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

Finally, a politician with gonads

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Sandbag: "And a summary of all your posts; "BACK DA PACKAH" for everything."

What you call "packer backing" is actually "FACT BACKING". Whether you like it or not, this country's legal system is based on the "PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENSE". There are not exceptions for large evil corporations because whiny thumbsucking corporate blamers are envious of their success. Either you can back your packer allegations or you can't. If R-CULT's lack of success in the court room is any indication, you can't back your allegations.

You're playing for a losing team Sandbag. Nobody has ever blamed or regulated their way to prosperity.


~SH~
 
"Fact backing"? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm pretty sure that whatever you're smoking will sell for high dollar in the cities. 8) You could be a rich man.
 
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "And a summary of all your posts; "BACK DA PACKAH" for everything."

What you call "packer backing" is actually "FACT BACKING". Whether you like it or not, this country's legal system is based on the "PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENSE". There are not exceptions for large evil corporations because whiny thumbsucking corporate blamers are envious of their success. Either you can back your packer allegations or you can't. If R-CULT's lack of success in the court room is any indication, you can't back your allegations.

You're playing for a losing team Sandbag. Nobody has ever blamed or regulated their way to prosperity.


~SH~

You're playing for a losing team Sandbag. Nobody has ever blamed or regulated their way to prosperity.

But the lack of it was the downfall of Enron, Worldcom, Arthur Anderson, the Ca. energy crisis, ................. And it will be the downfall of those who do not heed its lessons.
 
the chief said:
A state senator has fired off a letter to the CEO of Tyson Foods asking
the company to give a little something back after its decision to leave
Norfolk on a moment's notice: $2 million.

"We've made a lot of changes to try and accommodate our new citizens,"
said Sen. Mike Flood of Norfolk, who sent the letter directly to John
Tyson, CEO of Tyson Foods.

The company cut 1,300 jobs when it closed the Norfolk meat-processing
plant last month. Another 365 jobs were lost in West Point, outside
Flood's legislative district, when Tyson closed a slaughterhouse.

"Tyson asked for a lot of incentives to come to town, and I'm just
asking them to continue providing services now that they've left
,"
Flood said.

Like others in the city of about 24,000, Flood's anger over Tyson's
decision is exacerbated by how the company handled it. Flood said he
got a phone call at 7:58 a.m. the day Tyson announced its decision.

Two minutes later, the company made it public. And two days later, it
was stripping the Norfolk plant.


Flood believes Tyson should pay to ease the expected budget crunch on
groups that created new services to meet the needs of Tyson employees,
many of which are new immigrants. The groups must continue providing
the services even after the company has left, Flood says.

"The City of Norfolk and Madison County have made significant changes
in the way they do business following your company's decision to locate
in Norfolk," Flood says in the letter.

"Our schools have developed programs for English language learners, our
health care system has implemented programming to serve Latino, Somali
and Sudanese communities and our law enforcement has implemented
changes to provide high quality public safety services."

About $900,000 of Flood's $2 million request is tied specifically to a
health care clinic created in large part to cater to Tyson employees.
Another $450,000 is for a new center that helps immigrants obtain basic
services, and $210,000 is for the United Way.

The figures represent estimated budget losses for the groups over the
next three years. Flood is also asking for $500,000 to help the area
with economic development and marketing.

Flood's letter may be a first for the company.

"I've worked here about 15 years," Tyson spokesman Archie Schaffer III
said. "During that time period, I'm just guessing, we've closed less
than 10 plants. As far as I know this is the first request like this
I've received."

"I am not prepared to respond substantively to Senator Flood. We
received the letter this morning. It is something I'll discuss with
senior management."

Schaffer said Tyson is "very mindful" of the impact its decision had on
Norfolk and West Point.

The company's departure thus far hasn't caused a mass exodus of former
Tyson employees out of Norfolk, Flood said.

