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

Mike Johns Explains "No Competition"

Mike

Well-known member
From the Horse’s Mouth: A Report from the Five Nations Conference



Not to necessarily defend which end of a horse I might resemble, I understand an erroneous media report from Australia has been circulating among a few in the industry here, and I thought it might be good for me to report on my trip to Australia to participate in the Five Nations Beef Conference. Hear it from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.



The Five Nations Beef Conference occurs every 18 months or so with industry representatives from Mexico, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the United States. As a group, our aim is to seek the elimination of non-scientific and political trade restrictions and maintain strong demand for beef against competitive threats from pork and poultry.



So, when I say it’s not about competition, that’s because this conference had nothing to do with competition between our nations. There is no question we are competitors in the global marketplace. And in my mind, there is no question U.S. producers have a strong competitive position, producing the greatest tasting beef in volumes to satisfy the world’s consumers.



But the fact of the matter is unscientific trade barriers remain, and that’s unacceptable. NCBA is about eliminating those trade barriers so U.S. producers can compete fairly. I’m confident the quality and value of U.S. beef, along with our industry’s foreign promotion and educational efforts, will prevail once we are allowed access. And that’s why leveraging other beef producing nations who are like-minded on the topic of politically motivated, unscientific trade barriers is an important element to an overall trade strategy.



It doesn’t surprise me that some have grabbed on to a bad headline that completely misrepresented me as part of what seems like never-ending attempts to divide the industry. NCBA is about including all beef industry stakeholders to strengthen our industry today and ensure a promising future for the next generation of cattle producers.



It does disappoint me that the coverage about my direct challenges to Australia’s unfair trade barriers have been conveniently overlooked. I find it very hypocritical that while Australia industry representatives support science-based trade practices, their government fails to follow their lead and import product into their nation based on sound scientific principles. And I didn’t hesitate to tell them so, both directly to their high ranking government officials and their media.



Do you know that we do not ship one ounce of U.S. beef into Australia right now? Australia continues to ban beef from any country where BSE has been found. This from a country that exports 70 percent of their beef production, and a whole lot of that is bound for the United States. So try this headline on for a change: “North Americans Blast Australia's BSE Stance.” This is an actual headline from a story that ran in Australia, and the story began, “Australia’s position on quarantine and trade has been branded ‘hypocritical’ by visiting North American cattlemen who believe our position on BSE ignores globally accepted science.”



I’m proud of what NCBA has accomplished for its members and the continued pressure we put on our trading partners and potential partners to uphold fair, sound and reliable practices. The fact is NCBA was in large part responsible for initiating the Congressional sanctions that pressured the Japanese to re-engage with us. Japan’s beef consumption dropped 40 percent when Japan discovered their first case of BSE in September 2001. Total beef exports to Japan are still down 300,000 metric tons – which went to pork and poultry – so our challenge is to recover this market for beef.



NCBA will continue to apply pressure because the 96-plus percent of world’s consumers who live outside the United States deserve a chance to enjoy the high quality, safe beef we produce. And cattlemen deserve the opportunity to profit from expanded exports. NCBA remains committed to implementing producer directed policy and won't back down to anyone in order to get this accomplished.



Source: Mike John, cattleman from Huntsville, Missouri, and president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Johns still doesn't recognize that the "science based" definition is one the USDA promotes, not real science. It is a packer definition that hurts U.S. producers in beef trade.

Does he think that all the testing in Brittain is not science based and everyone should follow suit with the packer lead NCBA in their definition?

NCBA/USDA policies have prevented innovative, customer serving companies like Creekstone from competing in the international beef trade because of big packer backed policy. U.S. producers lose out. The NCBA has become the worst thing for international beef trade for U.S. producers in a long time and has cost the industry millions if not billions in beef trade.

Shame on Johns. If he wants to work for only the big packers and against producers, he should be paid by them only and stop masquerading as a representative of producers also.

You can only serve one master and it is easy to see Johns serves the big packers.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Shame on you Econ! Or Lyndon Larouche, or CEO of the Ellinghuysen Livestock Brief, or Big Poohbah of the Party for Socialism & Liberation....or whatever your real title and agenda is.

The Party for Socialism & Liberation was one of the links on a site you linked on another post. Interesting that it also was linked to OCM and Insitute for Rural America. None of them seem very conducive to individual ownership of cattle, the American Way, etc. in just the very short time I was able to spend looking at the sites. I really do not need to be "liberated" and I'm very sure that Socialism is not going to be good for hard working businessmen in the cattle business.

