I understand the concept of making laws against the use of market power.
You don't understand the concept of providing evidence that proves that markets were manipulated.
I understand that the appellate decision was economically illiterate.
Another of your many unsupported "cheap talk" opinions. You don't understand anything about this industry let alone have enough knowledge to understand the appellate decision.
I understand you want to discredit a law that makes companies be have because you are a company advocate.
Another lie from you. I don't have any ties to Tyson but I do agree with "due process" and the "presumption of innocense". Just because I don't support your packer blaming bias does not mean that I am a company advocate. I believe in truth and facts, not a compelling need to blame large corporate packers like you do.
I understand that you make baseless claims that you are obviously not willing to defend.
I understand that you refuse to answer questions yet expect others to and I understand that claiming "baseless" is easier than proving it.
I understand that you are willing to argue against an economic law without even knowing the historical context, the economic concepts, and the right of business to ignore them when it is convenient and not pay the price for breakining the law.
You don't understand nothing. You make crap up as you go. If you knew what you were talking about you could take a statement I have made and prove me wrong with the facts to the contrary. You don't have any facts to support anything so you resort to your empty meaningless little discrediting statements like this that impress you.
There was no proof that any law was broke. You are so overcome with packer blame that you have convinced yourself that it happened YET CANNOT PROVIDE THE PROOF TO BACK THAT POSITION.
I understand that you got almost ALL of the arguments of the Pickett case wrong and that you might even believe the nonsense you spout out and therefore I have not called you a liar. I have courteously pointed out your numerous mistakes, none of which required any trial testimony.
You haven't corrected me on anything. All you can offer is your cheap talk little statements like this. You could't be more factually void to defend your position. If it wasn't for cheap talk, you wouldn't exist.
You have declined to argue these points, instead you resort to name calling.
Until you start answering my questions, don't expect me to answer yours. This isn't your classroom to deceive.
You claim that the beef industry is special and therefore does not fall under the same economic rules of the free market.
Another damn lie!
Show everyone where I made that claim!
Watch the dance folks.................
You have made an assertion that examples of economic theories do not apply to the beef industry,.........
Make it up as you go. Must really impress yourself huh?
I have tried to engage you on an intellectual level without all of the extra b.s. and my attempts have failed. Maybe it is not possible.
You don't have any intellect when it comes to arguing your case. Your opinions and theories are only as good as the facts that support them. From the standpoint of supporting facts, you couldn't be more "WITHOUT".
For your propaganda, you get an A, for your intellectual astuteness, objectivity, and economic intepretation of an economic law and its application, you get an F.
You aren't qualified to teach kindergarten let alone lecture on the economic factors in the cattle industry.
Nobody has been corrected on more false information here than you have.
Go collect your paycheck or keep being the fool you play for free whichever it is.
More cheap talk! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
Collect the non-thinkers of the world ready to follow your lead.
You'd know all about following wouldn't you?
Absorbing an insult from you is not unlike being run over by a baby buggy.
~SH~