Econ101 said:rkaiser, what is that article you mentioned? How would I google it? Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
Tam said:Econ101 said:rkaiser, what is that article you mentioned? How would I google it? Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
Are you claiming or trying to claim that the Canadian Government would not have come up with any money to save the Beef industry in Canada if Tyson and Cargill had lobbied to them? The Whole industry plus the Provincial governments had a bit to do with the money that was handed over. Yes in the Federal Governments hast to help save the industry out of a disaster Tyson and Cargill did get a pretty fair chunk of the first money but the feeding sector of the industry was the hardest hit when the border closed so that was the first sector to recieve money. Tyson and Cargill had feeders they qualified for payment just like everyone else that owned feeders. As if that sector went broke who would the producers sell their calves to. After things calmed down a bit and the government had time to think about who to help next the Packers didn't see much of the money. You are so quick to want to tag the packers with whatever that you don't even stop to think that just Maybe the Government saw that if they didn't step in and help a large part of the Canadian economy was going to down the toilet. Some Economist you are.
Econ101 said:....... How would I google it? Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
S.S.A.P. said:Econ101 said:....... How would I google it? Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
Actually Econ I do think you already have an "opinion". How or why do I think this? The form of your question: Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
Sandhusker said:The fact of the matter is the Canadian Government's intentions of the bailout was to help an industry that desperately needed a hand before capsizing. Can we agree there?
Another fact is that Tyson and Cargill were not in danger of capsizing as they had access to the very lucrative US boxed beef market. Can we agree there?
Clearly, Tyson and Cargill were in a much different situation than the vast majority of Canadian feeders. Can we agree there?
The question then arises, why were Tyson and Cargill lumped with everybody else? When you consider what the intentions of the bailout were, it makes no sense. Was it just the government tossing money away foolishly again, or were there other reasons?
Oldtimer said:But Canadians did single out individuals.....How about the US ranchers, that because of their political and fraternal involvement were singled out by Canadians and were hindered or prevented from slaughtering the cattle they owned in Canada?
More good old Canadian foreplay :???: :wink:
Sandhusker said:The fact of the matter is the Canadian Government's intentions of the bailout was to help an industry that desperately needed a hand before capsizing. Can we agree there?
Another fact is that Tyson and Cargill were not in danger of capsizing as they had access to the very lucrative US boxed beef market. Can we agree there?
Clearly, Tyson and Cargill were in a much different situation than the vast majority of Canadian feeders. Can we agree there?
The question then arises, why were Tyson and Cargill lumped with everybody else? When you consider what the intentions of the bailout were, it makes no sense. Was it just the government tossing money away foolishly again, or were there other reasons?
Tyson and Cargill had no markets other than domestic Canadian markets from May 20/03 until the end of August. The lines were almost at zero many of those weeks. They had thousands of cattle under contract at pre BSE prices and they honored evryone of those contracts at huge losses to themselves.
S.S.A.P. said:Econ101 said:....... How would I google it? Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
Actually Econ I do think you already have an "opinion". How or why do I think this? The form of your question: Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
Just who are you talking about Oldtimer could these guys be the R-CALFers the LEO said DID NOT OWN CATTLE IN CANADA on RFD-TV. IF they are then are you saying LEO LIED ON TV to the viewing public?But Canadians did single out individuals.....How about the US ranchers, that because of their political and fraternal involvement were singled out by Canadians and were hindered or prevented from slaughtering the cattle they owned in Canada?
.
Tam said:OldtimerJust who are you talking about Oldtimer could these guys be the R-CALFers the LEO said DID NOT OWN CATTLE IN CANADA on RFD-TV. IF they are then are you saying LEO LIED ON TV to the viewing public?But Canadians did single out individuals.....How about the US ranchers, that because of their political and fraternal involvement were singled out by Canadians and were hindered or prevented from slaughtering the cattle they owned in Canada?
.
This packing plant was supplying most of the beef eaten in Canada as Tyson and Cargill were slaughtering UTM cattle for export. But Randy doesn't want to compete with these guys in a market that really needs the competition so we don't hear about what they are doing to the Canadian producers.
Tam said:S.S.A.P. said:Econ101 said:....... How would I google it? Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
Actually Econ I do think you already have an "opinion". How or why do I think this? The form of your question: Would the Canadian subsidy have been granted without the lobbying of Tyson/Cargill/ whoever else?
I have to agree with you on the way Econ slipped in the Tyson and Cargill I have to wonder why he didn't use the Canadian cattle producers and the Association that represent them lobbied or the MLA's lobbied on behalf of the people in Agriculture that they represent. But No Tyson and Cargill lobbied.
