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

"Big Ears"

Help Support Ranchers.net:

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Say what you will about Ross Perot, "Big Ears" sure had one thing right: NAFTA did produce a giant sucking sound that sucked away American jobs and dollars. For farmers and ranchers in all the countries affected, NAFTA has not lived up to the hype. But still George Bush, ever the Big Business President, is trying to sign more agreements just like NAFTA. He signed a free trade agreement with Australia that will give them unlimited access to the U.S. beef market in 18 years and he is attempting to push through Congress CAFTA or Central American Free trade Agreement, which would extend NAFTA to six additional countries in Central America: Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. And if CAFTA is passed this summer by Congress, Bush will then turn his attention to FTAA, or Free Trade of the Americas which would create one tariff-free free trade zone from Tierra del Fuego to the top of Canada in which goods and services would flow freely amongst a market of 800 million people.

That is the reason that Bush is pushing so hard to reopen the border to live Canadian cattle despite the health risk to American consumers. He must prove to Central and South American countries that the U.S. lives up to its free trade agreements and that we are a reliable trading partner. If Congress fails to approve CAFTA, the chances for future trade deals, including the Free Trade Area of the Americas appear dismal. "There will be no FTAA if we don't pass CAFTA," said Mark Smith, director of Western Hemisphere affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
The cattle business will boil down to who can raise cattle the cheapest. With our EPA regs, tax structure, etc. I don't believe we can compete.

Just think, in parts of Central and South America they have summer year round. Which means they don't have to winter cattle. Think how much that would save.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Mike said:
The cattle business will boil down to who can raise cattle the cheapest. With our EPA regs, tax structure, etc. I don't believe we can compete.

Just think, in parts of Central and South America they have summer year round. Which means they don't have to winter cattle. Think how much that would save.


Yes Mike the difference and unfairness is obvious to every body except people like sh,that dont know which end of a cow to feed much less own any,damn prarie dog lie like a rug when he aint counting his packer stock...............good luck
 

Cattleman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Haymaker, can you explain why this is so "unfair". Should we be limiting supply to consumers and not giving them the ability to buy cheaper product? We can't compete on low cost anymore in North America, so go produce, a valued product and sell it! The world is changing what you did in the past won't work in the future. Time to take advantage of opportunities rather then complain. Look for the opportunities, not the problems. There are winners and loser with change, winners are those who best adapt to change!
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Cattleman[quote said:
"]Haymaker, can you explain why this is so "unfair
". Should we be limiting supply to consumers and not giving them the ability to buy cheaper product? We can't compete on low cost anymore in North America, so go produce, a valued product and sell it! The world is changing what you did in the past won't work in the future. Time to take advantage of opportunities rather then complain. Look for the opportunities, not the problems. There are winners and loser with change, winners are those who best adapt to change![/quote]






I dont really believe you need me to explain why cafta is unfair,its obvious why its unfair to the cattle man and small town America.Of course if you are a city dweller got a nine to five job,drive a KIA and dont give a damn about where your clothes and food come from its probably a good deal for you.IM a different story born and raised a RANCHER, I aint about to see these changes without a fight..............good luck
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
HAY MAKER said:
Say what you will about Ross Perot, "Big Ears" sure had one thing right: NAFTA did produce a giant sucking sound that sucked away American jobs and dollars. For farmers and ranchers in all the countries affected, NAFTA has not lived up to the hype.Hemisphere affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Response...How many jobs have been created since NAFTA? I expect you don't have a clue. For you your information, the U.S economy has sucked up, created, 21.0 million new jobs since NAFTA. Other than China name one country that has created more jobs. Do you know what has happened to total beef trade between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. since NAFTA. I expect you don't know. Therefore, you just parrot what others say who probably know even less than you know. If you would spend as much time actually doing some research as you do copying & pasting BS you could discover the truth and learn things beneficial to you.
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Mike said:
T
Just think, in parts of Central and South America they have summer year round. Which means they don't have to winter cattle. Think how much that would save.

REsposne.. You forgot to mention that it gets so hot during that extended summer that the cattle actual lose weight and therefore have to go through two full seasons to get to market weight. That makes them really competitive with our gains!!!!!
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
21,984
Reaction score
83
Location
Big Muddy valley
Haymaker I see that I am not alone in correcting your so called facts. Oh well I will take all the help i can get cause keeping you straight is a full time job. :cowboy:
 

Tommy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Location
South East Kansas
NAFTA 10 Years After

By John Marsh

Jan 1, 2004 12:00 PM





Nearly 10 years have passed since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was passed in 1994. Considerable debate has ensued concerning NAFTA's impacts on U.S. beef producers in terms of cattle prices received, fair trade practices, and animal health risks.


Supporters of NAFTA emphasized the need for less restrictive markets in North America to expand U.S. exports of livestock and meat products. Also, transportation cost advantages occur because distances to other foreign markets are greater than those within North America.

Opponents of NAFTA concurred that the U.S. could experience export growth. However, they perceived that increased imports of live animals and meat products into U.S. feedlots and meat packing plants could offset those gains.

Trade Trends


U.S. live cattle and beef trade, excluding by-products, (called total beef trade, measured on a carcass weight basis) with Canada and Mexico reveals opposite trends of imports relative to exports.

Figure 1 shows total U.S. beef trade on a net export value basis (value of total beef exports less value of total beef imports). The trends show the U.S. net beef deficit increasing with Canada, but decreasing with Mexico.

Specifically, from 1985-2002 the net beef export deficit with Canada increased from -$380 million to -$2.05 billion, or a 439% increase in the deficit. From 1985-2002 the net beef export value with Mexico increased from a -$90 million deficit to a $500 million surplus, or a 656% increase in net value.

For total U.S. beef trade, the net beef export value decreased from -$1.22 billion to -$1.27 billion, or by about 4%. However, the deficit value decreased up to 2001 (4%), but it substantially increased in 2002 due to large meat imports from Canada, Mexico, and Brazil and large cattle imports from Canada.

These trade patterns indicate the U.S. net beef trade position with Canada has declined while the net trade position with Mexico has improved. Various reasons account for these trade positions, but much of it relates to relative surplus production and excess (or unutilized) capacity in the beef industries of the NAFTA countries.

The Canadian cattle industry is roughly 14% the size of the U.S. cattle industry. Nevertheless, Canada is a surplus producer of live cattle and beef carcasses. U.S. beef packers and processors import these commodities because of excess U.S. processing capacity and domestic consumer demand.

Canada also sells its surplus boxed beef products primarily into the U.S., with smaller quantities sold into Mexico and the Pacific Rim countries.

The Mexican cattle industry is roughly 22% the size of the U.S. cattle industry. However, Mexico is a surplus producer of feeder cattle which are exported to the southern U.S. to be finished in commercial feedlots with excess capacity. Mexico is a deficit producer of beef middle meats and high value table cuts, so they import these products from the U.S. and Canada.

Post-NAFTA Impacts


The looming question is: What has been NAFTA's effect on U.S. beef cattle markets during this period?

The following analysis compares changes in U.S. net beef imports of live cattle and meat (imports less exports) with Canada and Mexico and their effects on prices and revenues in the fed cattle and feeder cattle sectors. Comparisons are made for the pre-NAFTA period from 1985-1993 and the post-NAFTA period from 1994-2002.

Impacts are also evaluated for changes in U.S. net beef imports that include all trading partners — NAFTA countries, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, South America, etc.

The price and revenue adjustments are based on estimates of a statistical demand and supply model of the U.S. beef industry. The parameters are applied to changes in average net beef imports between the two nine-year periods for Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. as shown in Table 1.

Table 2 gives the impacts on cattle prices and revenues (in 2002 dollars) for these two periods. The salient aspects of the trade results are:


U.S. beef trade with Canada reduced U.S. fed and feeder cattle prices and revenues between the pre-NAFTA period and the post-NAFTA period.

U.S. beef trade with Mexico shows the opposite result in that U.S. cattle prices and revenues increased between the pre-NAFTA period and post-NAFTA period.

The negative cattle price and revenue effects of U.S. beef trade with Canada appear to dominate the positive price and revenue effects with Mexico in both cattle sectors.


