Canfax numbers

[Tam]

So, Tam, why do you take the positions you take if someone isn't holding something over you?

I don't want to discredit you personally,

yea right Econ how many other threads have you posted you sick analogy on while I was answering this one. you don't deserve an answer. And you sure the He** don't deserve any respect for the crap you post.

The analogy is powerful. It should be. There is a lot at stake.

it's sick and only a sick person would post you need help.

 

[Econ101]

yea right Econ how many other threads have you posted you sick analogy on while I was answering this one. you don't deserve an answer. And you sure the He** don't deserve any respect for the crap you post.

The analogy is powerful. It should be. There is a lot at stake.

it's sick and only a sick person would post you need help.

Maybe it hits too close to home. If that is the case, I am truly sorry. Everyone deserves a better life than that.

 

[Tam]

The analogy is powerful. It should be. There is a lot at stake.

it's sick and only a sick person would post you need help.

Maybe it hits too close to home. If that is the case, I am truly sorry. Everyone deserves a better life than that.

it couldn't be further from the truth and I think you are sick and deserve a better life SEE A DOCTOR

 

[Econ101]

it's sick and only a sick person would post you need help.

Maybe it hits too close to home. If that is the case, I am truly sorry. Everyone deserves a better life than that.

it couldn't be further from the truth and I think you are sick and deserve a better life SEE A DOCTOR

So you have denegrated rkaiser's deal yet offered no substantive proposal of your own. You argue the packer's point almost all of the time. You seem to think that the USDA walks on water on the issues that are being brought forth here on this forum. You have not talked about ANYTHING Canadian producers could do to make their situation better except badmouth R-Calf even though you know most of the damage was done by the USDA/NCBA decisions. You do not support or even try to understand the Packers and Stockyards Act or to get the same protections for Canadian producers. You continually argue against it, not with points that show you understand the issues, but with name calling to those trying to enforce it. You can not see the utility of having laws govern instead of wealth. You are Johnny on the spot to call something on someone who you disagree with but will say NOTHING to someone you agree with..... I could keep going on and on, Tam.

Now, my analogy asks the question, why do you do it Tam?

 

[Tam]

Maybe it hits too close to home. If that is the case, I am truly sorry. Everyone deserves a better life than that.

it couldn't be further from the truth and I think you are sick and deserve a better life SEE A DOCTOR

So you have denegrated rkaiser's deal yet offered no substantive proposal of your own. You argue the packer's point almost all of the time. You seem to think that the USDA walks on water on the issues that are being brought forth here on this forum. You have not talked about ANYTHING Canadian producers could do to make their situation better except badmouth R-Calf even though you know most of the damage was done by the USDA/NCBA decisions. You do not support or even try to understand the Packers and Stockyards Act or to get the same protections for Canadian producers. You continually argue against it, not with points that show you understand the issues, but with name calling to those trying to enforce it. You can not see the utility of having laws govern instead of wealth. You are Johnny on the spot to call something on someone who you disagree with but will say NOTHING to someone you agree with..... I could keep going on and on, Tam.

Now, my analogy asks the question, why do you do it Tam?

So you have denegrated rkaiser's deal yet offered no substantive proposal of your own.

So tell me how did I degenerate rkaiser's deal. first I thought it was the BIG C deal and that is why Randy couldn't get all the facts straight but it's even worse if it is his DEAL and he can't answer direct question without name calling. and Econ I don't think I have the power you think I have because I'm only one person and it takes the majority of the whole industry to support Randy's deal for a Checkoff paid for plant.

You argue the packer's point almost all of the time.

well someone has to bring the truth to prove your packer blaming claims wrong. I just don't see why you can't see that after three investigation there was NO EVIDENCE to prove your claims at least in Canada.

You seem to think that the USDA walks on water on the issues that are being brought forth here on this forum.

I think you need to look in the archives again Econ

You have not talked about ANYTHING Canadian producers could do to make their situation better

maybe not to you but then why should I you don't know a whole lot about the Canadian beef industry :wink:

except badmouth R-Calf

Econ would you like to explain what percautionary firewalls Leo was talking about when he made this statement.

