• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

When meat packers own their own cattle

Help Support Ranchers.net:

~SH~ said:
Whoopdi Do! You quoted from the PSA of 2000 B.C.

How about providing an example of a violation if you are so certain it's occuring?

You could have made a better case for "preferential treatment" than market manipulation. Your market manipulation conspiracy theory is nothing more than a theory.


~SH~
Click to expand...

The "PSA of 2000 B.C." is still law. You belittle the PSA law written by the lawmakers per the constitution (older than that ancient PSA) while you champion the PSA law rewritten by a judge who has no authority to do so.

You're tipping your hand.
 
Sandbag,

The PSA of 2000 B.C. or whenever it was written is a law to address legitimate market manipulation such as "price fixing". Not phony "PERCEIVED" market manipulation of dropping your price in the cash market as your needs are met in the formula market.

You got nothing here and nothing anywhere else leaving you empty handed with empty statements.

The PSA was not re-written. That is a lie. The PSA was interpreted correctly by Judge Strom and the 11th circuit and no violation was found because dropping your price in the cash market due to your needs being met in the formula market is not market manipulation.

The Pickett packer blamers were slick enough to convince a jury that dropping your price in reaction to demand was market manipulation but Judge Strom and the 11th circuit saw right throught the smokescreen.

You packer blamers got nothing and lost another round.


~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandbag,

The PSA of 2000 B.C. or whenever it was written is a law to address legitimate market manipulation such as "price fixing". Not phony "PERCEIVED" market manipulation of dropping your price in the cash market as your needs are met in the formula market.

You got nothing here and nothing anywhere else leaving you empty handed with empty statements.

The PSA was not re-written. That is a lie. The PSA was interpreted correctly by Judge Strom and the 11th circuit and no violation was found because dropping your price in the cash market due to your needs being met in the formula market is not market manipulation.

The Pickett packer blamers were slick enough to convince a jury that dropping your price in reaction to demand was market manipulation but Judge Strom and the 11th circuit saw right throught the smokescreen.

You packer blamers got nothing and lost another round.


~SH~
Click to expand...

SH:
he PSA of 2000 B.C. or whenever it was written is a law to address legitimate market manipulation such as "price fixing". Not phony "PERCEIVED" market manipulation of dropping your price in the cash market as your needs are met in the formula market.
Click to expand...

SH, this is what makes you the class clown. Thanks for the laugh this morning.
 
conman said:
I can make a case for a lot of things.
Click to expand...

That's the funniest thing I have read. No one has seen proof of any case from you.

Oh I forgot you don't need proof to believe what you do.
 
Conman: "SH, this is what makes you the class clown. Thanks for the laugh this morning."
Click to expand...

As always, you bring nothing to the table to contradict anything I have stated. You're as empty handed as you always are. Nothing ever changes with a phony like you.


~SH~
 
So, SH, what is the difference between legitimate market manipulation and illegal market manipulation? Maybe that is our problem in our differences. :roll:
 
Sandbag: "So, SH, what is the difference between legitimate market manipulation and illegal market manipulation? Maybe that is our problem in our differences."
Click to expand...

The question is, what is the difference between "Legitimate" market manipulation and "perceived" market manipulation.

One is real and proven and the other is imagined by packer blamers like you.


~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "So, SH, what is the difference between legitimate market manipulation and illegal market manipulation? Maybe that is our problem in our differences."
Click to expand...

The question is, what is the difference between "Legitimate" market manipulation and "perceived" market manipulation.

One is real and proven and the other is imagined by packer blamers like you.


~SH~
Click to expand...

How is market manipulation of any kind legitimate? Does it depend on who profits from the manipulation?
 
Everytime a consumer buys a package of beef they manipulate the market.

Tyson buys a pen of steers they have reduced the supply and affected the market.

A rancher buys a bull and reduces the sellers supply.

If enough bulls are bought the seller might just raise his prices. (Asking price)

If enough beef is sold the retailer just might raise his prices. (Asking price)

If enough steers are bought the feedlot just might raise his prices. (Asking price)

In each instance if the new higher asking price is not met product stops selling. Sometimes the price has to rever to move product again.
 
Jason said:
Everytime a consumer buys a package of beef they manipulate the market.

Tyson buys a pen of steers they have reduced the supply and affected the market.

A rancher buys a bull and reduces the sellers supply.

If enough bulls are bought the seller might just raise his prices. (Asking price)

If enough beef is sold the retailer just might raise his prices. (Asking price)

If enough steers are bought the feedlot just might raise his prices. (Asking price)

In each instance if the new higher asking price is not met product stops selling. Sometimes the price has to rever to move product again.
Click to expand...

I did not think you knew what any of the terms used mean, Jason. This just proves it.
 
Jason, "Everytime a consumer buys a package of beef they manipulate the market."

Using Webster's defintion of "Manipulate", I think you need to explain how buying a package of beef is artful, unfair, or insidious.

MANIPULATE
1 to treat or operate with the hands or by mechanical means especially in a skillful manner
2 a : to manage or utilize skillfully b : to control or play upon by artful, unfair, or insidious means especially to one's own advantage
3 : to change by artful or unfair means so as to serve one's purpose :
 
Sandbag: "How is market manipulation of any kind legitimate? Does it depend on who profits from the manipulation?"
Click to expand...

I'm talking about "REAL" market manipulation which is proven versus "IMAGINED" market manipulation by packer blaming conspiracy theorists like you.

Until you can prove it, it's imagined.


~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "How is market manipulation of any kind legitimate? Does it depend on who profits from the manipulation?"
Click to expand...

I'm talking about "REAL" market manipulation which is proven versus "IMAGINED" market manipulation by packer blaming conspiracy theorists like you.

Until you can prove it, it's imagined.


~SH~
Click to expand...

12 people who heard testimony you didn't say it was proved. But, I guess you learn more about what happened in a South Dakota prairie dog town instead of the court room where testimony is being directed to you..... :roll:
 
Sandbag: "12 people who heard testimony you didn't say it was proved. But, I guess you learn more about what happened in a South Dakota prairie dog town instead of the court room where testimony is being directed to you....."
Click to expand...

What was that proof Sandbag?

DANCE SANDBAG, DANCE!

DIVERT SANDBAG, DIVERT!



~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "12 people who heard testimony you didn't say it was proved. But, I guess you learn more about what happened in a South Dakota prairie dog town instead of the court room where testimony is being directed to you....."
Click to expand...

What was that proof Sandbag?

DANCE SANDBAG, DANCE!

DIVERT SANDBAG, DIVERT!



~SH~
Click to expand...

If you would of been in the courtroom you would of heard it.
 
Exactly, manipulation is unproven. You guys claim normal market fluctuations are manipulation.

You just proved there is no manipulation by your phony stance.
 
Jason said:
Exactly, manipulation is unproven. You guys claim normal market fluctuations are manipulation.

You just proved there is no manipulation by your phony stance.
Click to expand...

As I have said before and you have proven time and time again, Jason, you would not know proof if you saw it.
 
to manage or utilize skillfully b : to control or play upon by artful, unfair, or insidious means especially to one's own advantage
to change by artful or unfair means so as to serve one's purpose :
 
When a consumer buys a roast because it is on sale, is it to his/her own advantage?

When a feedlot buys a load of cheap calves even though they will have to move some to an alley to feed is it not for his own advantage?

When a ranchers sitting at a bull sale sees a good bull selling cheap and waves his hand to take home the deal is it not for his own advantage?
 

Latest posts

Top