You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Some of the details on Japan
- Thread starter Bill
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Conman: "So now the GAO is part of the conspiracy?"
Never said it was! You are part of the packer blaming conspiracy!
* GAO observed lengthy lag times by USDA in correcting problems when packers failed to report or provided incorrect information.
Then perhaps those who mandated this stupid law should be in charge of enforcing it instead of sitting at their critical throne of judgement.
GAO evaluated 844 audits and found that packers incorrectly reported or failed to report required information 64 percent of the time.
What information was not reported? Was it not detailed enough? Was the information requested easily understood? Was the information requested RELEVANT? Was the information reported inaccurate?
Those are the questions that need to be answered.
On many of these audits it showed that USDA, on average, was taking roughly 85 days to ensure a packer made needed corrections to the information.
Yup, USDA is twiddling their thumbs with nothing better to do than run around and demand price reporting information that is probably totally irrelevant.
This is so typical of you packer blamers. You mandate an unnecessary mandatory price reporting law, when voluntary reporting had always worked just fine, and when the prices are not reported accurately, you BWAME DA PACKAH and BWAME USDA!
What a bunch of whiners!
~SH~
~SH~ said:Conman: "So now the GAO is part of the conspiracy?"
Never said it was! You are part of the packer blaming conspiracy!
* GAO observed lengthy lag times by USDA in correcting problems when packers failed to report or provided incorrect information.
Then perhaps those who mandated this stupid law should be in charge of enforcing it instead of sitting at their critical throne of judgement.
GAO evaluated 844 audits and found that packers incorrectly reported or failed to report required information 64 percent of the time.
What information was not reported? Was it not detailed enough? Was the information requested easily understood? Was the information requested RELEVANT? Was the information reported inaccurate?
Those are the questions that need to be answered.
On many of these audits it showed that USDA, on average, was taking roughly 85 days to ensure a packer made needed corrections to the information.
Yup, USDA is twiddling their thumbs with nothing better to do than run around and demand price reporting information that is probably totally irrelevant.
This is so typical of you packer blamers. You mandate an unnecessary mandatory price reporting law, when voluntary reporting had always worked just fine, and when the prices are not reported accurately, you BWAME DA PACKAH and BWAME USDA!
What a bunch of whiners!
~SH~
Maybe on a cut off from your trip on the yellow brick road you can go tell them what you think. If you dont have anything to hide, why hide it?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Conman: "If you dont have anything to hide, why hide it?"
What do you think I'm trying to hide?
Creating another "ILLUSION"????
~SH~
Maybe if the $10,000.00 fines went into the coffers of the administration that was responsible for taking action we might clean up this cattle business mess. We might get a little more transparency with the AMS and the people who are getting paid off would have an incentive to do thier jobs instead of the other way around
A
Anonymous
Guest
Did you think we needed to read that again?
What do you think I'm trying to hide?
Another statement you can't back?
~SH~
What do you think I'm trying to hide?
Another statement you can't back?
~SH~
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Econ101 said:Maybe if the $10,000.00 fines went into the coffers of the administration that was responsible for taking action we might clean up this cattle business mess. We might get a little more transparency with the AMS and the people who are getting paid off would have an incentive to do thier jobs instead of the other way around
According to the GAO, fines levied against the packers have never been collected. There was a couple of times I wished the County Court had the same policy. :wink:
Price reporting without reporting value tells you nothing. It just tells someone with poor cattle that they should be paid as much as someone with quality cattle. That's why this industry is heading away from socialized cattle marketing towards value based marketing.
Someday, with fringe groups pushing so hard, quality will be the only way producers are paid hopefully.
Produce what is wanted, and they will fill your pockets. Produce commodity and they will pay what it is worth, which is an unseen, unknown inconsistent quality/quantity.
~SH~ said:Did you think we needed to read that again?
What do you think I'm trying to hide?
Another statement you can't back?
~SH~
SH, you are trying to hide market data so packers can get away with manipulating the markets. I don't care what you get for your little bit of runty cattle but I do care about its use as captive supply.
SH:
Quote:
* GAO observed lengthy lag times by USDA in correcting problems when packers failed to report or provided incorrect information.
Then perhaps those who mandated this stupid law should be in charge of enforcing it instead of sitting at their critical throne of judgement.
That is the best thing I think you have ever said on this forum.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Conman: "SH, you are trying to hide market data so packers can get away with manipulating the markets. I don't care what you get for your little bit of runty cattle but I do care about its use as captive supply."
I simply don't think it's any of your busines what I sell fat cattle for. A reported price doesn't tell you a damn thing without reporting the value that price was based on. All cattle do not grade and yield the same nor do they have target carcass weights so what good is a price if it does not report the value that price is based on? That's the issue and one more thing you simply can't understand. You actually believed packer buyers could judge grade and yield on the hoof. That's how damn smart you are.
Your market manipulation conspiracy theory was shot down in flames in a court of law MORE THAN ONCE!
Fourth falacy of the day!
NEXT!
~SH~