"we know if we are going to keep consumer confidence we are going to maintain some of the highest standards in the world to make sure that BSE is not introduced into this country. And we are going to make sure we have the best meat and bone meal ban in this country in place. So if for some reason we did find a case we can stand and look our consumers right in the eye and say, don't worry we have had these firewalls in place for years, the only country prior to having a case of BSE to have these firewalls in place for so many years. And we did it to make sure if a case was ever found it was a non-issue. If we look them right in the eye and say that I will guarantee they will keep eating beef".

and what made the US beef safe after R-CALF told all the US consumers that would listen including a Federal Court Judge that all beef coming from a country affected by BSE is tainted and not fit for human consumption after the US found BSE. It sure couldn't have been the so called firewalls LEO was talking about as they are the main reason the US couldn't afford to import cattle from Canada as they would surely spread IMPORTED BSE within the US herd and put US customers at risk. Would you also like to explain Leos comments about We know Canada still processes Downers and the US doesn't or the statement about the US ANNUALLY tests 150,000 more head for BSE than Canada does. If you look in the Archives you will see the numbers I posted several time prove the US doesn't even test the same percentage I go after R-CALF for the lies they seem to think they can spout and not have to answer for. :liar: :liar:

even though you know most of the damage was done by the USDA/NCBA decisions.

THAT IS YOUR OPINION but I have to ask Were either of this groups standing with "consumer group" :wink: to scare the consumers into not trusting beef from a country that was in the exact same risk catagory.

You do not support or even try to understand the Packers and Stockyards Act or to get the same protections for Canadian producers.

do you not realize that Canada has a Competition Act and that the Competition Bureau did investigate and reported they found no evidence to support your packer blaming claims.

You continually argue against it, not with points that show you understand the issues, but with name calling to those trying to enforce it.

How many lost lawsuits and investigations will it take to prove to you you're wrong? and please don't talk about name calling I think you would have to look way up to see the belly of a bottom feeder after your actions today. :help:

You can not see the utility of having laws govern instead of wealth.

No I can't see punishing people with laws when three investigations proved there was no evidence to prove any of the packer blaming claims. WE have a COMPETITION ACT and an INVESTIGATION WAS DONE. :roll:

You are Johnny on the spot to call something on someone who you disagree with but will say NOTHING to someone you agree with...

READ this again and answer one question do you call people on things when YOU AGREE WITH THEM I see it now Yes SH I agree with you what do you have to say about that huh. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I could keep going on and on

, Please don't you went to far with the last statement :wink:

Now, my analogy asks the question, why do you do it Tam

what do I do Econ I work with the SSGA as you know, I also sit on a political board and I sit on the church board and I guess I would have to say I speak up at all meeting to get my points across I'm sure I could find a few that will testify to that. But to you that is not enough so I guess if you think I should I will run for office and single handedly change the whole damn country to your way of thinking. Econ Just tell me who you are so I can tell everyone who their KING WILL BE. :x

 

[Econ101]

All rulers should be for the people, not corporations or aristocracies that inevitably develop. I am sorry you don't see it that way.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

All rulers should be for the people, not corporations or aristocracies that inevitably develop. I am sorry you don't see it that way.

I don't understand why people have started to feel that corporations now have rights equal to (or in some cases, greater than) the individuals who live in society. It truly is an unfortunate state of affairs.

Rod

 

[Mike]

All rulers should be for the people, not corporations or aristocracies that inevitably develop. I am sorry you don't see it that way.

I don't understand why people have started to feel that corporations now have rights equal to (or in some cases, greater than) the individuals who live in society. It truly is an unfortunate state of affairs.

Rod

I feel that we are diminished by the almost death of entrepeneurialism. Most kids are not taught to become one, but just go to school, study hard, and get a job with a big corporation (or guvment) that has " Benefits" and a retirement plan.

The big corps are getting a boost from the masses in this category.

 

[Tam]

All rulers should be for the people, not corporations or aristocracies that inevitably develop. I am sorry you don't see it that way.

eCON this is how you discuss the points with one smart a*s PM and this?
what happen to the answers to my questions?
What did I do to stop Randy's deal ?
all I did was ask a few question he couldn't answer.
Did BIG C ever get their IDEA to the PLAN stage?
did they ever get a vote?
or was my asking a few direct questions enough to stop the whole IDEA in its track?
Have you and Rod found any evidence to prove your Packer Blaming claims?
are are you just hoping the someone else will protect your daughters?

