know that too.

In PM beef group, we had video imaging for a time. Video image grading actually worked against the producer. If a carcass was on the line between choice and select, USDA graders would give packers and producers the benefit of the doubt by calling it choice. With video image grading, there was no benefit of the doubt. It was either choice or select. Producers quickly found out they were better off with manual grading.


Conman: "Whether or not grid there would be grid pricing should be determined by the market participants."

Whether or not there is grid pricing IS determined by market participants. Everyone has numerous packer and pricing options. This industry doesn't need packer blaming conspiracy theorists like you saving it from itself.


Conman: "Whether or not the grid, formula, or any other marketing mechanism is violating the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 is up to the 12 members of the jury, not some judges who think they know it all. The founders of our country did not trust institutions like the judges in the judicial system and that is why we have juries of 12 regular people instead of just judges to hear cases. If a judge overturns a jury verdict, they better have a darn good reason. Judge Strom nor the 11th circuit had that. They have turned our federal court system into Kanagaroo Court and the members of the Senate Judiciary Commitee as well as those apointing the judges and those who approved those judges, have allowed this to happen."

Our judicial system has checks and balances in the form of an appeals process. When the jury gets it wrong, judges can overrule. From that point they are held accountable to an appeals process. In this case, the packer blamers convinced a jury that a difference in price between the cash market and formula market was proof of market manipulation. Judge Strom knew that was bullsh*t, acted accordingly, and was supported by the 11th circuit. Whenever you packer blaming conspiracy theorists get your head handed to you in a court of law, you cry foul because you need someone or something to blame. Too bad, you lost!


Conman: "It is all to give advantages in our economy to some very wealthy and political giving families and corporations."

Typical "class envy" of a liberal democrat. POOR ME, HOW DARE YOU BE SUCCESSFUL IF I'M NOT! WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!


Conman: "It creates economic deadweight losses to our economy, and it promotes mercantilism at the expense of producers."

Your baseless allegations and conspiracy theories are a deadweight to this site.


Conman: "It should be stopped."

Of course! Anything you don't understand should be stopped because it might be a conspiracy????????

ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!




~SH~
 
agman said:
Beefman said:
Econ101 said:
Whether or not the grid, formula, or any other marketing mechanism is violating the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 is up to the 12 members of the jury, not some judges who think they know it all. The founders of our country did not trust institutions like the judges in the judicial system and that is why we have juries of 12 regular people instead of just judges to hear cases. If a judge overturns a jury verdict, they better have a darn good reason. Judge Strom nor the 11th circuit had that. They have turned our federal court system into Kanagaroo Court and the members of the Senate Judiciary Commitee as well as those apointing the judges and those who approved those judges, have allowed this to happen. \

It is all to give advantages in our economy to some very wealthy and political giving families and corporations.

It creates economic deadweight losses to our economy, and it promotes mercantilism at the expense of producers.

It should be stopped.

Econ, you covered a lot of ground here. In one paragraph, I read about grids / formulas, the countries founders, the judicial system, juries, P&S, senate committees, and ended with deadweight losses and mercantilism. Those damn grids and formulas really get you going, don't they!

Here's an analogy, just so you know what this paragraph sounded like. If your television system is like mine, I can count on the following movies showing at least 50 times a month: The Blue Brothers, Grease, Pure Country, and Animal House. In Animal House, while the fraternity is before the review board, Otter---in his testimony while pleaing for the life of his frat, states that "an indictment against our fraternity is like an indictment against the USA". The analogy was truely hilarious.

Kinda like what you just stated.

Beefman

You really need to quit deceiving readers with you position that jurors are absolute in their verdict. The legal systems says that is not always true. Thus, the law allows for a judge to void the verdict when there is compelling evidence that if the jury understood the testimony they would not have voted the way they did. The evidence was so overwhelming that the Appellate Court upheld Judge Storm ruling unanimously. Furthermore ALL judges in the 11th district rejected completely the request for an en banc hearing by the plaintiffs. We are supposed to believe they are all wrong and your are correct. Give the world a break from your fantasies.

No more real knowledge than you have ever demonstrated about the cattle business there is no reason for anyone to believe your interpretation of legal events and the law.

The plaintiff's case got crushed just as your phony and unsupported accusations get crushed daily on these forums. You continue to fool no one.

Arlen Specter and company have been at work "behind closed doors". If the Republicans think they can control the country in this fashion they while arguing war politics and abortion politics as side issues, let them try.

The religious right is starting to come around on these issues instead of being held captive to the empty moral arguments the Republicans make but do not adhere to.

Go back and read Pareto. He was right then and history will prove him right again. It is unfortunate for all that have to re-live this BS.
 
Hey, SH, have you found in PSA anything that would allude to the act being about packer/packer and not packer/producer per your comments? I think that was the original challenge.
 
SH, Middlemen like the packers have to show competition on the two sides that they deal with. For packers it is the packer/producer relationship and in addition it is the packer/wholesale level. The PSA clearly covers both of these. The appellate court is buying the argument that it only covers one of these relationships. They have clearly erred, as have you.

Evidence for one side of the relationship is not nessarily applicable on the other. The appellate court showed their ignorance to these economic concepts in their brief. They substituted their own judgement not only for the jury, but for the law itself.


Do you think the writers of the legislation knew the difference between "and" and "or"? Should courts be substituting their judgment on issues as to what words mean in the English language? They are legislating from the bench, pure and simple.
 
Sandbag: "Hey, SH, have you found in PSA anything that would allude to the act being about packer/packer and not packer/producer per your comments? I think that was the original challenge."

Maintaining competition between packers is addressing the packer/producer issues of market manipulation.


Conman: "SH, Middlemen like the packers have to show competition on the two sides that they deal with. For packers it is the packer/producer relationship and in addition it is the packer/wholesale level. The PSA clearly covers both of these. The appellate court is buying the argument that it only covers one of these relationships. They have clearly erred, as have you."

Where is your proof that the appleate court did not address the producer side of competition to back THIS CONSPIRACY THEORY?

It doesn't exist. Watch folks, more empty statements unsupported by fact.


Conman: "Evidence for one side of the relationship is not nessarily applicable on the other. The appellate court showed their ignorance to these economic concepts in their brief. They substituted their own judgement not only for the jury, but for the law itself."

Oh bullsh*t! Either prove it or prove that you can't. The appellate court found no violation of the PSA and your just too much of a packer blaming conspiracy theorist to accept the truth. POOR YOU!


~SH~
 
SH, "Maintaining competition between packers is addressing the packer/producer issues of market manipulation. "

Your hyer-biased opinions and interpretations have no value to me. The PSA itself is easily accessable - I'd like some direct quotes from the act. Think you can do that, Mr. Facts?
 
Sandbag: "Your hyer-biased opinions and interpretations have no value to me.Z"

Understandably! You're too ignorant and to blamer biased to understand them.


Sandbag: "The PSA itself is easily accessable - I'd like some direct quotes from the act. Think you can do that, Mr. Facts?"

They've already been posted many times Mr. NO FACTS!


~SH~
 

Latest posts

Top