OldtimerJust who are you talking about Oldtimer could these guys be the R-CALFers the LEO said DID NOT OWN CATTLE IN CANADA on RFD-TV. IF they are then are you saying LEO LIED ON TV to the viewing public?But Canadians did single out individuals.....How about the US ranchers, that because of their political and fraternal involvement were singled out by Canadians and were hindered or prevented from slaughtering the cattle they owned in Canada?
.
Sandhusker After the first money, that was hastily handed out to the feeders to shore up that part of the industry from certain disaster because the border slammed shut when cattle were ready for market and the price bottomed out, (which Tyson and Cargill were a part of because they owned feeder cattle), the rest of the programs were set up so they would not get any further money as it went to the sectors that Tyson and Cargill were not a part of.
What I would like to know is why Randy is posting what Tyson and Cargill got but he says nothing about the big Canadian family owned packing plant? They belong to every sector of the beef industry including the commission sales yard end of it, and they were the only large Federally inspected plant slaughtering cull cattle. They took every advantage they could including making producers pay a fee for arrangment of loads that were to be hauled to their plant for slaughter. One rancher told me he arranged for the truck to come and pick up his cattle at his ranch. He loaded them, the trucker were hauled to their plant and the rancher got charged a fee by the packing plant for arranging the loads. This at a time while Cull cattle were selling for maybe 30 cents if you were lucky. This packing plant was supplying most of the beef eaten in Canada as Tyson and Cargill were slaughtering UTM cattle for export. But Randy doesn't want to compete with these guys in a market that really needs the competition so we don't hear about what they are doing to the Canadian producers.
Oldtimer said:How about the US ranchers, that because of their political and fraternal involvement were singled out by Canadians and were hindered or prevented from slaughtering the cattle they owned in Canada?
rkaiser said:Oh my goodness Jason. This is an amazing post.
Jason
Tyson and Cargill had no markets other than domestic Canadian markets from May 20/03 until the end of August. The lines were almost at zero many of those weeks. They had thousands of cattle under contract at pre BSE prices and they honored evryone of those contracts at huge losses to themselves.
No markets but their domestic Canadian markets. Can you tell us all how they would have to bring their lines down to "almost zero" to deal with a loss of less than 30% of their sales. Canada accounts for at least 70% of all beef produced in Canada.
I sure would have liked to see Cargill and Tyson back out of those contracts Jason. Would you have sued them?
Huge losse to themselves..... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Once again I guess you forgot that Canadians eat beef, and in fact increased consumption while "THE LINES WERE ALMOST AT ZERO". Doesn't that mean they were trying to match supply and demand? :roll:
Sounds to me by the rest of your post that you think the Canadian public should have doled out even moe to your hero's. Is that true, or did you simply borrow SH's packer defender suit for a day or two.
Amazing post; as I said before. :roll: :roll: :roll:
Canadian Meat Council
Presentation to the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry
February 26, 2004
Export markets represented 70% of the total beef production in Canada prior to the discovery of one case of BSE in May 2003. When international markets slammed shut to Canadian beef over the next few days havoc was created in the marketplace and huge numbers of live cattle were backed up.
Bull Oldtimer Shae said there were stories in the industry about R-Calf members owning cattle in Canada then she ask him if they was any truth to them and his answer was were No R-Calf members owned cattle in Canada, why would they, they have not market from them so they would be loosing money. Then he laugh.Oldtimer said:Tam said:OldtimerJust who are you talking about Oldtimer could these guys be the R-CALFers the LEO said DID NOT OWN CATTLE IN CANADA on RFD-TV. IF they are then are you saying LEO LIED ON TV to the viewing public?But Canadians did single out individuals.....How about the US ranchers, that because of their political and fraternal involvement were singled out by Canadians and were hindered or prevented from slaughtering the cattle they owned in Canada?
.
Tam- Leo said that R-CALF owned no calves- which was true...He said he had no way of knowing which R-CALF members owned cattle in Canada or for that matter anywhere else-- which is also true...
You have become a true Canadian- cry and whine about following the law- but then be one of the first to support discrimination and violating the law.....Same as I've seen for years--Remember the first shot fired in the Beef Wars was by Canada and their Anaplas-Bluetongue artificial trade barriers which were put up as a health issue and then shown to be scientifically full of holes- even completely backpeddled and dropped by Canada when a little pressure was put on.... Shows their importance :???: :wink: