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

Discussion for the More Advanced: Beef Demand

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Econ, you are such a gentleman! What sort of parents taught you so well???

If I'm one of the idiots, you certainly are the champion of us all!

Do you really fail to understand that receiving a smaller piece of a larger pie can mean getting more........and I'm only using pie instead of cattle or beef as an example because it is easier to picture (for some of us that is).

Don't ignore the fact that those importers could take that money they must pay to the checkoff and use it to focus a hotshot ad campaign for their "Grass Fed", "Maple Leaf Finest", "Pampas Grown", "New Zealand Pampered" or any of a multitude other catchy phrases implying superior quality, because the CAN provide it. Some of you like to imply that all imported beef is "crap" (to quote Johnny Smith, ardent fundraiser for R-CALF), but you are far off the mark in that claim!

The amount of money the Beef Checkoff leaders spend on advertising has dropped dramatically as the need to use some of the money for research and education has become understood.

Are you sure you are not an anti-meat activist masquerading as a champion of the cattle/beef industry? So much of what you post is really detrimental to this industry, it causes one to wonder.

MRJ

MRJ, today I was going to go back and take the idiot comment out of my post to you but after you wrote this, I think I will just let it stay in.

How is so much of what I post detrimental to the industry? The food safety and accountability part? The part about the USDA not running a proper regulatory agency? The part about the USDA not allowing competition?

Sometimes I wonder if you really think you can provide a good product without all the crutches the above questions suggest.


Econ, so typically for you to 'sort of' offer a back-handed, 'almost' apology for your mean spirited name calling, 'almost' retracting it, then deciding not to because of some self-perceived slight to you when you have been given a well deserved scolding by me or others.

The part of your posts detrimental to the cattle/beef industry is just that part which is speculative at best, and laden with conspiratorial innuendo generally (such as your unproven "corrupt USDA, Tysons TRYING to drive cattle producers out of business, GWB promoting business corruption" and things like your supposed access to "closed door meetings", probable phone taps, etc. and general discouragement to consumers that beef is a safe product in this country with such wicked governance and business tycoons.......those do, IMO, seem not in the best interest of those of us making a living from the cattle/beef business....

MRJ

MRJ, the words conspiracy are only coming from your lips.

We do have a corrupt USDA. It is not just the regular beaurocratic mistep. Just look at their policies and their regulatory agencies. There is no accountability. Have you read the OIG report yet? It shows this to be a fact. The problem is that you are an idiot that believes nothing but what you want to hear regardless of the facts. The fact that there was no follow up investigation of JoAnn Waterfield means there will be no accountability and the actions of that regulatory agency will remain unaccountable. The complaints against big business will be swept under the rug yet again. The politicians will continue to take political donations that ensure a regulatory agency that will do nothing. You are an idiot for taking the stand you take of "everything is ok--everyone who wants to change the industry's problems is just a conspiracy nut". GWB is the "decider" and is accountable for the the executive branch's total incompetence in these areas. Keep worshipping incompetence because you are a bone fide idiot. It fits who you are.

Sometimes you have to call them like you see them.

You wouldn't stand up for a producer unless it was yourself.

I see you as one of the biggest pansies and idiots on this forum. It isn't because you don't know, it is because you don't want to know.

Keep telling yourself everything is right in this world and you will never be able to fix the things that are wrong--heck, you can't even recognize them when they are put right before your face unless the NCBA tells you. You and your kind are the arthur andersons of this world. You allow fraud to continue in your midst and you do nothing to stop it. You even get in the way of stopping it because you are an idiot.

How do you sleep at night?

Go read the OIG report instead of asking the NCBA about it.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Murgen, your first misconception is that USA producers can't produce enough to meet our needs. Thousands of acres of pasture around me have been planted to pine trees because the beef producers didn't receive financial incentives to continue to produce beef on those acres. During this same time, Canadian beef producers were expanding their production because USA packers were giving them the financial incentive to do so. The reason is simple math...it is cheaper to pay more for 3 million head than to pay more for 35 million head. The multi-national packers that control 80% of the beef market use imported supplies to make up the elasticity of their market which holds USA cattle prices in check. The lose of access to Canadian supplies timed with the impact of the USA Western Plains drought resulted in the record high USA cattle prices. With free trade and diversified supply options, the multi-nationals have a competitive advantage over any country's independent processors. Canadian beef is irrelevant because the majority of it is Tyson and Cargill beef...you have to get past this misconception to see the real problems facing all producers.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Well said, Robert Mac. The big problem is that by diversifying their supplies to world supplies, they will be able to push producers down in all areas, not just the U.S. The diversification into international supplies has risks regarding our food supply that are not calculated into the lowest price drive. Unfortunately we will not see the conseqences of these type of risks until it is too late. The politicians will lament the current woe but are lacking in governing ability to prevent it. It is management by disaster instead of prudent management to prevent disaster.