Did you bother to look in the Archives to see that I have not always thought the USDA walks on water?
I just don't happen to think at all of what they have done wrong is 100% their fault they wrote the rules BUT IT WAS THE INDUSTRY THAT WAS TO COMPLY TO THEM INCLUDING THE PRODUCERS.
And all my question about R-CALF lies and not one reply from you on them. :? I'll highlight them for you eCON
WHAT FIREWALLS WAS LEO TALKING ABOUT?
WHERE DID THE US TEST 150,000 MORE HEAD ANNUALLY THAN CANADA?
AND IF THE US DOESN"T PROCESS DOWNERS THEN WHAT IS THIS

U.S. beef inspectors have failed to fully comply with rules banning cattle that are unable to walk to reach consumers, according to a recent government audit report. The inspector general said that at two of 12 slaughter plants reviewed in an audit, 29 non-ambulatory cattle were slaughtered over a 10-month period, and that 20 had been identified as downers that had no records of acute injury.

WHAT MAKES US BEEF SAFE WHEN ALL BEEF COMING FROM A COUNTRY AFFECTED BY BSE IS TAINTED AND UNFIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION?
Did either the USDA or the NCBA try scare consumerS away from eating beef by grandstanding with the enemy?
What do you think our COMPETITION ACT is for, you were told the Competition Bureau is an independent agency that promotes and maintains fair competiton so that all Canadians can benefit from competitives prices, product choice and quality servive. It over sees the application of the COMPETITION ACT.
So where is you proof they aren't doing their job for ALL CANADIANS? Come on Econ Claims are cheap bring your PROOF.
And again why should I jump all over people I AGREE WITH?
last but certainly not least don't I do enough should I run for office and make you KING of ECONOLAND where PACKERS NEED NOT SET UP SHOP AS ALL POOR(as god knows you wouldn't allow any wealthy to live in Econoland) BEEF EATERS WILL JUST GATHER ON THE RANGE AND TAKE DOWN A COW AND EAT HER RAW.
Come on eCON you want to discuss the points go for it answer my questions. And I will make sure I tell the SSGA what you think of them in your PM to me this morning. :wink: Oh while you are at it bring the proof that proves that TYSON OFFICIALS AND THE USDA PERSONAL THAT MET THE JAPANESE DELEGATES WERE KNIFE CARRYING CROOKS THAT SOMEHOW THREATENED THEM INTO SAYING SOMETHING THEY DIDN'T WANT TO.

 

[Jason]

And yet at the same time as many feel big corps are running pampant over the country, GM, Ford, Wal-mart are all posting lower than expected numbers.

 

[Tam]

And yet at the same time as many feel big corps are running pampant over the country, GM, Ford, Wal-mart are all posting lower than expected numbers.

Don't you love how some discusses points and sticks to the topic? :lol: all those questions and not one answer. :???: :wink:

 

[Mike]

And yet at the same time as many feel big corps are running pampant over the country, GM, Ford, Wal-mart are all posting lower than expected numbers.

Don't you love how some discusses points and sticks to the topic? :lol: all those questions and not one answer. :???: :wink:

Midol might help Tam. :wink:

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

1) Have you and Rod found any evidence to prove your Packer Blaming claims?

2) are are you just hoping the someone else will protect your daughters?

3) What do you think our COMPETITION ACT is for, you were told the Competition Bureau is an independent agency that promotes and maintains fair competiton so that all Canadians can benefit from competitives prices, product choice and quality servive. It over sees the application of the COMPETITION ACT.

So where is you proof they aren't doing their job for ALL CANADIANS?

1) There have been numerous snippets of solid proof presented, both in the Pickett inquiry and other inquiries. Just that corporate backers fail to see it, or don't want to believe it.

2) I plan on protecting my own children, thats why I am constantly peppering my elected representatives with suggestions, questions, and criticism. Most of all, I'm trying to protect my family from people who have their heads buried in the sand and fail to understand how damaged our society is because of corruption in the government and large corporations.

