# GIPSA



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Barack.....the gift that keeps on giving. From Growing TN.

Regards, Mike

http://growingtennessee.com/features/2017/01/opinion-small-producers-will-lose-under-new-gipsa-rules/?utm_source=Growing+Tennessee&utm_campaign=79910e1c27-growingtennessee-daily_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d75710df8e-79910e1c27-296641129


----------



## r82230 (Mar 1, 2016)

Just looks like the liberals want prime and choice beef, at canner/cutter prices.

Larry


----------



## Swv.farmer (Jan 2, 2016)

Just like it's always been wanting the good stuff for nothing.


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

*"It goes against everything that capitalism and a fair market stand for. When everyone gets the same price, no matter what the differences in quality and production practices exist, consumers will no longer turn to beef as their choice of high quality protein, and then we all lose."*

1) Anyone who thinks that we are still a capitalistic country has been smoking too much Colorado grass.

To quote an old quote: "Farming is the only occupation where you buy at retail and sell at wholesale." I do not get to set the price for seed. I can buy from one of three suppliers in my area---and they all march pretty much in step. I do not get to set the price of fertilizer--I can buy from one of two suppliers in the area--and they are both within $10/ton. I do not get to negotiate the price at the elevator--there is only one fairly close and, yes, I can truck it further, but Ithe price differential is small--usually not enough to warrant the trucking charge.

Capitalism implies competition. A choice of two or three is not much competition!

2) The major buyers of beef (like McD's) don't care where they get their beef from--they only care about cost--because their customers don't care about beef quality because most of them wouldn't know a cow from a giraffe. Further, they wouldn't know the taste difference between quality beef and roadkill because they are under-educated and over-whelmed.

3) I'm getting off my soap box now since it's snowing here and things are getting slippery. But, you young whipper-snappers got to get your butts in gear, get educated, get smart, and get mean!

Ralph

Just some ramblings from the pasture.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Good post Ralph. Ignorance is incurable.

Regards, Mike


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

Meh, muddle through like we always have...

The market wants to pay for a 30 cent calf, I can deliver them 30 cent calves... I've done it before, I can do it again... (and yeah I remember Dad and Grandpa having to sell calves for 30 cents a pound at the auction...)

I don't have a problem with all this "branded beef" and stuff... if guys can make money with it, more power to them. Same with organic, grass-fed, whatever. I know what works FOR ME.

This isn't REALLY about that... this is about the RIGHT people being able to make money off "the system". All this "contract buying" cuts out the speculators and other BLOODSUCKING LEECHES that contribute NOTHING but volatility to the pricing structure and produce NOTHING but uncertainty... but *THEY* cannot make money if they cannot manipulate the markets, and it requires that *everything* be turned into a "commodity" for that to happen, so that it's "transparent" enough and flowing through their hands (or markets they can tinker with). As such, we simply CANNOT ALLOW "farmer A" to grow "calves B" to sell under contract to "company C", because it cuts "marketing firm D" and "market speculator E" out of the loop, depriving them of the opportunity to suck off the profit while doing NOTHING in the process... It sets a dangerous example-- what if corn and beans and cotton and everything else were to switch to a contract production strategy between user and producer, instead of contracts going through CBOT, KCBOT, NYMerc, and all the other dens of worthless bloodsuckers??

We cannot have that, now can we??

Later! OL J R


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

Gotta love our "industry representatives" like the guy that wrote this article... Play off farmer against farmer, just like they always do. Denigrate anybody who's not following the mantra "only the biggest and best will do" as "no matter how poorly they manage their cows"... What a crock of sh!t...

I always have to laugh at that type... The ag-mags are full of them screaming from the rooftops about how rich they're getting with all their premiums and contracts and stuff, AND IMPLY *EVERYBODY* SHOULD BE DOING IT *THEIR WAY*. They don't realize that if *everybody* were doing it "their way" that their much-vaunted premiums and perks would ALL DISAPPEAR! If *every* calf going through the ring were a brand-certified black-hided preconditioned prize-winning clone just like every other calf going through the ring, does ANYBODY in their right mind think that ANYBODY would be willing to pay PREMIUM prices or perks above the LEAST COMMON DENOMINATOR "going market price"?? SERIOUSLY?? I've read the same crap for decades about growing "EXACTLY the kind of cotton that the market wants, for the PREMIUMS", and every other crop... grain sorghum, corn, beans, wheat, you name it... I remember when the bigshots and the extension gurus were all pushing "white sorghum" years ago... A few guys doing it making money at it, but if everybody did it it'd be "any cow will do" as the idgit article writer put it, and the premiums disappear as it ALL becomes a "high quality COMMODITY".

Relative scarcity or limited supply creates the price premiums-- if the majority of production shifts to that particular production ideology, then the supply grows to meet or exceed demand, at which point there is NO INCENTIVE to pay premiums, since the relative scarcity no longer exists... It's not exactly rocket science! Then, of course, everybody's stuck in a MORE EXPENSIVE production scheme to get THE SAME OR LESS MONEY for the product... yep, that's ALWAYS a big money maker!!!

Don't get me wrong-- I don't have a problem with the guys who can find that niche market and produce high-quality just-what-the-buyer-wants calves or crops and sharpens their pencil enough to figure out how to make a profit with it-- nor do I have a problem with the companies that want to go contract with whatever farmer is willing to go the extra mile for them, and is willing to offer a premium lucrative enough to get the farmer to sign on the bottom line with them... It isn't the "rank and file" farmer producing "whatever" for the market who's going to be suing over this GIPSA crap if it goes through as advertised... not unless they're just a stooge or front for whatever 'disaffected groups' are looking to make a buck off someone else... it's these 'disaffected groups' that can't sponge off the market because they've been cut out of the loop that are going to be making noise and starting lawsuits... though they may find some farmers willing to be stooges for them if they wave a big enough carrot in front of their nose...

Sad but true, but some people will do ANYTHING for money...

Later! OL J R


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

BTW, where was all this concern for farmers when the chicken and hog farmers were forced into vertical integration and cannot even really raise chickens anymore unless your "under contract" with a handful of end buyers (companies) who basically all collude together to set the terms, prices, and conditions... just like the so-called 'chickenization' of the hog industry which is following on its footsteps??

I smell a rat... Like Daddy used to say-- "Something's dead in Denmark"... LOL

I don't buy, "I'm from the gubmint and I'm here to help you" anymore...

Later! OL J R


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

Who would the individual sue? The livestock auction, the order buyer?

Almost every week someone calls the local livestock sale and complains their calves did not sell for as much as some other people's calves did. Both sellers calves might weigh 550 lbs. One might be in good flesh, good frame, steer, shots and weaned.

The other calf may be short coupled, months older, less condition, shaggy/common looking, bull calf, grass and momma only fed.

Both weigh 550. One will not weigh over 900 lbs. after 200 days on feed. It will take a month to get straight before it makes any money for the buyer.

The better calf will step off the trailer and begin making money. It will graze and grow, will hit 1,350 when finished on feed.

All the original seller sees is that his 550 lb. calf did not bring as much as other calves the same weight. Sue someone.

Another scenario is a person comes to the sale early to see how calves are selling. (local sale begins at 8:30 AM) Calf prices are good and he goes home and brings his calves.

The calves brought the day before are gaunt. They have emptied their gut over night, even with free choice hay.

The calves brought the evening before sell for more than the calves brought that day. The order buyers know the difference at first glance and do not pay as much for a calf full of poop. Plus the order buyers may have filled their order when the last calves come through the ring.

The seller complains the sale is rigged. Guess he can sue someone now.

The question is, who does a person sue?


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

Tim/South said:


> Who would the individual sue? The livestock auction, the order buyer?
> 
> Almost every week someone calls the local livestock sale and complains their calves did not sell for as much as some other people's calves did. Both sellers calves might weigh 550 lbs. One might be in good flesh, good frame, steer, shots and weaned.
> 
> ...


Yep...

This whole thing sounds like a rule written by lawyers for lawyers... and everybody else LOSES...

Later! OL J R


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

luke strawwalker said:


> Yep...
> 
> This whole thing sounds like a rule written by lawyers for lawyers... and everybody else LOSES...
> 
> Later! OL J R


Or written by someone sitting behind a desk. They may mean well, thinking they are leveling the playing field. Good intentions combined with ignorance do not mix well.


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

Tim/South said:


> Or written by someone sitting behind a desk. They may mean well, thinking they are leveling the playing field. Good intentions combined with ignorance do not mix well.


Yep, way to hell is paved with 'em...

And seems gubmint's only job is paving a 12 lane freeway there as fast as possible...

Later! OL J R


----------



## Waterway64 (Dec 2, 2011)

We still need the packers and stockyards act fully funded and active.


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

Waterway64 said:


> We still need the packers and stockyards act fully funded and active.


Not truer words have ever been spoken.


----------



## 2ndWindfarm (Nov 11, 2014)

I can't make out what the problem this new GIPSA rule is supposed to resolve... Lot's of "fire and rhetoric" here to wade thru. But, I'm not taking on faith that 'ol Wes is any more a friend of the small or mid-level producer than the folks "sittin' behind a desk" writing the new GIPSA rules are! 
My years dealing with the public and enforcing regulations has given me the perspective that 1.) the good guys are usually playing catch-up to someone that has figured out a new way to "cheat". And 2.) new rules or regulations don't materialize out of the blue...

Somebody's gettin' screwed and they ain't gettin' kissed afterwards!


----------