We (everyone) has to hold these politicians that govern by crisis accountable for the lack of governing ability to prevent it.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Murgen said:
Sandhusker, ever wonder how record prices were recorded with also record imports?

Yes, record demand. Take the demand out, which has already been happening, and see what happens.

Substitute increases in demand for beef with poultry instead of imported beef as has been happening and you can see why beef has been replaced with poultry. Hire (with checkoff money) a report on "Demand" to throw everyone off track to why beef is really losing in the competition game by blaming it all on more women working in the work force.

Agman still hasn't answered my questions to him on the checkoff funded "Demand Determinates" report. Perhaps it is a question he does not want answered.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ, today I was going to go back and take the idiot comment out of my post to you but after you wrote this, I think I will just let it stay in.

How is so much of what I post detrimental to the industry? The food safety and accountability part? The part about the USDA not running a proper regulatory agency? The part about the USDA not allowing competition?

Sometimes I wonder if you really think you can provide a good product without all the crutches the above questions suggest.


Econ, so typically for you to 'sort of' offer a back-handed, 'almost' apology for your mean spirited name calling, 'almost' retracting it, then deciding not to because of some self-perceived slight to you when you have been given a well deserved scolding by me or others.

The part of your posts detrimental to the cattle/beef industry is just that part which is speculative at best, and laden with conspiratorial innuendo generally (such as your unproven "corrupt USDA, Tysons TRYING to drive cattle producers out of business, GWB promoting business corruption" and things like your supposed access to "closed door meetings", probable phone taps, etc. and general discouragement to consumers that beef is a safe product in this country with such wicked governance and business tycoons.......those do, IMO, seem not in the best interest of those of us making a living from the cattle/beef business....

MRJ

MRJ, the words conspiracy are only coming from your lips.

We do have a corrupt USDA. It is not just the regular beaurocratic mistep. Just look at their policies and their regulatory agencies. There is no accountability. Have you read the OIG report yet? It shows this to be a fact. The problem is that you are an idiot that believes nothing but what you want to hear regardless of the facts. The fact that there was no follow up investigation of JoAnn Waterfield means there will be no accountability and the actions of that regulatory agency will remain unaccountable. The complaints against big business will be swept under the rug yet again. The politicians will continue to take political donations that ensure a regulatory agency that will do nothing. You are an idiot for taking the stand you take of "everything is ok--everyone who wants to change the industry's problems is just a conspiracy nut". GWB is the "decider" and is accountable for the the executive branch's total incompetence in these areas. Keep worshipping incompetence because you are a bone fide idiot. It fits who you are.

Sometimes you have to call them like you see them.

You wouldn't stand up for a producer unless it was yourself.

I see you as one of the biggest pansies and idiots on this forum. It isn't because you don't know, it is because you don't want to know.

Keep telling yourself everything is right in this world and you will never be able to fix the things that are wrong--heck, you can't even recognize them when they are put right before your face unless the NCBA tells you. You and your kind are the arthur andersons of this world. You allow fraud to continue in your midst and you do nothing to stop it. You even get in the way of stopping it because you are an idiot.

How do you sleep at night?

Go read the OIG report instead of asking the NCBA about it.

Econ, your vicious personal attacks on me indicates the
facts I post to counter your fallacies is getting to you!

Of course you do not say that you are posting conspiracies! Your words just drip with conspiracy theories when you speak of "corrupt USDA" as if there is nothing in that organization which is not dishonest. Your complaint of big business out to steal from or rip off both their suppliers and their customers grows tiresome with no validation.

Politicians take "political donations" in order to pay for campaigns. PAC groups and individuals donate such money to help elect Congressmen whom we believe will be good for our industry, rather than trying to tax or regulate us out of existence. Our "lobbyists" go to Congress to attempt to give sadly ill informed Congressmen and their staff people accurate information about our businesses. But you must turn it ALL into some conspiracy, though you can't admit to using the word. You DO imply such is the case with your little innuendoes and tid-bits about "closed door" informants giving you the scoop on "back room deals".

Yes, the political systems could be improved, with more transparency. Such as eliminate the ability of extremely wealthy people like George Soros, and many, many others at the state and national level to use obscene donations to their political front groups to prop up their favored candidates, and allow individuals who cannot fund such organizations the ability to spend what we want on candidates, all with transparency.

Talk about "pansies", you don't have the courage to admit to who you are. You are such a joke! Of course, it is typical of cowards to make their vicious personal attacks anonymously, isn't it?

BTW, what is happening to the cattle and Futures markets lately????


MRJ
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Econ, so typically for you to 'sort of' offer a back-handed, 'almost' apology for your mean spirited name calling, 'almost' retracting it, then deciding not to because of some self-perceived slight to you when you have been given a well deserved scolding by me or others.

The part of your posts detrimental to the cattle/beef industry is just that part which is speculative at best, and laden with conspiratorial innuendo generally (such as your unproven "corrupt USDA, Tysons TRYING to drive cattle producers out of business, GWB promoting business corruption" and things like your supposed access to "closed door meetings", probable phone taps, etc. and general discouragement to consumers that beef is a safe product in this country with such wicked governance and business tycoons.......those do, IMO, seem not in the best interest of those of us making a living from the cattle/beef business....

MRJ

MRJ, the words conspiracy are only coming from your lips.

We do have a corrupt USDA. It is not just the regular beaurocratic mistep. Just look at their policies and their regulatory agencies. There is no accountability. Have you read the OIG report yet? It shows this to be a fact. The problem is that you are an idiot that believes nothing but what you want to hear regardless of the facts. The fact that there was no follow up investigation of JoAnn Waterfield means there will be no accountability and the actions of that regulatory agency will remain unaccountable. The complaints against big business will be swept under the rug yet again. The politicians will continue to take political donations that ensure a regulatory agency that will do nothing. You are an idiot for taking the stand you take of "everything is ok--everyone who wants to change the industry's problems is just a conspiracy nut". GWB is the "decider" and is accountable for the the executive branch's total incompetence in these areas. Keep worshipping incompetence because you are a bone fide idiot. It fits who you are.

Sometimes you have to call them like you see them.

You wouldn't stand up for a producer unless it was yourself.

I see you as one of the biggest pansies and idiots on this forum. It isn't because you don't know, it is because you don't want to know.

Keep telling yourself everything is right in this world and you will never be able to fix the things that are wrong--heck, you can't even recognize them when they are put right before your face unless the NCBA tells you. You and your kind are the arthur andersons of this world. You allow fraud to continue in your midst and you do nothing to stop it. You even get in the way of stopping it because you are an idiot.

How do you sleep at night?

Go read the OIG report instead of asking the NCBA about it.

Econ, your vicious personal attacks on me indicates the
facts I post to counter your fallacies is getting to you!

Of course you do not say that you are posting conspiracies! Your words just drip with conspiracy theories when you speak of "corrupt USDA" as if there is nothing in that organization which is not dishonest. Your complaint of big business out to steal from or rip off both their suppliers and their customers grows tiresome with no validation.

Politicians take "political donations" in order to pay for campaigns. PAC groups and individuals donate such money to help elect Congressmen whom we believe will be good for our industry, rather than trying to tax or regulate us out of existence. Our "lobbyists" go to Congress to attempt to give sadly ill informed Congressmen and their staff people accurate information about our businesses. But you must turn it ALL into some conspiracy, though you can't admit to using the word. You DO imply such is the case with your little innuendoes and tid-bits about "closed door" informants giving you the scoop on "back room deals".

Yes, the political systems could be improved, with more transparency. Such as eliminate the ability of extremely wealthy people like George Soros, and many, many others at the state and national level to use obscene donations to their political front groups to prop up their favored candidates, and allow individuals who cannot fund such organizations the ability to spend what we want on candidates, all with transparency.

Talk about "pansies", you don't have the courage to admit to who you are. You are such a joke! Of course, it is typical of cowards to make their vicious personal attacks anonymously, isn't it?

BTW, what is happening to the cattle and Futures markets lately????


MRJ

MRJ, I don't mind if you disagree with me or what I post if you have a good reason and are honest. I do mind if you do not take seriously what is happening in this industry and continue to act like a mindless cheerleader.

Have you read the OIG report to know anything other than what your friends at NCBA tell you?

If you would just look at what is happening instead of cheering mindlessly, I wouldn't be so hard on you. You have a responsibility to think and make sure the NCBA is adequately representing producers and you just don't take that part seriously.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ, the words conspiracy are only coming from your lips.