Rather than admitting the NCBA bashers got snookered by a faulty headline by and Australian reporter and publication apparently still smarting from the strong words of Mike John re. their use of non-scientific trade barriers against US beef, you chose to hijack the thread to make yet another unfounded attack on NCBA.

Further, you perpetuate your lie that NCBA officers receive ANY pay, let alone serves the big packers.

Why not get honest with us for a change and tell us who you are so that you can demonstrate for us your veracity?

MRJ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Do you know that we do not ship one ounce of U.S. beef into Australia right now? Australia continues to ban beef from any country where BSE has been found. This from a country that exports 70 percent of their beef production, and a whole lot of that is bound for the United States.


WHY :???:
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Shame on you Econ! Or Lyndon Larouche, or CEO of the Ellinghuysen Livestock Brief, or Big Poohbah of the Party for Socialism & Liberation....or whatever your real title and agenda is.

The Party for Socialism & Liberation was one of the links on a site you linked on another post. Interesting that it also was linked to OCM and Insitute for Rural America. None of them seem very conducive to individual ownership of cattle, the American Way, etc. in just the very short time I was able to spend looking at the sites. I really do not need to be "liberated" and I'm very sure that Socialism is not going to be good for hard working businessmen in the cattle business.

Rather than admitting the NCBA bashers got snookered by a faulty headline by and Australian reporter and publication apparently still smarting from the strong words of Mike John re. their use of non-scientific trade barriers against US beef, you chose to hijack the thread to make yet another unfounded attack on NCBA.

Further, you perpetuate your lie that NCBA officers receive ANY pay, let alone serves the big packers.

Why not get honest with us for a change and tell us who you are so that you can demonstrate for us your veracity?

MRJ

MRJ, they are not using nonscientific barriers on us.

We are using them on ourselves.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
I'm certainly no fan of NCBA, but I'm glad that at least this was cleared up. Maybe they haven't totally rolled over - they're just on their side. :lol:

I do have a problem with forcing nations to adopt trade standards that they don't want to adopt. I think it makes more sense to fight fire with fire. If the Aussies don't want to import our products, then we don't import theirs.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I think if I remember right, this was one of the concerns of the NCBA folk back when Johns became President-- apparently he has a history of saying something first- then thinking/ and of not being clear on what he means and needing an interpreter to straighten it out...

Kind of a GW Bush/John Kerry of the NCBA :wink: :lol: :lol:
 

mrj

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Shame on you Econ! Or Lyndon Larouche, or CEO of the Ellinghuysen Livestock Brief, or Big Poohbah of the Party for Socialism & Liberation....or whatever your real title and agenda is.

The Party for Socialism & Liberation was one of the links on a site you linked on another post. Interesting that it also was linked to OCM and Insitute for Rural America. None of them seem very conducive to individual ownership of cattle, the American Way, etc. in just the very short time I was able to spend looking at the sites. I really do not need to be "liberated" and I'm very sure that Socialism is not going to be good for hard working businessmen in the cattle business.

Rather than admitting the NCBA bashers got snookered by a faulty headline by and Australian reporter and publication apparently still smarting from the strong words of Mike John re. their use of non-scientific trade barriers against US beef, you chose to hijack the thread to make yet another unfounded attack on NCBA.

Further, you perpetuate your lie that NCBA officers receive ANY pay, let alone serves the big packers.

Why not get honest with us for a change and tell us who you are so that you can demonstrate for us your veracity?

MRJ

MRJ, they are not using nonscientific barriers on us.

We are using them on ourselves.

That your conspiracy oriented brain would twist the facts a full 180% is no surprise! Dream your anti-NCBA dreams. Some of us prefer reality and science.

MRJ
 

mrj

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I think if I remember right, this was one of the concerns of the NCBA folk back when Johns became President-- apparently he has a history of saying something first- then thinking/ and of not being clear on what he means and needing an interpreter to straighten it out...

Kind of a GW Bush/John Kerry of the NCBA :wink: :lol: :lol:


Your fantasy life continues richly, OT. There is NOTHING wrong with what Mike J. actually said! Working to convince people from those countries that using the best of science according to OIE guidlines serves all beef producers well is good business for the US cattle producer.

Sorry you fail to understand that GWB truly IS serving us well in this world of terrorists who insist that we must adhere to their religion or die!

