Is it time to double the checkoff?

[Anonymous]

Econ.: "Maybe you should have gone to church more. If you can't say anything nice......."

Maybe you should have gone to church more to learn the consequences of lying and spreading misinformation. There is no doubt that I have a low tolerance for liars and deceivers such as yourself and that intolerance is reflected in my posts. If you don't like my posts, don't read them. This isn't your site and I doubt a self righteous hypocrite like you will change my level of intolerance for lies and deception. Spare me your self-righteousness when you come on this site and lie about market manipulation and things about this industry you don't even understand. Don't comment about a sliver in someone's eye when you have a log in your own.

I don't care about your "I trapped myself" logo. It's the truth. I should have never fallen for the parasite's little games of forcing others to prove that they didn't lie. Leave it there. It's a good reminder for me not to fall for the parasite's lying games.

Econ.: "SH, if there was a terrorism act (or a strike or something else) and it took out 25% of the capacity of packing plants in the U.S., would the cash price still follow boxed beef prices?"

Eventually, yes!

WHAT'S YOUR POINT??????

For the most part, unrealistic hypotheticals are a complete waste of time.


~SH~

 

[RobertMac]

RobertMac, why do you believe there is not accountability in the Beef Checkoff? Detail please!

MRJ

Periodic votes on the checkoff and votes on the people that run it. It probably won't make a lot of difference except in the perception of producers.

 

[HAY MAKER]

AP reports that Monte Reese (Checkoff chief operating officer) claims we wrongly "confuse NCBA's checkoff role with its more political, policy related role, even though they're completely separate"... That's like claiming Dr Jekyll shouldn't be confused with Mr Hyde... If you were to take Dr Jekyll out to dinner, you would also be feeding Mr Hyde...

 

[Anonymous]

Whose thought is that Hayseed? You didn't come up with that. Still claiming other's quotes as your own huh? Try coming up with something original for once.


~SH~

 

[HAY MAKER]

Whose thought is that Hayseed? You didn't come up with that. Still claiming other's quotes as your own huh? Try coming up with something original for once.


~SH~

Give it a rest,you perverted nit wit......................good luck

 

[Anonymous]

Answer the question Hayseed. Whose quote is that?

It's definitely not Wes Ishmael's. Who did you quote this time? Sounds like something Mike Callicrate would say.



~SH~

 

[Tam]

Tam, I apologize...I see I was wrong. But one thing I will say for Randy's position is that, unlike local governments giving tax breaks to industries, the tax break(the $1.00 checkoff on all cattle) of Big C's plan would be voted on by the people paying the tax. Interesting idea!

Thank you for the apology. I have to ask you Robertmac if two groups come to you and asked you to invest in their plants, you looked at the Business plans and saw that the first group had a strong plan that was very well thought out and a good chance of competeing, looks like a great investment, but then you looked at the second groups IDEA that has no business plan designed yet and their only plan was to have the Checkoff levied on all cattle sold in your country pay for the plant, Would you invest in the plant that had the great business plan knowing it would have to compete with a Plant that isn't responsible for its own debt? I asked our banker this question and I bet you can guess what the answer was. No we would not invest Bank money in a plant that was going to have to compete with another plant with that kind of advantage. I have to wonder just how many good business plans were trashed because of Big C's IDEA. :shock:

 

[Tam]

This paydown of the loan from the side would be the advantage that BIG C would have over investor funded plants in that profits would not go towards loan payment or returns to investors until the plant was paid down. Your honey Tam might see this as some unfair advantage over her plant, but I see it as a well thought out business idea. Like I said before, the competition that will squash your plant will not come from BIG C who are also considering export to countries other than the USA as their top priority.

Now the Statement about Your Honey Tam is the main reason BMR and I didn't want most of you to know we even knew each other . :roll:

That aside Randy if you have the advantage over investor funded plants how is that not putting those other plants at an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE? And If you are competeing with all plants for the cattle with your Checkoff funded advantage how in the he** can you say it will not be the competition you create that will be running the other packers out of the business. :roll: Randy answer this if you didn't have the advantage of having your loans paid down for you could you compete on a level playing field or would you be another poorly thought out business IDEA gone bad? :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

I don't know about up there, but down here in the US, the government has been funding and subsidizing businesses for a long time. They bailed Chrysler out of bankruptcy - you could certainly say that gave them an advantage over GM & Ford. They bailed Farm Credit out - you could say that gave them an advantage over all the other ag lenders. Recently, they even pulled "eminent domain" out of their hat to swipe private land for a for-profit business.