We do have a corrupt USDA. It is not just the regular beaurocratic mistep. Just look at their policies and their regulatory agencies. There is no accountability. Have you read the OIG report yet? It shows this to be a fact. The problem is that you are an idiot that believes nothing but what you want to hear regardless of the facts. The fact that there was no follow up investigation of JoAnn Waterfield means there will be no accountability and the actions of that regulatory agency will remain unaccountable. The complaints against big business will be swept under the rug yet again. The politicians will continue to take political donations that ensure a regulatory agency that will do nothing. You are an idiot for taking the stand you take of "everything is ok--everyone who wants to change the industry's problems is just a conspiracy nut". GWB is the "decider" and is accountable for the the executive branch's total incompetence in these areas. Keep worshipping incompetence because you are a bone fide idiot. It fits who you are.

Sometimes you have to call them like you see them.

You wouldn't stand up for a producer unless it was yourself.

I see you as one of the biggest pansies and idiots on this forum. It isn't because you don't know, it is because you don't want to know.

Keep telling yourself everything is right in this world and you will never be able to fix the things that are wrong--heck, you can't even recognize them when they are put right before your face unless the NCBA tells you. You and your kind are the arthur andersons of this world. You allow fraud to continue in your midst and you do nothing to stop it. You even get in the way of stopping it because you are an idiot.

How do you sleep at night?

Go read the OIG report instead of asking the NCBA about it.

Econ, your vicious personal attacks on me indicates the
facts I post to counter your fallacies is getting to you!

Of course you do not say that you are posting conspiracies! Your words just drip with conspiracy theories when you speak of "corrupt USDA" as if there is nothing in that organization which is not dishonest. Your complaint of big business out to steal from or rip off both their suppliers and their customers grows tiresome with no validation.

Politicians take "political donations" in order to pay for campaigns. PAC groups and individuals donate such money to help elect Congressmen whom we believe will be good for our industry, rather than trying to tax or regulate us out of existence. Our "lobbyists" go to Congress to attempt to give sadly ill informed Congressmen and their staff people accurate information about our businesses. But you must turn it ALL into some conspiracy, though you can't admit to using the word. You DO imply such is the case with your little innuendoes and tid-bits about "closed door" informants giving you the scoop on "back room deals".

Yes, the political systems could be improved, with more transparency. Such as eliminate the ability of extremely wealthy people like George Soros, and many, many others at the state and national level to use obscene donations to their political front groups to prop up their favored candidates, and allow individuals who cannot fund such organizations the ability to spend what we want on candidates, all with transparency.

Talk about "pansies", you don't have the courage to admit to who you are. You are such a joke! Of course, it is typical of cowards to make their vicious personal attacks anonymously, isn't it?

BTW, what is happening to the cattle and Futures markets lately????


MRJ

MRJ, I don't mind if you disagree with me or what I post if you have a good reason and are honest. I do mind if you do not take seriously what is happening in this industry and continue to act like a mindless cheerleader.

Have you read the OIG report to know anything other than what your friends at NCBA tell you?

If you would just look at what is happening instead of cheering mindlessly, I wouldn't be so hard on you. You have a responsibility to think and make sure the NCBA is adequately representing producers and you just don't take that part seriously.

Econ, it is very apparent that what you really are disagreeing with is that the MANY cattle PRODUCERS who run NCBA do not buy into your take on the industry and politics in general.

Most members of NCBA do take serious interest in assuring that those we elect to represent us in leadership are doing the job we expect of them. If that fact does not win your approval, I'm sure we can live without it.

What makes you so sure that my "friends" at NCBA are "telling" me anything? They are not, other than answering me accurately when I have questions about policy and/or checkoff projects.

It is disgusting that you are not honest enough to recognize my right to my own opinions and analysis of the cattle industry and the political scene and to stop calling me "dishonest" and a "cheerleader" because you do not agree with me.

MRJ
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
MRJ, are the " MANY cattle PRODUCERS who run NCBA" concerned that the OIG says the government agency that is in charge of monitoring unfair competitive practices within our industry simply wasn't doing their job??????
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ:
Econ, it is very apparent that what you really are disagreeing with is that the MANY cattle PRODUCERS who run NCBA do not buy into your take on the industry and politics in general.

Most members of NCBA do take serious interest in assuring that those we elect to represent us in leadership are doing the job we expect of them. If that fact does not win your approval, I'm sure we can live without it.

What makes you so sure that my "friends" at NCBA are "telling" me anything? They are not, other than answering me accurately when I have questions about policy and/or checkoff projects.

It is disgusting that you are not honest enough to recognize my right to my own opinions and analysis of the cattle industry and the political scene and to stop calling me "dishonest" and a "cheerleader" because you do not agree with me.

MRJ

MRJ, when the NCBA hides its head in the sand when it comes to the frauds uncovered by the OIG report on GIPSA and you blindly support the NCBA's "do nothing" stance, you are part of the problem in this industry.