The 1989 U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) was a catalyst that increased U.S. net beef imports with Canada, while NAFTA was merely a continuation of this agreement. As well, the Western Canadian livestock feeding industry, particularly Alberta, grew because of the elimination of Canadian grain transportation subsidies in 1995.

This growth contributed to expanded beef exports into the U.S. The data indicate (Table 1) that average U.S. net beef imports from Canada increased by 128% between the pre- and post-NAFTA periods.

This pattern resulted in reducing fed cattle prices and revenues by $1.35/cwt. and $530 million respectively, and feeder cattle prices and revenues by 77¢/cwt. and $450 million.

U.S. beef trade relationships with Mexico resulted in opposite cattle price and revenue effects between the pre- and post-NAFTA periods. NAFTA increased U.S. exports of middle meats and high value muscle cuts to a growing Mexican economy.

The data shows (Table 1) that U.S. average net beef imports with Mexico decreased by 192% between the two periods. The result was to increase fed cattle price and revenue by 53¢/cwt. and $210 million respectively, and increase feeder cattle price and revenue by 30¢/cwt. and $180 million.

The combined result of U.S. beef trade with Canada and Mexico was net reductions in prices and revenues due to the deficit position with Canada. The combined country effects of Canada and Mexico (see “Total” row in Table 2) indicates net reductions in fed cattle price of 82¢/cwt. and fed cattle revenue of $330 million.

The difference reflects the fact that Canada is a more important U.S. beef trading partner than is Mexico. For example, live cattle and beef import and export trade with Canada and Mexico represented about 5.5% and 2.4% of U.S. beef supplies, respectively, from 1985 to 2002.

The U.S. also exports beef products into the markets of the Pacific Rim, Caribbean countries, and Russia. As a result of increased beef exports into these areas, the negative price and revenue effects of NAFTA were substantially mitigated.

For example, the U.S. net import deficit for all beef trade was reduced by 24% between the pre- and post-NAFTA periods (Table 1). The aggregate result was to increase fed and feeder cattle prices by 88¢/cwt. and 52¢/cwt., respectively, and to increase corresponding beef revenues by $350 million and $220 million (Table 2).

Trade liberalization, growing foreign incomes, foreign preferences for animal source proteins, and U.S. product promotion in foreign markets account for much of the overall trade improvement.

Conclusion


NAFTA has been beneficial to the U.S. beef industry due exclusively to the U.S. beef trade gain with Mexico. However, since 1994 the U.S. has substantially increased its beef trade deficit with Canada. It is not clear whether Canada's contribution to the U.S. beef trade position would have differed much even without NAFTA since U.S. trade liberalization with Canada was already implemented under the CFTA.

Perhaps NAFTA has made a difference for the U.S. in terms of exporting more meat to Canada, conflict resolution in trade agreements, or in terms of the Restricted Feeder Cattle Program. The latter permitted northern tier states to increase feeder cattle exports to Canada as a result of removing test requirements and other costs of animal health restrictions.

The NAFTA impacts on U.S. cattle prices and revenues are relatively small primarily because U.S. beef trade (imports and exports) with Canada and Mexico constitutes only about 7-8% of U.S. beef supplies. When considering net beef trade (imports less exports), it is only about 4% of U.S. beef supplies.

Also, the price impacts in this study do not reflect the rare event (since May 2003) of the U.S. closing its borders to Canadian live cattle and beef due to the single case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) found in Canada. Beef producers and economists feel this event was highly amplified by low U.S. cattle inventories and strong domestic and export demand, in producing record cattle and beef prices.

This article is in full text, entitled “Post-NAFTA and the U.S. Beef Market” (Briefing No. 50). It can be downloaded on the Web at http://ampc.montana.edu/publications/AMPCpublications.html.

John M. Marsh is a professor, Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University, Bozeman.

Table 1. Average Values of U.S. Net Beef Trade, Pre-NAFTA (1985-1993) and Post-NAFTA (1994-2000).


