whats the "basis"going to be?

[agman]

...you are right rkaiser... most ranchers in Canada want REAL competition in the packing industry...not some side show expansion from the status quo... maybe agman some of us ranchers if we could get our packer loving governments out of the way...we could maybe find some other markets elsewhere around the globe...just a thought... :wink:

That is where the opportunity is which is no differnt than some smaller U.S. packers who service niche markets. I am in your camp on that one.

As far as the govenment I can understand both sides of the issue. Short term they appear to be wrong. Long term they may very well prove to be right. As old tariffs have come down by treaty or agreement the new tariff barrier is hiding behind food safety issues. If we do not correct this problem now it will haunt this industry everytime for every trivial incident in the future. Who wants to see your industry or ours go through this a second time? No flame intended. Have a great day.

 

[agman]

i think jason's proposal sounded way scary. this country (the US) is a capitalist society. it's based on the laws of supply and demand, and those laws are the underpinning not only of our ENTIRE economy, but also (be logical here), therefore, of the beef industry in this country.

now think about the "beef cycle". and keep in mind that this has been disrupted by not only the US/CD border closing, but also by extended periods of drought in some of the main cow/calf ranches in this country.

think about it.

think about a capitalistic economy: those who are most efficient make money. those who aren't, don't. we are all here to make money (or at least a living ). relative to the beef cycle, at some point in time, usually, either the cow/calf producer, the feeder or the packer shows some profitability. i don't think there are too many times in history that all segments of the industry made money at the same time. it goes in cycles.

the answer will never be that packers subsidize feeders. sorry. maybe try the gov't--they subsidize evertything else.

I compliment you for your grasp of the broader situation. Have a great day.

 

[rkaiser]

You know, I don't disagree with what chuckie has to say either. However take a look at the Canadian situation. We might as well be a third world country when it comes to the packing industry. Very shortly Cargill will own 50% of the packing industry in Canada. How much of this capitalist, most efficient survive, mentality must we accept. Two companies will control close to 80%. Sure two is better than one when it comes to competition, but 10 is a lot better than 2.

How on earth do we suggest to producers of our country that we need them to supply competition without being labeled a Packer Blamer?

I know you can't force a capitalist to become a capitalist. I am one because I beleive in it. How do we convince others that this is the way.
And how do we stop captalist ventures from securing power, leverage and dominance without being labeled socialist?

 

[agman]

Agman -

What government entity do you know that can compete with a private entity? That would just be one more plant the majors would surely own.

I think black jack was refering to a plant owned by producers, operated by an existing beef marketing firm (preferably Asian or European, but possibly even American) and bridge finanaced by the governement.

Quick to jump to conclusions about us communists are'nt you Agman. :roll:

If you think so!!!!!!