You are like an arthur anderson accountant that knows or has been told something is very wrong and yet you do nothing about it. You even scold people who are trying to do something about it.

You probably believe the Enron failure was caused by a "run on the bank" as the defense claimed.

You are an idiot who can not see what is put right in front of your face in your blind support of the NCBA and their do nothing policy on fraud to producers. The fraud they are doing to producers is hurting the price of beef.

The inability of the USDA to adequately enforce food safety measures has hurt domestic producer's ability to ship to Japan and much of the orient. It has cost a lot of money and has increased the risk of bse in the USA. Why don't you tell flounder or reader there is no problem with bse in the USA? Would you do the same if it was about breast cancer and it could be prevented?

You are the worst kind of person to have in any leadership position when it comes to figuring these things out because you can not think!!!! You are a blind follower and you are following based on tribalism instead of ideology. The reason it isn't ideology is because you can't put yourself out far enough to know what the ideology is and why it is. You continually revert to the NCBA tribal dogma.

I know there are a lot of good people in the NCBA. There are a lot of people in the NCBA that are there for the tribal aspects instead of the reason the NCBA exists. The decisions at the leadership level at the NCBA are very, very, poor and they are hurting a lot of people and are not solving any of the problems the producers face when it comes to the processors. You can't even do a little research to find out if the NCBA is telling the truth. Go read the OIG report!!! No one can make you any smarter but yourself.

Many of the "many" cattle producers are supporting a new upstart even though the NCBA has a long, long history with its respective organizations that make it up. You should get a clue as to why.

I gave you the example of a family that had a problem with incest in it. How does a mother in that family handle the situation? What if it means she loses her ability to have an income to put a roof over her head? What does it mean to an uncle that allows it because he is a cripple and has to have the support What does it mean to a brother or sister who has a sibling that is being abused?

I equate you with a sibling that does not have the capacity to know that what is happening is wrong.

Should you support republicans that do not act like republicans? How about preachers who are hypocrits? How about family members who are involved in incest?

Think about it.



I don't enjoy calling you an idiot. I think you are smarter than that but are just a little lazy except when it comes to supporting your "club".
 

mrj

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
MRJ:
Econ, it is very apparent that what you really are disagreeing with is that the MANY cattle PRODUCERS who run NCBA do not buy into your take on the industry and politics in general.

Most members of NCBA do take serious interest in assuring that those we elect to represent us in leadership are doing the job we expect of them. If that fact does not win your approval, I'm sure we can live without it.

What makes you so sure that my "friends" at NCBA are "telling" me anything? They are not, other than answering me accurately when I have questions about policy and/or checkoff projects.

It is disgusting that you are not honest enough to recognize my right to my own opinions and analysis of the cattle industry and the political scene and to stop calling me "dishonest" and a "cheerleader" because you do not agree with me.

MRJ

MRJ, when the NCBA hides its head in the sand when it comes to the frauds uncovered by the OIG report on GIPSA and you blindly support the NCBA's "do nothing" stance, you are part of the problem in this industry.

You are like an arthur anderson accountant that knows or has been told something is very wrong and yet you do nothing about it. You even scold people who are trying to do something about it.

You probably believe the Enron failure was caused by a "run on the bank" as the defense claimed.

You are an idiot who can not see what is put right in front of your face in your blind support of the NCBA and their do nothing policy on fraud to producers. The fraud they are doing to producers is hurting the price of beef.

The inability of the USDA to adequately enforce food safety measures has hurt domestic producer's ability to ship to Japan and much of the orient. It has cost a lot of money and has increased the risk of bse in the USA. Why don't you tell flounder or reader there is no problem with bse in the USA? Would you do the same if it was about breast cancer and it could be prevented?

You are the worst kind of person to have in any leadership position when it comes to figuring these things out because you can not think!!!! You are a blind follower and you are following based on tribalism instead of ideology. The reason it isn't ideology is because you can't put yourself out far enough to know what the ideology is and why it is. You continually revert to the NCBA tribal dogma.

I know there are a lot of good people in the NCBA. There are a lot of people in the NCBA that are there for the tribal aspects instead of the reason the NCBA exists. The decisions at the leadership level at the NCBA are very, very, poor and they are hurting a lot of people and are not solving any of the problems the producers face when it comes to the processors. You can't even do a little research to find out if the NCBA is telling the truth. Go read the OIG report!!! No one can make you any smarter but yourself.

Many of the "many" cattle producers are supporting a new upstart even though the NCBA has a long, long history with its respective organizations that make it up. You should get a clue as to why.

I gave you the example of a family that had a problem with incest in it. How does a mother in that family handle the situation? What if it means she loses her ability to have an income to put a roof over her head? What does it mean to an uncle that allows it because he is a cripple and has to have the support What does it mean to a brother or sister who has a sibling that is being abused?

I equate you with a sibling that does not have the capacity to know that what is happening is wrong.

Should you support republicans that do not act like republicans? How about preachers who are hypocrits? How about family members who are involved in incest?

Think about it.



I don't enjoy calling you an idiot. I think you are smarter than that but are just a little lazy except when it comes to supporting your "club".


Econ, until you have the courage and honesty to reveal your identity, thus enabling us to better determine your biases and agenda, your claims and charges are simply not believeable.

You claim USDA does not enforce food safety, yet incidences of food borne illnesses continue to drop, due in no small part to efforts of Beef Checkoff leaders working with those packers and retailers, all groups you routinely bad mouth. BTW, since you bring it up, breast cancer is really the least of my worries. Just as in food safety, there have been major improvements, and the PEOPLE with the possiblity of the malady MUST continue be more diligent in getting necessary tests and timely treatment in order to continue the improvement in lives saved. There are more devastating forms of cancer that need our money and support even more than does breast cancer, IMO.

You continue to reveal the vile nature of your own character with your innuendoes and examples of incestuous families and assignment to me and others, of the character flaws necessary to cause us to do nothing about such gross abuses. Nothing you say could be much further from the facts, BTW.

I will continue to support conservative people running for elective office, regardless of party affiliation. You may someday be very surprised who the "bad guys" and the "good guys" actually turn out to be on the current political scene. Very similar, I believe, to what a dear honorable, but crusty citizen told a 'holier than thou' type of pastor in the community during some sort of "your brand of christianity is not as good as mine" hassle years ago: "WHICHEVER place you go when you die, you will be surprised to see who got there ahead of you"!

MRJ
 

ranch hand

Well-known member
There are more devastating forms of cancer that need our money and support even more than does breast cancer, IMO.

Did you learn this attitude from NCBA? Breast Cancer kills, have you ever seen someone die from it? They die the same way the other cancers do. It spreads to the whole body before it kills. Don't you think the people that die from it deserve as much help as others that have cancer? I am applaud at you for even thinking this. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ:
Econ, it is very apparent that what you really are disagreeing with is that the MANY cattle PRODUCERS who run NCBA do not buy into your take on the industry and politics in general.

Most members of NCBA do take serious interest in assuring that those we elect to represent us in leadership are doing the job we expect of them. If that fact does not win your approval, I'm sure we can live without it.

What makes you so sure that my "friends" at NCBA are "telling" me anything? They are not, other than answering me accurately when I have questions about policy and/or checkoff projects.

It is disgusting that you are not honest enough to recognize my right to my own opinions and analysis of the cattle industry and the political scene and to stop calling me "dishonest" and a "cheerleader" because you do not agree with me.

MRJ

MRJ, when the NCBA hides its head in the sand when it comes to the frauds uncovered by the OIG report on GIPSA and you blindly support the NCBA's "do nothing" stance, you are part of the problem in this industry.

You are like an arthur anderson accountant that knows or has been told something is very wrong and yet you do nothing about it. You even scold people who are trying to do something about it.

You probably believe the Enron failure was caused by a "run on the bank" as the defense claimed.

You are an idiot who can not see what is put right in front of your face in your blind support of the NCBA and their do nothing policy on fraud to producers. The fraud they are doing to producers is hurting the price of beef.

The inability of the USDA to adequately enforce food safety measures has hurt domestic producer's ability to ship to Japan and much of the orient. It has cost a lot of money and has increased the risk of bse in the USA. Why don't you tell flounder or reader there is no problem with bse in the USA? Would you do the same if it was about breast cancer and it could be prevented?

You are the worst kind of person to have in any leadership position when it comes to figuring these things out because you can not think!!!! You are a blind follower and you are following based on tribalism instead of ideology. The reason it isn't ideology is because you can't put yourself out far enough to know what the ideology is and why it is. You continually revert to the NCBA tribal dogma.

I know there are a lot of good people in the NCBA. There are a lot of people in the NCBA that are there for the tribal aspects instead of the reason the NCBA exists. The decisions at the leadership level at the NCBA are very, very, poor and they are hurting a lot of people and are not solving any of the problems the producers face when it comes to the processors. You can't even do a little research to find out if the NCBA is telling the truth. Go read the OIG report!!! No one can make you any smarter but yourself.

Many of the "many" cattle producers are supporting a new upstart even though the NCBA has a long, long history with its respective organizations that make it up. You should get a clue as to why.

I gave you the example of a family that had a problem with incest in it. How does a mother in that family handle the situation? What if it means she loses her ability to have an income to put a roof over her head? What does it mean to an uncle that allows it because he is a cripple and has to have the support What does it mean to a brother or sister who has a sibling that is being abused?

I equate you with a sibling that does not have the capacity to know that what is happening is wrong.

Should you support republicans that do not act like republicans? How about preachers who are hypocrits? How about family members who are involved in incest?

Think about it.



I don't enjoy calling you an idiot. I think you are smarter than that but are just a little lazy except when it comes to supporting your "club".


Econ, until you have the courage and honesty to reveal your identity, thus enabling us to better determine your biases and agenda, your claims and charges are simply not believeable.

You claim USDA does not enforce food safety, yet incidences of food borne illnesses continue to drop, due in no small part to efforts of Beef Checkoff leaders working with those packers and retailers, all groups you routinely bad mouth. BTW, since you bring it up, breast cancer is really the least of my worries. Just as in food safety, there have been major improvements, and the PEOPLE with the possiblity of the malady MUST continue be more diligent in getting necessary tests and timely treatment in order to continue the improvement in lives saved. There are more devastating forms of cancer that need our money and support even more than does breast cancer, IMO.

You continue to reveal the vile nature of your own character with your innuendoes and examples of incestuous families and assignment to me and others, of the character flaws necessary to cause us to do nothing about such gross abuses. Nothing you say could be much further from the facts, BTW.

I will continue to support conservative people running for elective office, regardless of party affiliation. You may someday be very surprised who the "bad guys" and the "good guys" actually turn out to be on the current political scene. Very similar, I believe, to what a dear honorable, but crusty citizen told a 'holier than thou' type of pastor in the community during some sort of "your brand of christianity is not as good as mine" hassle years ago: "WHICHEVER place you go when you die, you will be surprised to see who got there ahead of you"!

MRJ

So MRJ, have you read the OIG report yet and are you willing let the NCBA off the hook for promoting the actions that get the corrections or are you happy with the NCBA representing only the packers, of whom the complaints are against?

You must step up to the plate on this question or all your stuff is just nonsense.

Unlike you, I judge the character of a person on their actions, not on the stereotype that people want to put people in. The problem with your arguments on my identity do just the opposite. You seem to have some overwhelming desire to catagorize me or anyone else instead of looking at what they are saying.

If you don't get the anology, which is just one of tribalism over facts, you will never "get it". You will remain tribal, clannish, and unable to discern what direction leaders are pushing you. If you want to get out of the tribalism, do it. Otherwise don't post back to the points I bring up. I am not interested in why you think the NCBA is this or that, I am interested in discussing the policy decisions and if they are in the best interest of the producers. If you can not do that, then please don't answer back. All you seem to be able to do is defend the actions of NCBA management against the grassroots will of the memebers. The analogy fits you perfect. I am not calling you incestuous, I am saying that you put your tribe mentality over the issues that affect the tribe or are in the best interest of the tribe.

I don't have any pretensions about who I will or will not meet in heaven if by grace I get in. I often remind myself that my worst enemy may there before me. The decision of who gets in or does not is for someone who can read hearts, not mortals, no matter what the outward actions may be and as negative as they may be to me personally. Everyone must answer for themselves and I have no pretensions in that respect. That argument still does not persuade me from arguing against actions I do not think are correct.

On the food born illness, it is probably much like the bse problem. Because those in charge of ensuring its application are hamstrung by politics instead of the truth, we may never know the true answer as to the degree of food borne illness. For you to speak of such is just an opinion based on an unchecked and faulty system of accountability. The sad thing is that you do not even realize this to be the case.

Take food recalls as an indicator of success in this matter. How much as a percent are food recalls actually carried out and recalled and make it back to the manufactorer in beef? When you get that number, you will have a pretty good guess as to how accurate our food born illness numbers are. Stop fooling yourself with your unproven suppositions of food safety. It is just a bunch of made up numbers.

Since you have a hard time finding the time to research these things, here is a 10 second (beefman, here is another number for you to calculate) google research on the topic:

Source: Ohio State University

Posted: April 30, 2004


Yahoo: Save to My Web

del.icio.us: Save This Page
Only Half Of Recalled Meat And Poultry Is Recovered, Study Finds

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Only about half the meat and poultry recalled in the United States because of suspected health hazards between 1998 and 2002 was actually recovered by the manufacturers, according to a new study.
Ads by Google
Advertise on this site
Meat Grinders
Choose From Variety of Quality Electrical & Hand Operated Grinders
www.sausagemaker.com/
Knecht
sharpening and polishing machines plates, knives for meat machines
www.fdoinc.ca
Free Ringtones
Get a Free Ringtone For your Cell Phone now!
www.blinko.com
Natural Smoked Dog Bones
Processed in an Official Certified USDA Inspected Facility. Low Price
www.digitpet.com
Meat Cutting Supply
Kasco quality meat cutting blades, grinder plates, knives & equipment.
kascocorp.com

This and other results suggest new federal food safety regulations that took effect in the late 1990s have not done enough to ensure the safety of our food supply, said Neal Hooker, co-author of the study and assistant professor of agricultural, environmental and development economics at Ohio State University.

"I was hoping that with the new regulations we would have higher recovery rates, but that hasn't happened," Hooker said. "Manufacturers should have a better success rate, but they don't."

The new regulations have had some success -- there has been a large increase in the number of recalls and the size of those recalls.

"The food supply is probably safer, but only because recalls are triggered more often and more quickly, not because plants are preventing problems before they occur," he said. But the bigger, faster recalls are also due to more sensitive, more rapid tests developed in recent years.

Hooker conducted the study with graduate student Ratapol Teratanavat. Their results appear in the April issue of the journal Food Control.

The new regulations, called the Pathogen Reduction (PR)/Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) program, went into effect in 1998 at large plants (those with 500 or more employees); in 1999 at small plants (with 10 to 500 employees); and in 2000 at very small plants (with less than 10 employees). The program was designed to encourage meat-plant managers to examine their operations, identify the "critical control points" where risks to the food might occur, and put safety precautions in place to prevent potential hazards.

The system also requires detailed records to be kept about production and distribution, said Hooker, who also is a researcher with the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center. And that's where it seems to have had the most effect.

Hooker and Teratanavat collected recall information from the federal Food Safety and Inspection Service and other sources, using the Freedom of Information Act in some cases to gather data. They compared information about the class of the recalls (from Class I, the most serious, to Class III), as well as the type of hazard -- biological, physical or chemical. They also considered whether the product came from a large, small or very small plant.

They found that during this five-year period, 74 percent of the recalls were classified as Class I, the most serious threat to human health. That didn't change after the new rules went into effect, Hooker said. Additionally, 57 percent of the recalls resulted from some form of bacterial problem, such as Escheria coli or Listeria monocytogenes contamination. Physical hazards, in which a foreign object is found in a food product, accounted for only 16 percent of the recalls.

"I was hoping we would see that the more hazardous cases -- Class I recalls that are microbiological in nature -- would be more quickly acted upon and have higher recovery rates," Hooker said. "But the answer was no."

The number of large plants recalling products has been relatively stable over the years, with fewer than 20 cases per year. But recalls from small plants has increased from 29 or less between 1994 and 1999 to 38 to 49 in 2000-2002. Likewise, recalls from very small plants jumped from seven or less before 1999 to 17 to 26 per year from 1999-2002.

Surprisingly, although the number and size of recalls have increased, Hooker said, their success rate in collecting product has not. On average, only about half of products that are recalled are actually recovered from the market, and few clear patterns emerged on whether the rate of recovery increased or decreased during the period studied.

"The smallest plants seem to do the best job," Hooker said. "I think it's because they have simpler distribution systems and know their customers better, and will accept more product than was actually included in a recall just for good customer relations."

Hooker hopes policy-makers can use the study in examining current food safety laws. Last year, the National Academy of Sciences recommended more stringent regulations when it comes to recalls, allowing the government to more easily require a company to recall a food product.

"Right now, the USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) just asks a company if it made contact with retail outlets which distributed a product," Hooker said. "There's very little follow-up. If a product is already in the grocery stores and the stores don't put up big signs about the potential hazard, people might not get the message."

But simply allowing the USDA to initiate a recall doesn't go far enough, Hooker said.

"The success of recalls can get very complex. Our research says timing matters. A recall has to be managed in a proper way to get product out of the marketplace. And if we ever have a major bioterrorism threat linked to the food supply, we should have the system in place that would create the sense of urgency to prevent problems. You want to be able to move very, very quickly, and that should be in the regulations."

And to think, the packer wing of the NCBA wants food id to be a priority when they don't have the kinks workded out in their own systems from processing to plate. They are asking many seperate farmers/ranchers to be better on animal ID than their less than 50% success rate in recalls.
 

Latest posts

Top