Denny: "All he has to do is put a spin on it like you do read your post's you always say alot and end up saying nothing YOUR SO SMART"
I'll take that as your inability to add anything of substance to the post.
You certainly didn't address the question.
Did you have a point or are you here for Tyson blaming moral support?
When you can contradict what I have stated with facts to the contrary, bring it. Until then, keep making your meaningless little statements and prove you can't.
Randy: "You got me SH. I don't have proof. Other than the proof that Agman dug up and posted on the other thread."
Thanks for finally admitting that you cannot back your position.
If you didn't have the proof, why would you speculate?
That's the problem you have with Agman and I. You want to speculate without being bothered with the facts that prove you wrong.
The proof that Agman dug up contradicted your position which makes you resentful towards us for daring to present the facts and rain on your parade.
I won't apologize for presenting the facts which you see as defending packers.
Randy: "No one is really to blame for the economic BSE debacle in Canada."
Well I'm sure R-CULT appreciates you giving them a free pass on filing a court injunction claiming that your beef is "high risk" and "contaminated which shut you off from your historic markets.
That's pretty generous of you.
Randy: "Rcalf's tactics were ludicrous, but there goal was to get money for there members. Should we blame them?"
They lied about the safety of your product. I would certainly hold them accountable for that. You didn't see NCBA lieing about the safety of your product.
Randy: "You are on such a mission to root out PACKER BLAMERS SH that you can't look at what happened and even call it a problem. And if you think it was or is a problem; your only solution is status quo."
Wrong again Randy! I think what happened in Canada was a travesty. For R-CULT to use BSE as a catalyst to stop Canadian imports and lie about the safety of your product and jeoprodize the integrity of the safety of our product was the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in this industry. R-CALF's political tactics epitomizes everything that is disgusting about our industry.
You should never have been placed in a postition of having more cattle than slaughter capacity for more than a short period of time.
The problem was clearly the lies of R-CULT that closed the border and sent your industry into an economic ruin.
A situation that R-CULT denies out of one corner of their mouth while they lie about the safety of your product out the other.
Kato: "That's enough scrapping. It's not just Randy that thinks this, it's about 99.9% of Canadian cattle producers."
They can think what ever they want but the fact remains that Tyson wanted the border opened and filed an amicus brief stating so.
Kato: " Perhaps the plants in the U.S. did make less money than they would like, but they made up the lossses with the income from the Canadian divisions. How could they not make money buying cattle at our prices, then selling beef to you at your prices? Do the math.'
Agman already proved that assumption incorrect by providing the actual financial data for Tyson during that period of time.
Do you not believe it?
If you want to do the math, do the math. Do the math that realizes that the cattle that now have to be slaughtered in Canada, used to be slaughtered in the U.S. What you added to Canadian plants you have to subtract from U.S. plants.
Do the math that looks at the number of cattle that Tyson and Cargill normally slaughter in the U.S. and compare it to the number of cattle they used to slaughter in Canada. Let's just assume that Tyson slaughters 7 times more cattle in Canada than in the U.S. Do you honestly believe that Tyson is paying you 7 times less for your cattle to make up their losses in slaughtering U.S. cattle? DO YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT?
Yeh Kato, do the math!
Kato: "I can see packers who didn't have plants here wanting the border open, but those who are on both sides of the border were quite happy with things just the way they were. They were more than willing to go with the flow, as they say, until they could see that it was coming to an end. I expect with the prospect of the loss of a captive supply (in the truest sense of the word), that they could see it was time to make a token show of support for us, since they wouldn't want us too mad at them when the new competition came bidding on cattle."
TOTAL SPECULATION ON YOUR PART!
You don't have a single thing to present to back that position.
To the contrary, Tyson filed an amicus brief in support of opening the border.
To the contrary, the AMI filed a suit against USDA to allow the importation of cattle into the U.S.
To the contrary, U.S. plants that used to rely on Canadian cattle were shut down or greatly reduced.
Everyone thinks they are an authority on the packing industry and their motives but none of you can ever back your positions with supporting evidence.
In a court of law, nobody gets a pass to speculate on motive just because they were hurt financially. You have an obligation to support your position, not speculate.
Jason understands the bigger picture and he went through the same thing you did.
Speculating on packer motives will not change what happened. Expanding your slaughter capacity to cover your cattle and assuring that trade agreements are not threatened by lies will.
~SH~
