M COOL IS HERE TO STAY,GET USED TO IT.

[Kathy]

Don stated:

cool is doing nothing to protect american consumers from bse

People do not need protection from bse, they need protection from contamination of the air and water with heavy metals; toxic and in many cases radio-active. The prion protein is NOT the agent causing TSEs, it is a by-stander protein, one of many, that is cannabalized by the toxic metals that industry (and in limited cases, nature) exposes us to.

The crystals that form when these proteins are corrupted are not Transmissible without iatrogenic interference (in the labs). The animals with disease in the brain, have been exposed to the bare metal agents, mostly via inhalation, but also via consumption. The Specified risk material of the Peyer's Patches (in the Distal Ileum of the small intestine), is a rich source of metal ions - as outlined in Dr. F. Paquet's paper showing uranium dramatically accumulated in this region.

We should all be asking our government military leadership, why they allow the use of "depleted uranium" weapons on our bases, and in cruise missile tests.

Then you should ask the ministers of resources to explain why were are mining uranium, building nuclear power plants, and becoming a dumping ground for spent nuclear fuel.

Too bad the scientists working with nanotechnology and the manufacture of nanowires, can tell the truth about "fibril/wire" formation using proteins, but the medical researchers pretend - none of this information exists.

 

[PORKER]

Interest groups, including Washington, D.C.-based Food & Water Watch, say the U.S.D.A.'s finalization of the rule is an attempt by the Bush administration to appease disgruntled, trade-challenged countries. Wenonah Hauter, executive director of the group said a loophole was created by broadly defining "processed" foods in the final rule, to the benefit of trading partners in Canada and Mexico.

"This definition exempts from labeling over 60% of pork, the majority of frozen vegetables, an estimated 95% of peanuts, pecans, and macademia nuts and multi-ingredient fresh produce items," said Ms. Hauter.

COOL requires that things like ground beef, chicken, fruits and vegetables be labeled at retail to indicate what country it came from.

Now that the program has been finalized by the USDA, it will become effective on March 16th.

Retailers could face up to $1,000 in fines for each violation of the labeling law.

 

[Tex]

Interest groups, including Washington, D.C.-based Food & Water Watch, say the U.S.D.A.'s finalization of the rule is an attempt by the Bush administration to appease disgruntled, trade-challenged countries. Wenonah Hauter, executive director of the group said a loophole was created by broadly defining "processed" foods in the final rule, to the benefit of trading partners in Canada and Mexico.

"This definition exempts from labeling over 60% of pork, the majority of frozen vegetables, an estimated 95% of peanuts, pecans, and macademia nuts and multi-ingredient fresh produce items," said Ms. Hauter.

COOL requires that things like ground beef, chicken, fruits and vegetables be labeled at retail to indicate what country it came from.

Now that the program has been finalized by the USDA, it will become effective on March 16th.

Retailers could face up to $1,000 in fines for each violation of the labeling law.

When the USDA is the only enforcer of the $1,000.00 fine, it is pretty useless. They can be bought off and never impose a fine as they have in poultry. The USDA is about the most politically influenced agency in the US. This influence usually comes from big companies who buy off the committee chairs or the parties (where the chairman gets the credit for not regulating) as happened in the republican pay to play rules and this enunciated policy. Rep. Collin Peterson (D) is doing the same thing only it is not an enunciated policy like the pay to play policy was.

We have the best government money can buy.

 

[RobertMac]

Retailers shouldn't be the focus of enforcement...they are resellers of product. For meat, enforcement should be at the packing plant...like it is for me!!!!!!

 

[Tex]

Retailers shouldn't be the focus of enforcement...they are resellers of product. For meat, enforcement should be at the packing plant...like it is for me!!!!!!

What we need is for the Congress to stop giving money to the USDA unless they do their job. We have had a few Secretaries of Ag. and USDA management who should have gone home without any pay and some who should have been in jail (JoAnn Waterfield). When the committee chairmen and members of Congress are paid to not have accountability, we just don't have it.

If Congress can't get this government to do its job, they should be out of theirs.

 

[PORKER]

aaaaaaaaaaa JoAnn Waterfield, she needs 40 years with no rest.

 

[Tex]

aaaaaaaaaaa JoAnn Waterfield, she needs 40 years with no rest.

She was either extremely incompetent or corrupt. Either way, not addressing her situation will only encourage more of the same. The new GIPSA man hasn't done any better. Allowing this to continue only allows our regulatory agencies to be dysfunctional.

Why should U.S. taxpayers pay salaries to those who can not regulate? Shouldn't they have to give up their retirement or does government incompetence pay?

The real reason JoAnn Waterfield wasn't held accountable is because politicians were paid to not make her accountable. Why should incompetence or protecting politicians or government employees pay? It encourages a bad government.

We have the best government money can buy.

 

[RobertMac]

When industry gets big and concentrated, they don't have to "buy the government". If some in the government try to regulate them too hard, they simply say they will raise their prices and blame it on who ever they don't want re-elected...reverse vote buying. It will take a different kind of politician than what we have now in DC to change things. We need 100 packers doing the same job that the top 5 are doing...then we would have real competition again!

 

[PORKER]

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada will shelve for now its World Trade Organization complaint about U.S. rules that require a country-of-origin label on meat sold in American grocery stores, Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said Tuesday.

Revisions to U.S. rules that allow greater labeling flexibility now meet Canadian needs and amount to "tremendous good news" for the Canadian livestock sector, he said.

 

[Kato]

And he also said that Canada will be monitoring the situation as time goes by, which is a suggestion that if MCOOL is retooled .... again ...... to make it more contrary to trade that the challenge may be brought up again. Canada still views MCOOL as a trade barrier, and this tweaking is only seen as an improvement to a bad situation, not a solution. And our government is fighting for it's political life right now, so they are a little more inclined to actually stick up for us than in the past.

As for your so called corrupt officials, perhaps there are some people in the American government who actually realize who's your biggest trading partner, who supplies you with the majority of your energy needs, and who watches your backs, even if certain protectionists don't think trade, energy, and security are as important as short term ineffective barriers that don't improve profits anyway. Also remember that no one stands between America and it's oil supply. No one. :shock:

MCOOL isn't going to make one red cent of extra profit for anyone involved anyway, no matter where they stand in the business.

Sure Obama signed on to MCOOL, but don't forget he was in the middle of a political campaign when he did it, and we all know how much political campaigning lives on in the reality of governing after the election. It was a political promise. No more.

 

[burnt]

When industry gets big and concentrated, they don't have to "buy the government". If some in the government try to regulate them too hard, they simply say they will raise their prices and blame it on who ever they don't want re-elected...reverse vote buying. It will take a different kind of politician than what we have now in DC to change things. We need 100 packers doing the same job that the top 5 are doing...then we would have real competition again!

I think you are right on the money (oops, poor choice of terms!) with your assessment, RM.

I have had to wonder if the situation we have today (concentration not only in meat packing but in many industries) is the natural, unavoidable outcome of a capitalist system or if there is a way it can work without coming to this. :???: :???: :???: When is enough, enough?

 

[Anonymous]

When industry gets big and concentrated, they don't have to "buy the government". If some in the government try to regulate them too hard, they simply say they will raise their prices and blame it on who ever they don't want re-elected...reverse vote buying. It will take a different kind of politician than what we have now in DC to change things. We need 100 packers doing the same job that the top 5 are doing...then we would have real competition again!

I think you are right on the money (oops, poor choice of terms!) with your assessment, RM.

I have had to wonder if the situation we have today (concentration not only in meat packing but in many industries) is the natural, unavoidable outcome of a capitalist system or if there is a way it can work without coming to this. :???: :???: :???: When is enough, enough?

When all these entity's become "too big to fail" (ex AIG) without wrecking the economy- they are too big.....

Probably the greatest harm done by vast wealth is the harm that we of moderate means do ourselves when we let the vices of envy and hatred enter deep into our own natures.
But there is another harm; and it is evident that we should try to do away with that. The great corporations which we have grown to speak of rather loosely as trusts are the creatures of the State, and the State not only has the right to control them, but it is duty bound to control them wherever the need of such control is shown.
~Theodore Roosevelt (08-23-1902)

We wish to control big business so as to secure among other things good wages for the wage-workers and reasonable prices for the consumers. Wherever in any business the prosperity of the businessman is obtained by lowering the wages of his workmen and charging an excessive price to the consumers we wish to interfere and stop such practices. We will not submit to that kind of prosperity any more than we will submit to prosperity obtained by swindling investors or getting unfair advantages over business rivals.
~Theodore Roosevelt 06-17-1912

I believe in corporations. They are indispensable instruments of our modern civilization; but I believe that they should be so supervised and so regulated that they shall act for the interest of the community as a whole.
~Theodore Roosevelt

 

[burnt]

Is there then no room for any such thing as 'free' enterprise?

