As ranchers

[hypocritexposer]

Yup. I called it didn't I!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Scotch will do. :drink: :lol2:

Made in the US Scotch, with Canadian grown Barley, and water from the great lakes , no doubt

Would that be the ultimate in multiculturalism or just mixed up? :wink:

It would go with the authentic Italian pasta made in the US, with Canadian durum wheat. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Guess you win Burnt. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So your neighbors grows cattle he doesn't make beef?

Yup. I called it didn't I!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Scotch will do. :drink: :lol2:

Made in the US Scotch, with Canadian grown Barley, and water from the great lakes , no doubt

Actually- I watched a program on TV the other day that said in the US- whiskey could not be labeled Canadian Whiskey- unless it met certain specifications-- the number one being that it was made and produced in Candada...M-COOL...
Apparently the only ones in Canada afraid of truth in labeling to the consumers are the Canadian cattle/beef producers :roll:
And I personally think they are over paranoid- and that when honestly labeled would easily prevail over the Mexican,Uruguayan, Brazilian, Algerian, etc. etc. product that is now being passed off as product of USA in this country and Product of Canada in Canada....

And they wouldn't have to be profiteering from a fraud.....

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Yup. I called it didn't I!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Scotch will do. :drink: :lol2:

Made in the US Scotch, with Canadian grown Barley, and water from the great lakes , no doubt

Actually- I watched a program on TV the other day that said in the US- whiskey could not be labeled Canadian Whiskey- unless it met certain specifications-- the number one being that it was made and produced in Candada...M-COOL...
Apparently the only ones in Canada afraid of truth in labeling to the consumers are the Canadian cattle/beef producers :roll:
And I personally think they are over paranoid- and that when honestly labeled would easily prevail over the Mexican,Uruguayan, Brazilian, Algerian, etc. etc. product that is now being passed off as product of USA in this country and Product of Canada in Canada....

And they wouldn't have to be profiteering from a fraud.....

I have no problem with Canadian beef being labeled as Canadian. Just as Sandhusker says who makes the flour?

If the neighbor who grew the wheat didn't make the flour did the neighbor that raised the cattle make the beef?
You harp on USDA not inspecting Canadian beef Do they inspect USA beef?

 

[Anonymous]

Made in the US Scotch, with Canadian grown Barley, and water from the great lakes , no doubt

Actually- I watched a program on TV the other day that said in the US- whiskey could not be labeled Canadian Whiskey- unless it met certain specifications-- the number one being that it was made and produced in Candada...M-COOL...
Apparently the only ones in Canada afraid of truth in labeling to the consumers are the Canadian cattle/beef producers :roll:
And I personally think they are over paranoid- and that when honestly labeled would easily prevail over the Mexican,Uruguayan, Brazilian, Algerian, etc. etc. product that is now being passed off as product of USA in this country and Product of Canada in Canada....

And they wouldn't have to be profiteering from a fraud.....

I have no problem with Canadian beef being labeled as Canadian. Just as Sandhusker says who makes the flour?

If the neighbor who grew the wheat didn't make the flour did the neighbor that raised the cattle make the beef?
You harp on USDA not inspecting Canadian beef Do they inspect USA beef?

Probably not as well as they should--BUT at least its a USDA employee there doing it- and responsible for it--- rather than like in Mexico where the Mexican government employee inspector is paid little or nothing and expected like the rest of Mexican government employees to earn the rest thru graft and kickbacks :shock:

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Actually- I watched a program on TV the other day that said in the US- whiskey could not be labeled Canadian Whiskey- unless it met certain specifications-- the number one being that it was made and produced in Candada...M-COOL...
Apparently the only ones in Canada afraid of truth in labeling to the consumers are the Canadian cattle/beef producers :roll:
And I personally think they are over paranoid- and that when honestly labeled would easily prevail over the Mexican,Uruguayan, Brazilian, Algerian, etc. etc. product that is now being passed off as product of USA in this country and Product of Canada in Canada....

And they wouldn't have to be profiteering from a fraud.....

I have no problem with Canadian beef being labeled as Canadian. Just as Sandhusker says who makes the flour?

If the neighbor who grew the wheat didn't make the flour did the neighbor that raised the cattle make the beef?
You harp on USDA not inspecting Canadian beef Do they inspect USA beef?