Net Imports
Years/Percent Canada Mexico U.S.
(billion lbs.)
Pre-NAFTA
(1985-1993) 0.602 0.157 2.122
Post-NAFTA
(1994-2002) 1.373 -0.144 1.617
Percent Change +128 -192 -24
Note: Net Imports are total beef imports less total beef exports.


Table 2. Effects of U.S. Net Beef Imports on Prices and Revenues in the Beef Cattle Sectors, Pre-NAFTA (1985-1993) and Post-NAFTA (1994-2002).


Beef Sectors
Countries Fed Cattle Feeder Cattle
($/cwt) (billion $) ($/cwt) (billion $)
Canada -1.35 -0.534 -0.77 -0.452
Mexico 0.53 0.209 0.30 0.175
Total -0.82 -0.325 -0.47 -0.277
U.S. 0.88 0.351 0.52 0.218
Note: Net beef imports are total beef imports less total beef exports.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The NAFTA impacts on U.S. cattle prices and revenues are relatively small primarily because U.S. beef trade (imports and exports) with Canada and Mexico constitutes only about 7-8% of U.S. beef supplies.

Yet we constantly listen to the "dooms day prophets" bitching about NAFTA and how it has sent us down the path of destruction.


~SH~
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
agman said:
HAY MAKER said:
Say what you will about Ross Perot, "Big Ears" sure had one thing right: NAFTA did produce a giant sucking sound that sucked away American jobs and dollars. For farmers and ranchers in all the countries affected, NAFTA has not lived up to the hype.Hemisphere affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Response...How many jobs have been created since NAFTA? I expect you don't have a clue. For you your information, the U.S economy has sucked up, created, 21.0 million new jobs since NAFTA. Other than China name one country that has created more jobs. Do you know what has happened to total beef trade between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. since NAFTA. I expect you don't know. Therefore, you just parrot what others say who probably know even less than you know. If you would spend as much time actually doing some research as you do copying & pasting BS you could discover the truth and learn things beneficial to you.






what I parrot as you call it is the same thing 14500 cattle men and senators and congress men parrot,now use some cowboy logic,.......think about this for a few minutes who would you believe 14500 cattle men and senators or a @#&[email protected]%&)(*%#@$^*%%$*(*&,that has a vested interest in packer profits?..................good luck
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
HAY MAKER said:
agman said:
HAY MAKER said:
Say what you will about Ross Perot, "Big Ears" sure had one thing right: NAFTA did produce a giant sucking sound that sucked away American jobs and dollars. For farmers and ranchers in all the countries affected, NAFTA has not lived up to the hype.Hemisphere affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Response...How many jobs have been created since NAFTA? I expect you don't have a clue. For you your information, the U.S economy has sucked up, created, 21.0 million new jobs since NAFTA. Other than China name one country that has created more jobs. Do you know what has happened to total beef trade between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. since NAFTA. I expect you don't know. Therefore, you just parrot what others say who probably know even less than you know. If you would spend as much time actually doing some research as you do copying & pasting BS you could discover the truth and learn things beneficial to you.






what I parrot as you call it is the same thing 14500 cattle men and senators and congress men parrot,now use some cowboy logic,.......think about this for a few minutes who would you believe 14500 cattle men and senators or a @#&[email protected]%&)(*%#not nice*(*&,that has a vested interest in packer profits?..................good luck
*
 

Tom S

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
Location
Central MN
agman said:
Mike said:
T
Just think, in parts of Central and South America they have summer year round. Which means they don't have to winter cattle. Think how much that would save.

REsposne.. You forgot to mention that it gets so hot during that extended summer that the cattle actual lose weight and therefore have to go through two full seasons to get to market weight. That makes them really competitive with our gains!!!!!

Two full seasons is pushing it, for Central America that is.The grasses are of such poor quality some of them critters could starve to death with a full stomach. And parasites beyond belief, poisonous plants and critters, big time rustling, corrupt government officials from top to bottom. Guess thats why I had the wife's family plant coffee trees on the land down there.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
What is bad about a trade agreement that takes the tariffs we pay to get product into countries off?

Those countries have had very little to NO tariff on the beef, etc. they ship to us. I am glad to see the equalization of access for our beef.