All you have to do is say, "economic development" and you'll get a package of goodies that give you an advantage.

 

[Tam]

I don't know about up there, but down here in the US, the government has been funding and subsidizing businesses for a long time. They bailed Chrysler out of bankruptcy - you could certainly say that gave them an advantage over GM & Ford. They bailed Farm Credit out - you could say that gave them an advantage over all the other ag lenders. Recently, they even pulled "eminent domain" out of their hat to swipe private land for a for-profit business.

All you have to do is say, "economic development" and you'll get a package of goodies that give you an advantage.

That may be true but here you are acting as if this is just fine if Big C gets funds from somewhere other than the Plant profits that would give them a large Advantage over the competitors. Got a question for you Sandhusker How long will it take R-CALF to jump on the idea of Big C (a producer owner plant) is being subsidies as a reason to stop boxed beef from entering the US, because of the unfair advantage the Checkoff money gives them to sell cheaper meat? How long will it take them to get a tarff tacked to our boxed beef because of the unfair advantage? :?

 

[mrj]

RobertMac, why do you believe there is not accountability in the Beef Checkoff? Detail please!

MRJ

Periodic votes on the checkoff and votes on the people that run it. It probably won't make a lot of difference except in the perception of producers.

Are you saying people in the various states should not be allowed to decide for themselves how they structure their state Checkoff system? From the beginning, each states' cattle producers have decided how they structure the state Beef Councils.

SD has each state-wide cattle organization represented with three delegates from each organization. The members of each organization decide how their delegates will be chosen. Then, we have the SD LMA, who claims they represent the ranchers who don't join any organization, as well as their own members. However, I do believe all their delegates have been auction market owners or representatives of aution markets, and they do not allow their rancher "members" to vote in their organization, unless they have changed that rule recently.

The state Beef Councils directors determine the candidates for the CBB,
and USDA confirms them.

I would not be at all comfortable dictating to other states how they run their state Beef Industry Councils, or whatever name they are called by in each state, nor would I want ranchers from other states telling SD how we must manage our system.

MRJ

 

[Sandhusker]

I don't know about up there, but down here in the US, the government has been funding and subsidizing businesses for a long time. They bailed Chrysler out of bankruptcy - you could certainly say that gave them an advantage over GM & Ford. They bailed Farm Credit out - you could say that gave them an advantage over all the other ag lenders. Recently, they even pulled "eminent domain" out of their hat to swipe private land for a for-profit business.

All you have to do is say, "economic development" and you'll get a package of goodies that give you an advantage.

That may be true but here you are acting as if this is just fine if Big C gets funds from somewhere other than the Plant profits that would give them a large Advantage over the competitors. Got a question for you Sandhusker How long will it take R-CALF to jump on the idea of Big C (a producer owner plant) is being subsidies as a reason to stop boxed beef from entering the US, because of the unfair advantage the Checkoff money gives them to sell cheaper meat? How long will it take them to get a tarff tacked to our boxed beef because of the unfair advantage? :?

I don't know, try it and find out. Look at how long the lumber dispute has gone on. By the time the WTO or NAFTA council could make a ruling, the appeals exhaustd, etc... the project will either of failed or be standing on it's own.

 

[mrj]

AP reports that Monte Reese (Checkoff chief operating officer) claims we wrongly "confuse NCBA's checkoff role with its more political, policy related role, even though they're completely separate"... That's like claiming Dr Jekyll shouldn't be confused with Mr Hyde... If you were to take Dr Jekyll out to dinner, you would also be feeding Mr Hyde...

Why is it that you cannot understand that there is an extremely strong separation of finances and duties between the Federation of State Beef Councils division, and the Dues/Policy/Membership divisions of NCBA?

Also, the Federation division has members of Farm Bureaus, Farmers Union, Beef Improvement Federation, CattleWomen, LMA, R-CALF, and various other organizations, including a few members of the Policy/Dues/Membership division of NCBA. It is the Federation division that does the contract work for CBB. The Dues/Policy division DOES NOT contract with the CBB.

The Dues/Policy/Membership division uses DUES MONEY and revenues from conventions and sources OTHER THAN the Beef Checkoff for our work on issues and policy.

Or do you understand it, but just refuse to admit it is true?

MRJ