Probably not as well as they should--BUT at least its a USDA employee there doing it- and responsible for it--- rather than like in Mexico where the Mexican government employee inspector is paid little or nothing and expected like the rest of Mexican government employees to earn the rest thru graft and kickbacks :shock:

Canadian cattle processed in the USDA get the same inspection as USA cattle. Probably get a better inspection in Canada since we meet Russian standards and the USA doesn't.

 

[gcreekrch]

Canadians 6

R-CALF 0


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Sandhusker]

BMR, "If the neighbor who grew the wheat didn't make the flour did the neighbor that raised the cattle make the beef?"

What is the recipe for making beef, anyway? I'd like to make some rib roasts.

 

[Sandhusker]

BMR, "Canadian cattle processed in the USDA get the same inspection as USA cattle. Probably get a better inspection in Canada since we meet Russian standards and the USA doesn't."

They get what the USDA will accept as equivalent. However, you still don't get it. You're defending a system that has ALREADY FAILED. We've already suffered dangerous product being sent to us! The consumer has rightfully demanded the opportunity to decide if they trust the source themselves.

The system that you're defending is not honest, does not tell the consumer what they want to know, and makes no sense. Under it, one can sell Canadian orange juice, even though there is not an orange grove within 1000 miles of Canada. You can sell products such as "Florida Salmon", "Montana Coffee", etc... A company could take a bunch of crappy components from Tiajuana to Switzerland, put them together in 5 minutes and sell a "Swiss watch". You could buy up onions in Mexico, slice them up in Georgia and sell them as "Vadalia Onion Rings". The customer is misled into thinking they're buying source when they're not. What do you have to gain from lying to the customer? Why do you support dishonesty?

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

BMR, "Canadian cattle processed in the USDA get the same inspection as USA cattle. Probably get a better inspection in Canada since we meet Russian standards and the USA doesn't."

They get what the USDA will accept as equivalent. However, you still don't get it. You're defending a system that has ALREADY FAILED. We've already suffered dangerous product being sent to us! The consumer has rightfully demanded the opportunity to decide if they trust the source themselves.

The system that you're defending is not honest, does not tell the consumer what they want to know, and makes no sense. Under it, one can sell Canadian orange juice, even though there is not an orange grove within 1000 miles of Canada. You can sell products such as "Florida Salmon", "Montana Coffee", etc... A company could take a bunch of crappy components from Tiajuana to Switzerland, put them together in 5 minutes and sell a "Swiss watch". You could buy up onions in Mexico, slice them up in Georgia and sell them as "Vadalia Onion Rings". The customer is misled into thinking they're buying source when they're not. What do you have to gain from lying to the customer? Why do you support dishonesty?

Guess they had better start printing "Product of China" on every US dollar bill.

 

[Soapweed]

BMR, "Canadian cattle processed in the USDA get the same inspection as USA cattle. Probably get a better inspection in Canada since we meet Russian standards and the USA doesn't."

They get what the USDA will accept as equivalent. However, you still don't get it. You're defending a system that has ALREADY FAILED. We've already suffered dangerous product being sent to us! The consumer has rightfully demanded the opportunity to decide if they trust the source themselves.

The system that you're defending is not honest, does not tell the consumer what they want to know, and makes no sense. Under it, one can sell Canadian orange juice, even though there is not an orange grove within 1000 miles of Canada. You can sell products such as "Florida Salmon", "Montana Coffee", etc... A company could take a bunch of crappy components from Tiajuana to Switzerland, put them together in 5 minutes and sell a "Swiss watch". You could buy up onions in Mexico, slice them up in Georgia and sell them as "Vadalia Onion Rings". The customer is misled into thinking they're buying source when they're not. What do you have to gain from lying to the customer? Why do you support dishonesty?

Guess they had better start printing "Product of China" on every US dollar bill.

Chinese silk scarves have long been popular in the Great American Wild Rag West. :wink:

America was found and founded (both) on the principle of Globalization. If ol' Chris Columbus hadn't been looking for a shorter trade route from Spain to the West Indies, for the purpose of buying and selling goods, he'd have never discovered America in the first place.

 

[Silver]

BMR, "Canadian cattle processed in the USDA get the same inspection as USA cattle. Probably get a better inspection in Canada since we meet Russian standards and the USA doesn't."

They get what the USDA will accept as equivalent. However, you still don't get it. You're defending a system that has ALREADY FAILED. We've already suffered dangerous product being sent to us! The consumer has rightfully demanded the opportunity to decide if they trust the source themselves.

The system that you're defending is not honest, does not tell the consumer what they want to know, and makes no sense. Under it, one can sell Canadian orange juice, even though there is not an orange grove within 1000 miles of Canada. You can sell products such as "Florida Salmon", "Montana Coffee", etc... A company could take a bunch of crappy components from Tiajuana to Switzerland, put them together in 5 minutes and sell a "Swiss watch". You could buy up onions in Mexico, slice them up in Georgia and sell them as "Vadalia Onion Rings". The customer is misled into thinking they're buying source when they're not. What do you have to gain from lying to the customer? Why do you support dishonesty?

Whether you happen to agree with it or not, a product is a product of the country in which it underwent substantial change. That's the law. You can harp on about the orange juice thing all you want, it's actually a good point. I would like to think if oranges are imported into Canada and turned into orange juice, it just became a product of Canada and we as Canadians get to benefit from the high food safety standards in place in this country. That is why we would buy orange juice that is a product of Canada rather than some third world country with suspect inspection and safety regs.
In the same way, if a Canadian cow is turned into beef in Nebraska, that beef is a product of the USA. If it becomes tainted in it's processing, it would seem only fair that the USDA takes the blame for it. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me. Heck, go have a look at most things you consider proudly a 'Product of USA' and you will discover that many / most of the ingredients / parts came from abroad.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

BMR, "If the neighbor who grew the wheat didn't make the flour did the neighbor that raised the cattle make the beef?"

What is the recipe for making beef, anyway? I'd like to make some rib roasts.

Sandy the recipe for making hamburger is pretty much the same as flour. One you use wheat take off the hide/bran and grind it the other you take cow remove the bran/hide it and grind it. :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

BMR, "Canadian cattle processed in the USDA get the same inspection as USA cattle. Probably get a better inspection in Canada since we meet Russian standards and the USA doesn't."

They get what the USDA will accept as equivalent. However, you still don't get it. You're defending a system that has ALREADY FAILED. We've already suffered dangerous product being sent to us! The consumer has rightfully demanded the opportunity to decide if they trust the source themselves.

The system that you're defending is not honest, does not tell the consumer what they want to know, and makes no sense. Under it, one can sell Canadian orange juice, even though there is not an orange grove within 1000 miles of Canada. You can sell products such as "Florida Salmon", "Montana Coffee", etc... A company could take a bunch of crappy components from Tiajuana to Switzerland, put them together in 5 minutes and sell a "Swiss watch". You could buy up onions in Mexico, slice them up in Georgia and sell them as "Vadalia Onion Rings". The customer is misled into thinking they're buying source when they're not. What do you have to gain from lying to the customer? Why do you support dishonesty?

Guess they had better start printing "Product of China" on every US dollar bill.

Chinese silk scarves have long been popular in the Great American Wild Rag West. :wink:

America was found and founded (both) on the principle of Globalization. If ol' Chris Columbus hadn't been looking for a shorter trade route from Spain to the West Indies, for the purpose of buying and selling goods, he'd have never discovered America in the first place.

The arguement isn't against international trade, the arguement is simply to let us know where that product was from. That way, if we find out that Scarfistan is using carcinogenic dye in their scarves, we can avoid them and buy scarves from Honistan. Otherwise, when you find out about Scarfistan's cutting corners, you've got confusion where you can't seperate the good from the bad, nobody knows whether or not they're draping their jugular with poison, and the result is that all scarves are avoided and both consumers and honest suppliers are injured.

 

[Sandhusker]

Silver, "Whether you happen to agree with it or not, a product is a product of the country in which it underwent substantial change."

Cutting a steak from a carcass is not substantial change. You had one unit of beef and now you have two units of beef - and it's still beef. A DNA test will show both units to be identical. They will have identical chemical properties and both will reveal identical profiles concerning additives, antibiotics, hormones, harmful chemicals, etc... AND THAT IS WHAT THE CONSUMER IS CONCERNED ABOUT. You're still ignoring the concerns of the people that keep you in business, the consumer. Instead of addressing their concerns, you take on the role of a Clinton lawyer. Why?

Silver, "If it becomes tainted in it's processing, it would seem only fair that the USDA takes the blame for it."

Agreed, but what if it's tainted when it was being raised? How can consumers avoid that product? If they can't avoid that, they avoid it all.

 

[burnt]

Silver, "If it becomes tainted in it's processing, it would seem only fair that the USDA takes the blame for it."

Agreed, but what if it's tainted when it was being raised? How can consumers avoid that product? If they can't avoid that, they avoid it all.

If it was raised, and tainted in the process, in the USA, would it be any safer or avoidable?

Of course not, unless you have MIdCOOL.

 

[Sandhusker]

Silver, "If it becomes tainted in it's processing, it would seem only fair that the USDA takes the blame for it."

Agreed, but what if it's tainted when it was being raised? How can consumers avoid that product? If they can't avoid that, they avoid it all.

If it was raised, and tainted in the process, in the USA, would it be any safer or avoidable?

Of course not, unless you have MIdCOOL.

The label says, "Product of USA" and you're asking if there would be any way to avoid that product?

 

[Silver]

Silver, "Whether you happen to agree with it or not, a product is a product of the country in which it underwent substantial change."

Cutting a steak from a carcass is not substantial change. You had one unit of beef and now you have two units of beef - and it's still beef. A DNA test will show both units to be identical. They will have identical chemical properties and both will reveal identical profiles concerning additives, antibiotics, hormones, harmful chemicals, etc... AND THAT IS WHAT THE CONSUMER IS CONCERNED ABOUT. You're still ignoring the concerns of the people that keep you in business, the consumer. Instead of addressing their concerns, you take on the role of a Clinton lawyer. Why?

Silver, "If it becomes tainted in it's processing, it would seem only fair that the USDA takes the blame for it."

Agreed, but what if it's tainted when it was being raised? How can consumers avoid that product? If they can't avoid that, they avoid it all.

Cutting a steak from a carcass definetly is substantial change. There are far more people killed by meat tainted at the packing house than meat tainted by the producer. I think we can all agree on that.
I think if the consumer was concerned about anything that happend before the kill plant they would demand domestic bse testing, and they would get it.
I would also expect a car assembled in Canada to be labled as a Canadian product, even if the steel to make it was sourced elsewhere. Kinda like the orange juice analogy you are so fond of throwing out there :wink:

 

[PORKER]

Cutting a steak from a carcass definetly is substantial change. There are far more people killed by meat tainted at the packing house than meat tainted by the producer. I think we can all agree on that.

Good Comment, It's kind of like the wheat gulten that had melemine in it ,the wheat was ok but the criminals that added melemine to raise up the artificial protien level for more value didn't figure any one would notice, then anything that ate the wheat gluten started to die.

 

[Sandhusker]

Silver, "Whether you happen to agree with it or not, a product is a product of the country in which it underwent substantial change."

Cutting a steak from a carcass is not substantial change. You had one unit of beef and now you have two units of beef - and it's still beef. A DNA test will show both units to be identical. They will have identical chemical properties and both will reveal identical profiles concerning additives, antibiotics, hormones, harmful chemicals, etc... AND THAT IS WHAT THE CONSUMER IS CONCERNED ABOUT. You're still ignoring the concerns of the people that keep you in business, the consumer. Instead of addressing their concerns, you take on the role of a Clinton lawyer. Why?

Silver, "If it becomes tainted in it's processing, it would seem only fair that the USDA takes the blame for it."

Agreed, but what if it's tainted when it was being raised? How can consumers avoid that product? If they can't avoid that, they avoid it all.

Cutting a steak from a carcass definetly is substantial change. There are far more people killed by meat tainted at the packing house than meat tainted by the producer. I think we can all agree on that.
I think if the consumer was concerned about anything that happend before the kill plant they would demand domestic bse testing, and they would get it.
I would also expect a car assembled in Canada to be labled as a Canadian product, even if the steel to make it was sourced elsewhere. Kinda like the orange juice analogy you are so fond of throwing out there :wink:

Would that "substantial change" remove melamine or any other chemical?

 

[Kato]

Ok, so we have Canadian orange juice. And it's really good, too. 8) That's OK with me, for the same reasons Silver has.

Now how about all that Canadian bacon that people in the U.S. have come to love? It had better be Canadian, and not some pieces of American hogs trying to pass themselves off as Canadian. Lucky thing MCOOL is here to save the day, and guarantee that Canadian bacon is really Canadian. :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:

BTW, here in the home of Canadian bacon, it's called back bacon. 8) And it's just as delicious.