3) My god, Tam. The Competition Bureau WAS NOT ALLOWED TO DO THEIR JOBS. I presented to you, in a clear and logical fashion, why the study was inadequate to the needs of the people, and yet you still fail to realize it. Please, before you discuss this topic any further, get some real training in books, auditting and corporate finance. Even the quotes you provided that supposedly supported your position only lent more credibility to my own position.

Rod

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

And yet at the same time as many feel big corps are running pampant over the country, GM, Ford, Wal-mart are all posting lower than expected numbers.

Your point Jason? Just because a few well known large corporations are suffering doesn't mean they haven't already done significant damage to the market.

Lets address Ford and GM for moment. This is solid proof of how large corporations, when faced with GENUINE competition can fall apart. The auto industry is a hugely competitive field with thousands of players in it. Just because you only read about the Big 3, doesn't mean those are the only guys having an effect in the market.

You'll also notice that alternative powered vehicles certainly haven't come along very far in the past few years, yet in the RV market, we're seeing huge jumps in technology that are advancing the market by leaps and bounds. My sled is only 2 years old, but gets half the mileage of a new one. Why? Massive competition for limited consumer dollars. GM and Ford are starting to feel that bite because they no longer enjoy as much protection from the import market as they once did. Odd how that works, isn't it? Drop the corporate protection from government and all of sudden, genuine weakness is shown.

As for WallyWorld, thankfully we've seen a resurgence of purchasing co-ops who are able to get similar pricing from manufacturers, all the while still maintaining retail competition with one another. For example, Tru-Serv, the purchasing arm of TruValue hardware stores is now purchasing for several independent retail stores and in many cases, easily compete with Wal-Mart. IN this case, the smaller guys were able to band together and survive. They weren't too late to bring change. If they'd waited a couple years though......

Rod

 

[mrj]

A definition: corporation: 1. A body of persons recognized by law as an individual person or entity having its own name and identiry, and with rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members. 2. Any group of persons acting as one body.

There has been little ever written on this site of the fact that corporations in general, and several in particular, especially Walmart, are under serious attack by faceless entities.

Do any of you ever wonder why/how/who is involved in those attacks? It doesn't seem logical that the virtual fleets of lawyers searching out employees of Walmart, for instance, and urging them to file lawsuits against the company have no coordination or leader behind them, does it?Same for attacks on many other "corporations" or "big" businesses.

I recall when K-Marts came in that people were sure they were going to end the world as we know it, too. Wonder who/what will come up with better ideas to displace Walmart, and whether it will be due to better ideas, or to the "attacks" softening them up. Will we be better off, or worse off when Walmart "dies"?

Isn't it rather interesting that some of the promoters of the idea that packers are too few, controlling too much of the cattle processing are also promoting "eat locally" and "we need smaller farms and more farmers"?

Personally, I like being able to get good fresh salad veggies and fruits in winter. I would really hate to live on what we can grow in west central SD, with no "outside" produce allowed. I like having family members in business with us so each of us can get time to participate in the volunteer activities of our communities and industry. I worry that there won't be much of that if we go backward to a peasant agriculture some seem to promote.

MRJ

 

[Jason]

And yet at the same time as many feel big corps are running pampant over the country, GM, Ford, Wal-mart are all posting lower than expected numbers.

Your point Jason? Just because a few well known large corporations are suffering doesn't mean they haven't already done significant damage to the market.

Lets address Ford and GM for moment. This is solid proof of how large corporations, when faced with GENUINE competition can fall apart. The auto industry is a hugely competitive field with thousands of players in it. Just because you only read about the Big 3, doesn't mean those are the only guys having an effect in the market.

You'll also notice that alternative powered vehicles certainly haven't come along very far in the past few years, yet in the RV market, we're seeing huge jumps in technology that are advancing the market by leaps and bounds. My sled is only 2 years old, but gets half the mileage of a new one. Why? Massive competition for limited consumer dollars. GM and Ford are starting to feel that bite because they no longer enjoy as much protection from the import market as they once did. Odd how that works, isn't it? Drop the corporate protection from government and all of sudden, genuine weakness is shown.