The company's intentions for the building remain unclear. The Norfolk
plant isn't up for sale, Flood said, and Tyson officials have refused
to discuss their plans for it.

"Nobody knows what they're doing," Flood said.

Schaffer said the company has not decided what to do with that plant or
the West Point facility.
The flip side to this

The company said the efficiencies at its Dakota City plant and other factors will help Tyson save $40 million, some of which will be in the latter portion of the current fiscal year.


The company said 1,300 workers at Norfolk would lose their jobs Friday, the last day of production there. At West Point, production ended Wednesday, putting 365 people out of work. A warehouse at the Norfolk plant will operate for another month.


Tyson said it will pay workers at both plants and will provide benefits for 60 days. The company said it will try to retain some of the workers by having them move to Dakota City or Lexington, Neb., or Emporia, Kan.


"We regret the disruption the closings will cause our team members and these two outstanding plant communities, which both have a long history in the meatpacking industry," Tyson Chairman and Chief Executive John Tyson said. "We've worked hard over the past year to try to keep these plants open and I appreciate everyone's efforts. However, we've concluded we can operate more efficiently by permanently consolidating operations."

They may have closed the door but it doesn't look as if they kicked the employees to the curb to live off the town They are giving them 60 days to find other work and are retaining some to work in other plants.

This Senator makes it sound as if the community didn't see any beneifit for the incentive they paid Tyson but as MRJ mentioned look at the activity and tax funds from the add activity. The problem with incentives there is always a risk the venture will not be profitable. This Senator is trying to set a precedent that any company that takes incentives had better make sure they never close their door because of economic losses as they will be expected to pay the community back. Tyson took the risk of running the plant and lost. The Community took the risk of offering the incentives and lost. And by making Tyson pay he is taking the responiblity of the community leader's decision off of them.
 
MRJ said:
So.....do you anti-big business guys believe it is better or worse for a community to have a company come in that provides hundreds of jobs, some to area people, and some "imported" workers?

Speaking as a resident of a community where a 1400 person job landed in town and then left 3 years later, I'd prefer that it never had landed here. Stores in town expanded to meet the additional needs of the new immigrants and new stores opened up to add new services. When the jobs left, the new stores closed down as the old economic base couldn't support them, and even a couple of the existing stores that had expanded had to shut down because our small town could no longer support them.

In our case, the government did step in with some economic development dollars that helped ease the transition, but all in all, we were left with less than we started with.

Rod
 
Tam, "This Senator makes it sound as if the community didn't see any beneifit for the incentive they paid Tyson but as MRJ mentioned look at the activity and tax funds from the add activity. The problem with incentives there is always a risk the venture will not be profitable. This Senator is trying to set a precedent that any company that takes incentives had better make sure they never close their door because of economic losses as they will be expected to pay the community back. Tyson took the risk of running the plant and lost. The Community took the risk of offering the incentives and lost. And by making Tyson pay he is taking the responiblity of the community leader's decision off of them."

You say there is a risk the venture won't be profitable. How much was Tyson losing at this plant, Tam.

What risk does Tyson face compared to the community? Tyson just walked away. How risky is having that option? Look at the communities risk. Did you notice where the county completely changed the way they did business for Tyson? Do you have any idea what that entails?

Again, you take the packer's side.
 
Sandhusker said:
Tam, "This Senator makes it sound as if the community didn't see any beneifit for the incentive they paid Tyson but as MRJ mentioned look at the activity and tax funds from the add activity. The problem with incentives there is always a risk the venture will not be profitable. This Senator is trying to set a precedent that any company that takes incentives had better make sure they never close their door because of economic losses as they will be expected to pay the community back. Tyson took the risk of running the plant and lost. The Community took the risk of offering the incentives and lost. And by making Tyson pay he is taking the responiblity of the community leader's decision off of them."

You say there is a risk the venture won't be profitable. How much was Tyson losing at this plant, Tam.

