~SH~ said:Kindergarten,
Concentration is not unique to the packing industry nor is the distribution of the concentration in the packing industry out of line nor is their any proof to suggest that this level of concentration in the packing industry has been anything but beneficial to this industry.
During the 90,s the packer profit margins for the 5 largest packers was $3.88 per head. HOW MANY SMALLER LESS EFFICIENT PACKING COMPANIES WOULD STILL BE IN BUSINESS AT A $3.88 PER HEAD MARGIN????
Larger more efficient packing companies that sell everything but the "MOO" can and do pay a heck of a lot more for cattle than some inefficient packing plant that is paying someone to haul their ofal away like many smaller plants do.
Competition is not defined by more bidders for cattle.
This is one more issue you don't have a clue about.
Kindergarten: "competition does not lead to more concentration, the exercise of market power does."
THAT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE!
Did you impress yourself with that ridiculous statement?
Kindergarten: "Sometimes efficiencies of scale will lead to a larger facility but a larger facility does not have to lead concentration."
If a company expands their capacity, THAT IS FURTHER CONCENTRATION!
How can you be so ignorant?
Sandman: "My comment "Damages are damages" was meant to illustrate that the dollar figures are derived from how much the wronged are damaged, not by how much the damager ended up retaining."
In this case the damages cannot be more than the profits.
Kindergarten: "Your argument is really the increase in consumer surplus = efficiency in an economy argument.'
Your argument is called the "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh*t" argument. Nobody does that better than you.
Kindergarten: "We just have some economically and historically incompetent or corrupt judges as Agman points out continually. If these judges were economically litterate, they would realize that free markets set the equilibrium betweeen consumer surplus and producer surplus with supply and demand instead of market plays by middle margin players like packers. "
Of course, anyone that doesn't agree with your anti corporate, big is evil, packer blaming philosophies is incompetant.ZZZZZzzzzzzzz! I'd say that too if I was as "factually void" as you are. Supply and demand does determine the price not some crazy unproven "market play" conspiracy theory of yours.
YOU STILL GOT NOTHING!
~SH~
SH, pick one and start a thread if you think you can back up your baseless statements. Why don't you read a little more about the history of the beef industry before you do so you might be a little more intelligent in your posts? Pick one.