NCBA Wants more USDA/GIPSA Oversight

[Tex]

Tex: "It could be all of those things ......."

That's right so why would you make such a ridiculous statement as to suggest that $1.20 fat cattle has anything to do with who is running GIPSA???

The fact is you truly are clueless in understanding the factors that affect cattle markets.

Tex: "...but if packers are colluding on price manipulation,.."

BUT THEY'RE NOT, because if they were colluding on price manipulation, the markets would not be what they are and the evidence would have been produced in countless GIPSA investigations that came up empty handed as well as countless lawsuits filed against packers that also came up empty handed.

A packer is not guilty because a packer blamer like you wants them to be guilty. They are only guilty of what you accuse them of if they are proven guilty.

Tex: "...all of those things take a second seat to reduced prices because of lack of real competition."

Oh bullcrap! Those factors are playing on the markets every single day. Anyone who does any research on profits in the packing industry knows exactly how tight packer margins are on a daily basis and how those profits are tied to beef demand and cattle supplies.

Real competition in the packing industry is no more evident then in current fat cattle prices. If you don't think Tyson, Excel, USPB, and JBS are not in competition for the same cattle you are a complete fool.

Make no mistake about it, guys that believe in conspiracy theories like you do, Econ 101, are what is keeping this industry from moving forward.


~SH~

No, sh, this WAS proven to a jury. That is who judges evidence, not you.

Tex

 

[Anonymous]

Tex: "No, sh, this WAS proven to a jury. That is who judges evidence, not you."

What was proven to an ALABAMA jury (not a jury who understood fat cattle marketing) was that when a single packer drops their price in the cash market to reflect their purchases through other venues that this constituted market manipulation without even considering all the factors that play on markets. A judge with common sense saw what a ridiculous conclusion that was and the consequences it would have on the entire industry had the ALABAMA jury's decision stood.

If that ruling had stood, anyone who dropped their price on livestock purchases after procuring most of their needs would have also constituted market manipulation. The consequences would have been detrimental to the entire industry while packer blamers looking for some glimmer of hope to justify their conspiracy theories would have been jumping for joy just like they were when the flawed "M"COOL law was implemented and what a joke that has been. Judge Strom overturned the verdict, the appeals court upheld that decision and so did the Supreme court. You played a card trick that an Alabama jury bought but those who uphold the laws did not.

I really wish the consequences of the jury's decision would have affected you personally. When you needed 10 bulls and dropped the price for the last 2 bulls, you would have been fined for manipulating the market and would have had to live by the same rules you would have the packers live by. How unfortunate that you can't sleep in the bed you made. Would have served you right for being such a fool.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "...not a jury who understood fat cattle marketing)..."

Your statement inferrs that the judge did understand fat cattle marketing.

Like a true progressive, you're blinded by your ideology.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "Your statement inferrs that the judge did understand fat cattle marketing."

The judge understood the law as did the appeals court judges and supreme court judges. More importantly, they understood the implications of setting a socialized marketing standard for fat cattle procurement methods and how that would in turn set a presidence for cattle marketing of all sorts. Something a packer blamer like you is too ignorant to figure out.

That's the real sad aspect of your position. You never have to face the consequences of your ignorance. Most packer blamers don't even sell fat cattle yet they are so arrogant as to believe they need to save the feeders from themselves with their socialized cattle marketing agenda. Arrogance beyond imagination.

What's real interesting about you and those who think like you is the extremes you will go to in order to believe what facts will not support.

Someone should really do a study on the topic of the lengths that packer blamers will go to in order to believe what they want to believe in the face of facts that blow their conspiracy theories completely out of the water. All I can say is that I'm really glad I'm not a blind follower of the gospel according to R-CALF.

Sandhusker: "Like a true progressive, you're blinded by your ideology."

My positions are supported by facts and by court rulings. In contrast you are the one who blindly follows a packer blaming ideology that facts will not support.

You know what my best source of entertainment is? The packer blamers market report. These guys are so ignorant of any of the factors that truly affect cattle prices which includes something as simple as corn prices. It's really sad.


~SH~