What risk does Tyson face compared to the community? Tyson just walked away. How risky is having that option? Look at the communities risk. Did you notice where the county completely changed the way they did business for Tyson? Do you have any idea what that entails?

Again, you take the packer's side.
I don't know I haven't looked at the Tyson Books but they have said they tried to keep the plants open for over a Year and decided it would be better for them to consolidate. Would you rather they kept all plants open and lost money in all of them would that make you happy. As far as the Risk that is something the City Councils in those cities should have looked at not just the beneifit of having Tyson come to town. And again you blame the packers but where were you when it was R-CALF causing the closures?
 
Tam said:
Sandhusker said:
Tam, "This Senator makes it sound as if the community didn't see any beneifit for the incentive they paid Tyson but as MRJ mentioned look at the activity and tax funds from the add activity. The problem with incentives there is always a risk the venture will not be profitable. This Senator is trying to set a precedent that any company that takes incentives had better make sure they never close their door because of economic losses as they will be expected to pay the community back. Tyson took the risk of running the plant and lost. The Community took the risk of offering the incentives and lost. And by making Tyson pay he is taking the responiblity of the community leader's decision off of them."

You say there is a risk the venture won't be profitable. How much was Tyson losing at this plant, Tam.

What risk does Tyson face compared to the community? Tyson just walked away. How risky is having that option? Look at the communities risk. Did you notice where the county completely changed the way they did business for Tyson? Do you have any idea what that entails?

Again, you take the packer's side.
I don't know I haven't looked at the Tyson Books but they have said they tried to keep the plants open for over a Year and decided it would be better for them to consolidate. Would you rather they kept all plants open and lost money in all of them would that make you happy. As far as the Risk that is something the City Councils in those cities should have looked at not just the beneifit of having Tyson come to town. And again you blame the packers but where were you when it was R-CALF causing the closures?

Like Rod tried to get thru SH's thick skull, consolidation doesn't mean the plants weren't profitable.

Your notion that R-CALF caused closures is rediculous. The USDA closed the borders, as was their policy (and the same dang policy your government has as well). Tyson made a decison to close the doors, R-CALF was trying to get the government to do their job and follow their own stated policy. Figure it out, Tam.
 
Sandhusker said:
Tam said:
Sandhusker said:
Tam, "This Senator makes it sound as if the community didn't see any beneifit for the incentive they paid Tyson but as MRJ mentioned look at the activity and tax funds from the add activity. The problem with incentives there is always a risk the venture will not be profitable. This Senator is trying to set a precedent that any company that takes incentives had better make sure they never close their door because of economic losses as they will be expected to pay the community back. Tyson took the risk of running the plant and lost. The Community took the risk of offering the incentives and lost. And by making Tyson pay he is taking the responiblity of the community leader's decision off of them."

You say there is a risk the venture won't be profitable. How much was Tyson losing at this plant, Tam.

What risk does Tyson face compared to the community? Tyson just walked away. How risky is having that option? Look at the communities risk. Did you notice where the county completely changed the way they did business for Tyson? Do you have any idea what that entails?

Again, you take the packer's side.
I don't know I haven't looked at the Tyson Books but they have said they tried to keep the plants open for over a Year and decided it would be better for them to consolidate. Would you rather they kept all plants open and lost money in all of them would that make you happy. As far as the Risk that is something the City Councils in those cities should have looked at not just the beneifit of having Tyson come to town. And again you blame the packers but where were you when it was R-CALF causing the closures?

Like Rod tried to get thru SH's thick skull, consolidation doesn't mean the plants weren't profitable.

Your notion that R-CALF caused closures is rediculous. The USDA closed the borders, as was their policy (and the same dang policy your government has as well). Tyson made a decison to close the doors, R-CALF was trying to get the government to do their job and follow their own stated policy. Figure it out, Tam.
Where was your concern when the R-CALF injunction caused the plants to close?
 

Latest posts

Top