MRJ.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
MRJ said:
Oldtimer said:
I think if I remember right, this was one of the concerns of the NCBA folk back when Johns became President-- apparently he has a history of saying something first- then thinking/ and of not being clear on what he means and needing an interpreter to straighten it out...

Kind of a GW Bush/John Kerry of the NCBA :wink: :lol: :lol:


Your fantasy life continues richly, OT. There is NOTHING wrong with what Mike J. actually said! Working to convince people from those countries that using the best of science according to OIE guidlines serves all beef producers well is good business for the US cattle producer.

Sorry you fail to understand that GWB truly IS serving us well in this world of terrorists who insist that we must adhere to their religion or die!

MRJ.

Well- MRJ since we don't have the transcript/ and he didn't furnish a copy of his actual words- we will never know actually what Mr. Johns did say-- but if he was so unclear that he was misinterpreted, it makes you wonder about the qualifications he has for leadership...Or did he say it and catch so much flack from the cattleworld that he had to do another almost anticipated NCBA Flipflop they have become so famous for, and change what he said :???:

I do know that the entire cattle world recognizes the fact that as long as Johns is in a leadership role there is absolutely no chance of compromise or closing some of the gaps within the cattle politics...

And I agree with you that GWB is doing a great job with the terrorist issue--I'm just disappointed in that he just forgot the rest of his oath/Republican contract with America regarding upholding the Constituion and enforcement of such laws as the Immigration laws, Gipsa, the 2002 Farm Bill, Limited Federal Government and promoting States rights, Fiscal responsibility, National Sovereignty, etc., etc..........
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ said:
Shame on you Econ! Or Lyndon Larouche, or CEO of the Ellinghuysen Livestock Brief, or Big Poohbah of the Party for Socialism & Liberation....or whatever your real title and agenda is.

The Party for Socialism & Liberation was one of the links on a site you linked on another post. Interesting that it also was linked to OCM and Insitute for Rural America. None of them seem very conducive to individual ownership of cattle, the American Way, etc. in just the very short time I was able to spend looking at the sites. I really do not need to be "liberated" and I'm very sure that Socialism is not going to be good for hard working businessmen in the cattle business.

Rather than admitting the NCBA bashers got snookered by a faulty headline by and Australian reporter and publication apparently still smarting from the strong words of Mike John re. their use of non-scientific trade barriers against US beef, you chose to hijack the thread to make yet another unfounded attack on NCBA.

Further, you perpetuate your lie that NCBA officers receive ANY pay, let alone serves the big packers.

Why not get honest with us for a change and tell us who you are so that you can demonstrate for us your veracity?

MRJ

MRJ, they are not using nonscientific barriers on us.

We are using them on ourselves.

That your conspiracy oriented brain would twist the facts a full 180% is no surprise! Dream your anti-NCBA dreams. Some of us prefer reality and science.

MRJ

Did Johns get the barriers knocked down or just another meeting and more talk? Some of us prefer reality and science AND RSESULTS!!!

Creekstone believes it would have had results with its approach. WHY DID THE USDA/NCBA NOT ALLOW THEM TO EVEN TRY? SO JOHNS COULD HAVE MORE MEETINGS?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Oldtimer said:
I think if I remember right, this was one of the concerns of the NCBA folk back when Johns became President-- apparently he has a history of saying something first- then thinking/ and of not being clear on what he means and needing an interpreter to straighten it out...

Kind of a GW Bush/John Kerry of the NCBA :wink: :lol: :lol:


Your fantasy life continues richly, OT. There is NOTHING wrong with what Mike J. actually said! Working to convince people from those countries that using the best of science according to OIE guidlines serves all beef producers well is good business for the US cattle producer.

Sorry you fail to understand that GWB truly IS serving us well in this world of terrorists who insist that we must adhere to their religion or die!

MRJ.

Where are the RESULTS MRJ? We are still importing Australian beef and the Aussies and Japanese haven't bought our OIG/ No testing jive.

Sometimes you have to ask, WHERE'S THE BEEF?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Beef
The Agreement eliminates all US beef tariffs over time, with the previous in-quota tariff of 4.4 US cents/kg eliminated from 1 January 2005 and the 26.4 per cent over-quota tariff will be reduced to zero over 18 years. There is to be an 18-year phase out of the out-of-quota duty beginning in year 9, with one-third of the duty phased out in years 9-13 and the remainder in years 14-18.

