Task for Agman or SH

[Anonymous]

Randy: "I ain't buying it, and you are mad."

To the contrary it is you who is upset because you have nothing to support your position.

Randy: "Profit plus Profit equals Profit just the same as Loss plus Excessive Profit equals Profit. AND when Loss plus minor Profit started to look like Loss - Poof the magic border opens."

You just got done agreeing that the border closing is not the only factor affecting Tyson's profitability. Now you are back to suggesting that their slight profit after the border closed COMPARED TO THEIR MUCH LARGE PROFIT PRIOR TO THE BORDER CLOSING is proof to back your position that Tyson wanted the border to stay closed. Then you suggest that it opened when they started having losses.

THE BORDER OPENED WHEN R-CULT WAS SLAM DUNKED IN COURT which had nothing to do with Tyson's position.

YOUR POSITION IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FACTUALLY VOID TYSON CONSPIRACY THEORY.

Typical of packer blamers!

U.S. packer blamers say Tyson wanted the border opened to dump cheap Canadian beef on the U.S. market.

Canadian packer blamers say Tyson wanted the border to stay closed to continue raping Canadian producers.

CONFLICTING ARGUMENTS BETWEEN PACKER BLAMERS!

Nobody has any proof either way with the exception of what we have provided.

Randy: "You are the one who is trying to prove that Tyson was nothing but an ethical, helpful player."

There it is again.

The same lie that proves that you cannot comprehend what you read.

I have stated many times that Tyson took advantage of the situation in Canada yet you are so dense that you continue to suggest that my position is that Tyson helped Canadian producers.

You are so emotional over this that you can't even reason.


I don't get upset until someone lies about my position the way you continue to.

Randy: "Your 2 year old name calling to try to bring a rise out of me once again proves you are boxed in SH."

Ahh....ok?

Did I call you a Suck Hole? If so, I'm sorry. That would have been extremely childish.

Boxed in?

Hahaha!

That's something Saddam would have said in the gulf war. You admit that you have no proof yet I am the one who is supposedly boxed in?

Ahh....ok?

If you say so!


Randy, the bottom line is that you have nothing but suspicions, theorys, and opinions. You have zero facts to back your allegation. Sucks to be you!


~SH~


[/quote]

 

[rkaiser]

How many times do I have to say thank you SH, and how many times do you come back Desperately trying to save face with those who think you think well.

You don't have to convince those people SH. Relax, they already love you.

Thanks again, or keep playing your game, I don't care.

 

[Anonymous]

Agman: "He certainly fits the R-Calf mold. Accusation and blame with no supporting facts. As an R-Calf member yourself I can see why you come to his defense-facts be damned."

Robert simply loves the fact that Randy is blaming Tyson even when Randy's position directly contradicts R-CALF's position that Tyson wanted the border opened.

That's like arguing against CAFTA by quoting concerns of Central American Producers and arguing against NAFTA by quoting concerns about Mexican producers while they stab Canadian producers in the back by using BSE as a catalyst to send Canadian producers into economic ruin.

A logical person could only conclude that they have concerns with hurting Mexican and Central American producers when it fits their agenda and they have no concerns with hurting Canadian producers when that fits their agenda.

One day they are suggesting that imported beef is unsafe due to the conditions of their plants, the next day they are saying USDA hasn't gone far enough to assure the safety of our beef" and the next day they are criticizing USDA for seizing teary eyed 4-H kids carcasses in Montana due to cobwebs and mouse sh*t.

One day "USDA doesn't care about food safety" and the next day "we have the safest beef in the world".

How U.S. producers can mindless continue to support these flip flopping hypocrites is almost beyond belief.

There is absolutely no consistency in the position of a blamer.



~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

Keep convincing yourself SH.

You might yet become President of the USA.

OR

Your opinion is not worth anymore than mine.

 

[Sandhusker]

"I invested in oil futures awhile ago, two years to be exact. I have no love lost for the large capitalistic oil companies, but what I have made on futures has more than covered my additional fuel costs."

If a packer is making so much money and is a publically traded company, why not buy shares.

Agman, which packers are publically traded and which can the producer take an active role in profits and loses?

I guess the other way to go is to start/get involved with a branded beef product and negotiate a set price for hooks.

I bought Tyson stock a couple of years ago and It has been a very good investment.

 

[Mike]

I bought Tyson stock a couple of years ago and It has been a very good investment.

Hasn't the price doubled in the past few years?

 

[Sandhusker]

I bought Tyson stock a couple of years ago and It has been a very good investment.

Hasn't the price doubled in the past few years?

I haven't quite got a doubler yet, but I won't make less than 50% on it.

 

[rkaiser]

Good job Sandhusker. Somehow I knew you were not a kindergarten student.

 

[Sandhusker]

Good job Sandhusker. Somehow I knew you were not a kindergarten student.

Thanks. They don't teach deception or divertion until second grade here, so you know I've gotten that far! :wink: :lol:

 

[RobertMac]

The answer..."Packers made record profits in the domestic, U.S., market in 2003 due to exceptional growth in beef demand, plus 8% that year. Your assumption that those record profits were the sole result of the border being closed is just simply wrong."

The extra..."Sorry bud, but your total ignorance is on display once again. You just don't get it do you? You just keep looking for some justification of your failed position. You are just wrong, have the integrity to admit it. The only thing my data has provided is clear evidence of how silly and phony your position is. The same position that you now say you cannot prove. If you have no proof of your position where does that leave you? STUFFED!!!!!!!!"