Before any of you complain that they can't afford to buy our beef, remember that they do have tourism, and they do have some extremely wealthy citizens who must may like to indulge in our high quality beef.

To top it off, there is more to this than simply trade. There is the effort in many directions to attract those people to democracy with more freedom of their people to choose and participate in govermnent, rather than the more totalitarian (not to mention unfriendly to the USA) governments and "free agents" who have been luring the people toward more extreme forms of government. I've also read or heard speakers mention the necessity of helping the common people improve their lot in life as a result of such trade, rather than by the easier at this point in time route of crime/drug trade.

Isn't it interesting that the strongest anti-CAFTA noise is coming from the corporate sugar producers in the USA, as well as the NFU, and friends?

MRJ
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
HAY MAKER said:
agmanResponse...How many jobs have been created since NAFTA? I expect you don't have a clue. For you your information said:
what I parrot as you call it is the same thing 14500 cattle men and senators and congress men parrot,now use some cowboy logic,.......think about this for a few minutes who would you believe 14500 cattle men and senators or a @#&[email protected]%&)(*%#not nice*(*&,that has a vested interest in packer profits?..................good luck

Response....Politicians are wrong many times just as misled producers are. You are so caught up in nagative data and misinterpretation of data you keep missing the big picture. As a result you cannot even answer a simple and basic question. How do we create all these jobs, 21.0 million since NAFTA? Who can match that growth even when you adjust for population size. To properly apply logic one must first have knowledge of all the facts. Anything less is-well you know, just a failed observation.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
agman said:
HAY MAKER said:
agmanResponse...How many jobs have been created since NAFTA? I expect you don't have a clue. For you your information said:
what I parrot as you call it is the same thing 14500 cattle men and senators and congress men parrot,now use some cowboy logic,.......think about this for a few minutes who would you believe 14500 cattle men and senators or a @#&[email protected]%&)(*%#not nice*(*&,that has a vested interest in packer profits?..................good luck

Response....Politicians are wrong many times just as misled producers are. You are so caught up in nagative data and misinterpretation of data you keep missing the big picture. As a result you cannot even answer a simple and basic question.
How do we create all these jobs, 21.0 million since NAFTA?
Who can match that growth even when you adjust for population size. To properly apply logic one must first have knowledge of all the facts. Anything less is-well you know, just a failed observation.




OK,ILL take your word for it ,you just stated nafta created 21 million jobs,how many would have been created without nafta 41 million? If IM understanding you right you are saying 14500 cattle men are wrong and you and the cafta advocates are right,now all you have to do is convince congress.............good luck
 

Denny

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
5,632
Reaction score
0
Location
Mn usa
The free trade deals sound bad but human nature is to be GREEDY these 3rd world countries arent going to remain that way.They will want Big profits as all of us.

They will get a taste for money and things will even out you cant tell me John Deere,New Holland.pioneer seeds and all other corporation's doing business there are going to do it cut rate I doubt it.

Things will equal out and all the bitching in the world will stop nothing.

These trade deals are BIGGER than any of us can comprehend if it gets as bad as you all think there's always BARBER COLLEGE....
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
HAY MAKER said:
agman said:
HAY MAKER said:
agmanResponse...How many jobs have been created since NAFTA? I expect you don't have a clue. For you your information said:
what I parrot as you call it is the same thing 14500 cattle men and senators and congress men parrot,now use some cowboy logic,.......think about this for a few minutes who would you believe 14500 cattle men and senators or a @#&[email protected]%&)(*%#not nice*(*&,that has a vested interest in packer profits?..................good luck

Response....Politicians are wrong many times just as misled producers are. You are so caught up in nagative data and misinterpretation of data you keep missing the big picture. As a result you cannot even answer a simple and basic question.
How do we create all these jobs, 21.0 million since NAFTA?
Who can match that growth even when you adjust for population size. To properly apply logic one must first have knowledge of all the facts. Anything less is-well you know, just a failed observation.