The Agreement also provides for increasing quota access during the 18 year tariff elimination period. The $1.7 billion annual quota for Australian beef exports to the United States will expand by 20,000 tonnes to 398,214 tonnes in 2007, increasing to 448,214 tonnes in 2023. The estimated additional value to Australian beef exporters in 2023 is around $245 million if the quota is fully utilised.

From year 19, all Australian beef will be free to enter the US market without tariff or quota restrictions and subject only to a price-based safeguard. This safeguard applies to exports over a specified amount based on growth from the quota in year 18. The US also has discretion to not apply the safeguard.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Mike said:
Beef
The Agreement eliminates all US beef tariffs over time, with the previous in-quota tariff of 4.4 US cents/kg eliminated from 1 January 2005 and the 26.4 per cent over-quota tariff will be reduced to zero over 18 years. There is to be an 18-year phase out of the out-of-quota duty beginning in year 9, with one-third of the duty phased out in years 9-13 and the remainder in years 14-18.

The Agreement also provides for increasing quota access during the 18 year tariff elimination period. The $1.7 billion annual quota for Australian beef exports to the United States will expand by 20,000 tonnes to 398,214 tonnes in 2007, increasing to 448,214 tonnes in 2023. The estimated additional value to Australian beef exporters in 2023 is around $245 million if the quota is fully utilised.

From year 19, all Australian beef will be free to enter the US market without tariff or quota restrictions and subject only to a price-based safeguard. This safeguard applies to exports over a specified amount based on growth from the quota in year 18. The US also has discretion to not apply the safeguard.

Source:

http://www.daffa.gov.au/market-access-trade/fta/ausfta
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Big Muddy rancher said:
Econ do you know the amount of duty free beef that can come into the US from Australia?

Our borders from them have been opened and our borders to them have been closed.

If that is the kind of work the NCBA is working on, maybe we should lay them off. We would be better off without them.

This is the result of "working with the industry" as MRJ puts it.

It again shows how much of a talking head and idiot (they go hand in hand) MRJ and the NCBA are. Is the NCBA trying to ruin the US cattle producers or what?

BMR and MRJ, how much are our exports to Australia, Japan, and S. Korea?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
RobertMac said:
Sandhusker said:
If the Aussies don't want to import our products, then we don't import theirs.

Do you mean Cargill-Aust. can't ship to Cargill-USA? :?

Don't forget Swift- they own Australian slaughter facilities and would be left out too... :?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Seems the US trade representatives have been busy selling out our trade policy to the Multinational corporations at the expense of producers!!!! :evil: :evil: :mad: :mad: :mad:

I wonder who got the political contributions for that policy?
 

mrj

Well-known member
Boys, you just love to eat that 'conspiracy pie', don't you? Did you forget the 'nutrients' in it have a special acronym? It is BS!

Econ, it is ludicrous to say NCBA does ANYTHING not focused and aimed at IMPROVING business for cattle producers. It is absolute fact that cattle producers are the majority of NCBA members and WE SET THE POLICY for the leaders to follow.......regardless of how you boys try to twist it, that remains the FACT.

"Results" take time. We ARE selling beef in Japan.

NCBA does not have the power to give Creekstone permission to test for BSE, and I'm very sure Mr. Johns has all the meetings necessary without need to manufacture reasons for more.

OT, if there is no transcript of that comment, maybe that session was not recorded. It is my understanding that it was a social gathering preliminary to the working sessions.

Further that meeting was NOT about competing for TRADE......it was focused on building consumption of beef in other countries by elimination of NON-SCIENCTIFIC and POLITICAL trade barriers in an area where beef consumption has dropped 40% and pork and poultry consumption have increased.

It is no surprise that ABC mis-used a headline from an Australian story making it APPEAR that Mike John made the statement in question.

It is, unfortunately, no surprise that you boys use, twist, and expand upon it to serve your anti-NCBA agenda. As usual, you don't have the facts on your side.

BTW, does the President bring forth the spending proposals, or is that the province of Congress? I am disappointed that Congressmen insist on "bringing home the pork" as usual in time of war, and disappointed as well that the Pres. could not override them, but with the way devious legislators tie things together making it impossible to separate the necessary from the "pork" spending, I understand the dilemma.

If the Dems get control of either House and end the GWB tax cuts, we will soon find out how much those tax cuts have fueled our economy and they will blame Republicans for the economic woes, won't they? Another lesson we have had several times and won't learn from.

MRJ
 
Top