As for WallyWorld, thankfully we've seen a resurgence of purchasing co-ops who are able to get similar pricing from manufacturers, all the while still maintaining retail competition with one another. For example, Tru-Serv, the purchasing arm of TruValue hardware stores is now purchasing for several independent retail stores and in many cases, easily compete with Wal-Mart. IN this case, the smaller guys were able to band together and survive. They weren't too late to bring change. If they'd waited a couple years though......

Rod

My points exactly Rod.

Lets bring this back to the packers, Tyson is starting to posts lower numbers because competition is stiff. Big corps don't have free reign, they have to account to shareholders and they are subject to new and better technology.

GM made the choice to pursue the gas guzzler SUV market...in hindsight a bad move. But the high wages and benefit packages that unions forced them into is catching up. Now some people blame GM for losing manufacturing jobs when it is more a case of their hands being tied by other factors.

Do we want to see Tyson or Cargill held hostage like this? Granted they need to be fair with their workers, but workers need to know that a big company isn't just a cash machine.

Good alternatives are always viable. I am sure the packing industry will continue to see improvements. The case ready meats is a huge step forward. The more fast easy nutritious meals made from beef helps us all.

 

[Tam]

And yet at the same time as many feel big corps are running pampant over the country, GM, Ford, Wal-mart are all posting lower than expected numbers.

Don't you love how some discusses points and sticks to the topic? :lol: all those questions and not one answer. :???: :wink:

Midol might help Tam. :wink:

Another great divertion Mike but that was not what we were dicussing.

 

[Jason]

Reader you are right that some of the auto industry woes were bad decisions.

However when GM has a liability of $65 an hour and Toyota has a liability of $18 who is going to be able to make a profit in a tight market? (assuming of course that they build the same number of units per hour)

The article posted about Tyson closing plants said wages were $11-$12 range. Not poverty wages, but not top of the world wages either. If they were to face different wages than their competitors their cost per pound of beef would be affected.

What I don't get is how some can look at Tyson, see a huge corporate entity that evil and wants to control the world, then looks at GM or Ford and complains they are laying off workers because they are in trouble.

Large corporations are made up of people. There are good and bad people in every area of life. Being a large corporation doesn't make all the people who run it bad, nor does a small one mean the people are all good. Each company has to face realities and will go broke if they don't take care of business. Some decisions made will hurt some people, that can't be helped. To suggest the world would run better with no large corps is wishful thinking. We have them and have to deal with them.

The phrase jack of all trades master of none could be applied the corporate world. Why legislate all companies have to be small and they can't have people skilled in specific areas because their volumes aren't high enough to pay for that?

 

[Mike]

Don't you love how some discusses points and sticks to the topic? :lol: all those questions and not one answer. :???: :wink:

Midol might help Tam. :wink:

Another great divertion Mike but that was not what we were dicussing.

Dang Tam. We can't fight ALL the time! We gotta take a break and throw in some humor from time to time. :lol: :lol:

Now go take a couple more. :wink:

 

[Tam]

[
1) There have been numerous snippets of solid proof presented, both in the Pickett inquiry and other inquiries. Just that corporate backers fail to see it, or don't want to believe it.

2) I plan on protecting my own children, thats why I am constantly peppering my elected representatives with suggestions, questions, and criticism. Most of all, I'm trying to protect my family from people who have their heads buried in the sand and fail to understand how damaged our society is because of corruption in the government and large corporations.

3) My god, Tam. The Competition Bureau WAS NOT ALLOWED TO DO THEIR JOBS. I presented to you, in a clear and logical fashion, why the study was inadequate to the needs of the people, and yet you still fail to realize it. Please, before you discuss this topic any further, get some real training in books, auditting and corporate finance. Even the quotes you provided that supposedly supported your position only lent more credibility to my own position.

Rod

If you have proof that these three investigative bodies didn't have then take it to the Mounties and see to it that they look into it. From what I read there was no evidence to prove any of the claims like yours. I would hope that if two government and one independent investigative teams saw numerous snippets of solid proof their would not have filed their FINAL REPORTS CLAIMING NO EVIDENCE . But again if you have more snippets by all means turn them over.