 

[Anonymous]

Is there then no room for any such thing as 'free' enterprise?

Well in the US- there hasn't been "true" free enterprise since 1789- and the Treasury Secretary (Hamilton) decided that in order to repay the Revolutionary War debt they needed to bring in some income and suggested to Congress they tax the carriage makers and whiskey makers (singling out and putting additional expense on those industries)...Congress passed the law- Washington at first refused to sign it- but agreed after his opponents agreed with his wishes to move the new capitol from NYC to his native Virginia (first backroom you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours deal :???: )... Washington signed the law...

The ensuing Whiskey Rebellion failed- and we have had government intervention in enterprise ever since.....

 

[RobertMac]

Is there then no room for any such thing as 'free' enterprise?

Well in the US- there hasn't been "true" free enterprise since 1789- and the Treasury Secretary (Hamilton) decided that in order to repay the Revolutionary War debt they needed to bring in some income and suggested to Congress they tax the carriage makers and whiskey makers (singling out and putting additional expense on those industries)...Congress passed the law- Washington at first refused to sign it- but agreed after his opponents agreed with his wishes to move the new capitol from NYC to his native Virginia (first backroom you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours deal :???: )... Washington signed the law...

The ensuing Whiskey Rebellion failed- and we have had government intervention in enterprise ever since.....

The South seceded from the Union because of this...in 1860, tariffs on raw product coming out of the South paid for about 90% of the Federal government!

 

[RobertMac]

Kato, do you think Canada dropped their complaint because every country has the right to have COOL? Thirty or so countries have COOL...how many of those has Canada filed a complaint against?

Our COOL doesn't block any Canadian product...it simply has to be labeled to the consumer. The problem is the large packers don't want the rule. The large packers process about 90% of your AND our beef...they are the ones not buying your cattle to process and label as a product of Canada. If you had Canadian processors to buy your cattle, process them, and ship the meat south with a Canadian label, there would be no problem. Just another problem of having a concentrated processing industry. They are playing Canadian producers against USA producers to keep the focus off of them...it is time producers wake up!!!!

 

[RobertMac]

When industry gets big and concentrated, they don't have to "buy the government". If some in the government try to regulate them too hard, they simply say they will raise their prices and blame it on who ever they don't want re-elected...reverse vote buying. It will take a different kind of politician than what we have now in DC to change things. We need 100 packers doing the same job that the top 5 are doing...then we would have real competition again!

I think you are right on the money (oops, poor choice of terms!) with your assessment, RM.

I have had to wonder if the situation we have today (concentration not only in meat packing but in many industries) is the natural, unavoidable outcome of a capitalist system or if there is a way it can work without coming to this. :???: :???: :???: When is enough, enough?

Defining the new Oligopoly

Oligopolies have been around as long as commerce has. The term denotes a situation where there are few sellers for a product or service. The members of an oligopoly change the nature of a free market. While they can't dictate price and availability like a monopoly can, they often turn into friendly competitors, since it is in all the members' interest to maintain a stable market and profitable prices.

The new oligopoly is made up of multinational corporations that have chosen specific product or service categories to dominate. In each category, over time, only two to four major players prosper. Starting a new company in that market segment is difficult, and the few that do succeed are often gobbled up or run out of business by the oligopolies.

Few multinationals aspire to be monopolies. Monopolies attract government regulation and consumer anger (just ask Microsoft). Small oligopolies (such as Coke, Pepsi, and Cadbury-Schweppes) make plenty of money and avoid the constant attention of the regulators.

http://www.oligopolywatch.com/stories/2003/04/17/definingTheNewOligopoly.html

 

[don]

wasn't it dwayn andreas (adm) who said the competitor is our friend and the customer is the enemy?

 

[Tex]

We allowed AIG to insure the risk of failure without all the assets required. This has lead to a government bail out of AIG.

When a company is too big to fail or the consequence of failure is too disrupting on the economy, they should never have been allowed to get that big that others couldn't fill their shoes. We have allowed that to happen way too much in this economy because of the lack of regulation and enforcement of common sense principles we have learned in history like the antitrust laws. Lately we have just had a leaders who believed that selling out these principles for their own self interest is fine and causes no problem. They are finding out otherwise. If only we could hold them accountable.

Any law that requires more information is fine with me as long as the information is true.

If any country is ashamed of the fact that a product comes from their country, they should not be allowed to sell in this country at all.

The same goes for individual companies, in my opinion. We should know who is making products or they shouldn't be allowed to be sold.