OK,ILL take your word for it ,you just stated nafta created 21 million jobs,how many would have been created without nafta 41 million? If IM understanding you right you are saying 14500 cattle men are wrong and you and the cafta advocates are right,now all you have to do is convince congress.............good luck

Just how many cafta advocates are you saying are wrong? Could that number far out weigh the 14500 members of R-CALF? Just because Leo says its so doesn't mean all 14500 member agree either. I know of a few members that didn't agree with Leo's statement about BSE being a non issue if found in the US so how can you say all 14500 members agree on CAFTA. Just because you are a head bobber doesn't mean all 14500 are. :roll:
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Tam said:
HAY MAKER said:
agman said:
what I parrot as you call it is the same thing 14500 cattle men and senators and congress men parrot,now use some cowboy logic,.......think about this for a few minutes who would you believe 14500 cattle men and senators or a @#&[email protected]%&)(*%#not nice*(*&,that has a vested interest in packer profits?..................good luck

Response....Politicians are wrong many times just as misled producers are. You are so caught up in nagative data and misinterpretation of data you keep missing the big picture. As a result you cannot even answer a simple and basic question.
How do we create all these jobs, 21.0 million since NAFTA?
Who can match that growth even when you adjust for population size. To properly apply logic one must first have knowledge of all the facts. Anything less is-well you know, just a failed observation.




OK,ILL take your word for it ,you just stated nafta created 21 million jobs,how many would have been created without nafta 41 million? If IM understanding you right you are saying 14500 cattle men are wrong and you and the cafta advocates are right,now all you have to do is convince congress.............good luck

Just how many cafta advocates are you saying are wrong? Could that number far out weigh the 14500 members of R-CALF? Just because Leo says its so doesn't mean all 14500 member agree either. I know of a few members that didn't agree with Leo's statement about BSE being a non issue if found in the US so how can you say all 14500 members agree on CAFTA.
Just because you are a head bobber doesn't mean all 14500 are. :roll:
[/quote]



No and the fact that you are a head slober dont mean they aint...........good luck
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Denny said:
The free trade deals sound bad but human nature is to be GREEDY these 3rd world countries arent going to remain that way.They will want Big profits as all of us.

They will get a taste for money and things will even out you cant tell me John Deere,New Holland.pioneer seeds and all other corporation's doing business there are going to do it cut rate I doubt it.

Things will equal out and all the bitching in the world will stop nothing.

These trade deals are BIGGER than any of us can comprehend if it gets as bad as you all think there's always BARBER COLLEGE....

Things will even out- BUT at the cost of who? Should we be the welfare agency of the world? Just look at the comparable prices of your John Deere tractor you buy in Argentina, or the price of the New Holland baler you buy in Egypt...Doesn't even come close to what you pay in the U.S-....Many are the same product with a different name that sells at 1/10th the price-- the same as Monsanto does with biochemicals and weed sprays they sell in Canada... Then ( even with all these so-called FREE trade agreements) when a North Dakota or Montana neighbor trys to buy identical Canadian weed spray at the cheaper price they are charged with a Federal crime.....Same as the little old ladies that are being Federally charged now for buying Canadian drugs-- most of which were originally made in U.S. pharmaceutical plants anyway-- But now we are being told by our FDA that they do not meet standards....

As far as Pioneer seeds and Dupont and Monsanto- they are buying up huge areas of Brazil and South America-- They raise not only 2- but sometimes 3 generations of crops in one year for their genetic research- all the time while using $2.00 a day labor to sell us $10-50 a lb seed- whatever the market will bare....

Problem historically with free trade agreements is that the have not been friendly with U.S. Agriculture and right now the citizens of the US are beginning to wake up---CAFTA will probably not directly negatively effect most of us locally--except the sugar beet people of the Yellowstone Valley-- but it will also do nothing positive- especially if it opens up North America to the cattle of South America........ CAFTA stands a good chance to fail--not because it is so bad, but because US citizens are beginning to wake up to the fact that these free trade agreements have done them no good and only meant more foreign jobs and competition........

And this joke that NCBA and the packers push about all this high quality beef going to meet the tourist demand--what a JOKE-- How many people do you know that vacation in Honduras or Guatemala? :???:
 

Latest posts

Top