And you wonder why people say you rub them the wrong way?
Relax and have a cool one, Agbuddy

With all due respect to you Robert I will not enter a gun fight with a knife. I have said previously that I will respond in kind. If someone chooses to play this way I will accommodate them although that is certainly not my preference.

I am curious why you are not concerned with someone who by his own admission cannot prove his allegations while I have provided facts to refute what claim he thinks he has. Recall he asked me to produce tha data which I did. Since then he has been dancing around a different view of the data each time. Did you not take notice? What does that say about you RM?

He certainly fits the R-Calf mold. Accusation and blame with no supporting facts. As an R-Calf member yourself I can see why you come to his defense-facts be damned. Are you still wondering why the Ninth circuit buried the Montana ruling-all accusationa and no facts? Does that sound familiar? Who benefits from misinformation and who gets harmed? If you choose to allow baseless allegations to go unchallenged that is your choice. There are good people out there who appreciate factual information and benefit from such. You have to decide which group you are in.

With all due respect to you, Agman, you missed my point. Tell me how your response to me was a "response in kind" ? I haven't presented a position on this thread one way or the other. You could give 'the answer' without the 'in kind extra'. You, of all people here, are least in need of responding in kind and that kind of response says more about you than the person you are responding to.

 

[agman]

The answer..."Packers made record profits in the domestic, U.S., market in 2003 due to exceptional growth in beef demand, plus 8% that year. Your assumption that those record profits were the sole result of the border being closed is just simply wrong."

The extra..."Sorry bud, but your total ignorance is on display once again. You just don't get it do you? You just keep looking for some justification of your failed position. You are just wrong, have the integrity to admit it. The only thing my data has provided is clear evidence of how silly and phony your position is. The same position that you now say you cannot prove. If you have no proof of your position where does that leave you? STUFFED!!!!!!!!"

And you wonder why people say you rub them the wrong way?
Relax and have a cool one, Agbuddy

With all due respect to you Robert I will not enter a gun fight with a knife. I have said previously that I will respond in kind. If someone chooses to play this way I will accommodate them although that is certainly not my preference.

I am curious why you are not concerned with someone who by his own admission cannot prove his allegations while I have provided facts to refute what claim he thinks he has. Recall he asked me to produce tha data which I did. Since then he has been dancing around a different view of the data each time. Did you not take notice? What does that say about you RM?

He certainly fits the R-Calf mold. Accusation and blame with no supporting facts. As an R-Calf member yourself I can see why you come to his defense-facts be damned. Are you still wondering why the Ninth circuit buried the Montana ruling-all accusationa and no facts? Does that sound familiar? Who benefits from misinformation and who gets harmed? If you choose to allow baseless allegations to go unchallenged that is your choice. There are good people out there who appreciate factual information and benefit from such. You have to decide which group you are in.

With all due respect to you, Agman, you missed my point. Tell me how your response to me was a "response in kind" ? I haven't presented a position on this thread one way or the other. You could give 'the answer' without the 'in kind extra'. You, of all people here, are least in need of responding in kind and that kind of response says more about you than the person you are responding to.

Did my questions bother you; if so, why? They were legitimate questions to your commentary.

 

[Mike]

Here's your chance boys. You are the ones who have all of the figures and know all the facts.

Tell me how much Cargill, and then seperately Tyson foods BEEF divisions profitted from the closed border and then tell me how much they lost in the USA due to the same situation.

Net profit and loss please.

When you prove to me that the overall picture shows a loss for both companies, I will forever stay away from the topic again.

Randy, I have searched and searched for any figures for Tyson that differentiate Canada from the U.S. All I can find is consolidated figures.
Surely it's public information :???:

 

[Murgen]

I haven't quite got a doubler yet, but I won't make less than 50% on it.

Should have bought oil futures, they've done well! But you're a banker you knew they would, didn't you? No, well I never listen to my banker either!

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

"I invested in oil futures awhile ago, two years to be exact. I have no love lost for the large capitalistic oil companies, but what I have made on futures has more than covered my additional fuel costs."

If a packer is making so much money and is a publically traded company, why not buy shares.

Agman, which packers are publically traded and which can the producer take an active role in profits and loses?

I guess the other way to go is to start/get involved with a branded beef product and negotiate a set price for hooks.

I bought Tyson stock a couple of years ago and It has been a very good investment.

Sandhusker wouldn't Haymaker call you a packer lovin SOB for buying Tyson stock.

 

[Sandhusker]

"I invested in oil futures awhile ago, two years to be exact. I have no love lost for the large capitalistic oil companies, but what I have made on futures has more than covered my additional fuel costs."

If a packer is making so much money and is a publically traded company, why not buy shares.

Agman, which packers are publically traded and which can the producer take an active role in profits and loses?

I guess the other way to go is to start/get involved with a branded beef product and negotiate a set price for hooks.

I bought Tyson stock a couple of years ago and It has been a very good investment.

Sandhusker wouldn't Haymaker call you a packer lovin SOB for buying Tyson stock.

Actually, I've decided I'm getting out. I don't like what they stand for and figure there are other ways to make a buck. I'm selling tomorrow.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

I bought Tyson stock a couple of years ago and It has been a very good investment.

Sandhusker wouldn't Haymaker call you a packer lovin SOB for buying Tyson stock.

Actually, I've decided I'm getting out. I don't like what they stand for and figure there are other ways to make a buck. I'm selling tomorrow.

Yea right what stock market is open Saturday. The " VLE " Valentine Livestock Exchange. :wink: