redcowsrule33
Well-known member
5% of GDP but 100% have to eat. It is not smart to contract out your food security to other nations but many are in the name of greenhouse gas reduction.
COOL passed?
- Thread starter Lucky
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Ky hills
Well-known member
So many people are so far removed from any knowledge of food production and they've now grown up two or three generations of having everything they could want or need to eat a grocery store close them. They don't have enough sense or care to think enough about how the food gets there to even connect the the dots between agriculture and the grocery store.
I've always said we could do without office worker, lawyers, whatever but we can't do without food, we can't eat a computer .
Last edited:
Ky hills
Well-known member
Yeah definitely not a good national security plan to be dependent on importing food from other countries.
What if those countries decided we don't want to sell you food or start extortion over it, or some international upheaval happens and commerce movement is disrupted. So many horrible scenarios could happen.
farmerjan
Well-known member
I have been preaching for years that one day this country is going to wake up and find that we are so dependent on other countries for our food, and then someone like the Chinese are going to grab us by the balls and say..." no... not sending this to you... and what are you going to do about it".......and it will be too late except for those of us that have prepared for it... and we will be subjected to being attacked from all fronts by crazy people that have nothing on their minds but what they want RIGHT NOW, and then they will go pillaging elsewhere... killing anyone and everyone in their midst....with no idea of how to grow and provide for themselves down the road a week or a month or a year ahead...
This is in the works to make us a totally dependent "state" and as the "serfs", we will be as expendable as throwing away the waste paper is today.
This is in the works to make us a totally dependent "state" and as the "serfs", we will be as expendable as throwing away the waste paper is today.
Mrcopier
Well-known member
Most of our meds. Come from China, let that sink in
Travlr
Well-known member
That's something we don't hear much about in this country. We always hear about why we are dependent on China, but not much about how they are dependent on us. I'd like to know more.
greybeard
Well-known member
Nothing. Malacca Strait is between Indonesia, Sumatra, and Singapore. It might affect India, but certainly not mainland China.
Last edited:
Nesikep
Well-known member
THAT is who has been fighting it! JBS, Tyson, and etc.. and they in turn lobby the gov'ts in mexico, brazil, etc to do something about it
Here in canada a lot of our beef is from argentina, etc.. WHY??? we have plenty of beef.. I guess they say our product gets premiums when shipped overseas.. don't know how much truth there is to that, but it's certain that the import beef sure makes the importers rich
Travlr
Well-known member
Wouldn't it be a major shipping lane east and west regardless if a country was east of it or west of it? China must get things from the Mediterranean, Suez Canal, Red Sea, and through the Malacca Strait.
Travlr
Well-known member
Always makes me wonder in all this global warming hysteria that we import AND export beef. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I always wonder about the logistics when I see two semis full of hay pass each other going in opposite directions. I always wonder if truckers laugh when they deliver hay they've driven and delivered 500 miles from home... and then they pick up a load of hay to be delivered to the same area they came from with the first load.
Bob Kinford
Well-known member
It's actually far worse than just an urban-centric view. Why is the stock market is an economic indicator, when 65% of all trades are done by computers using algorithms in real time (computers are next to the stock exchange, with all of their cables exactly the same length) Another 15% of all trades are done by day traders running 1.5 to 2.5 seconds behind the big boys, leaving only 15% of trades actually being investments in the companies. Adding to that, 85% of all jobs are either service or entertainment.
Production of food (or anything else) has been taken out of the economic equation and replaced by a fragile supply chain theory.
Bob Kinford
Well-known member
I'm in an educational group based out of Canada and we had a discussion on this. Canada actually has COOL and they are concerned about the amount of meat in stores coming out of Mexico at a lower price than Canadian beef. Those producers are baffled as to why the USA doesn't have COOL.
Seems that if the UN was actually serious about solving hunger and health problems, one of the first things they should push it preventing countries with hunger problems from exporting food until their citizens were fed. Instead, it's all about "global economy" based around what is good for the global corporations.
Don't forget that the King Ranch and many other large US based operations have land in South America because of the cheap operating costs. I am sure they are not happy about this.
Twisted
Well-known member
If I remember correctly, their was a mass exodus of US ranchers to South and Central America 15 years ago or so because of the potential of wealth when exporting back to the US. There were a few of those ranchers on these boards at one point.
greybeard
Well-known member
Malacca strait is way too far to the south to affect mainland China very much.
It's the shipping lane that leads/comes from India, Sri lanka, Bangladesh and Mayanmar/Burma but China's primary lane to the developed high consuming nations is thru what we used to call the Formosa Strait. Taiwan now I suppose. (not to imply Australia isn't a highly developed nation!)
Travlr
Well-known member
Yeah, I was just thinking about any kind of European markets...
greybeard
Well-known member
They shouldn't be, since Canada was cohorts in dragging the last US country of origin labeling into the World Court.
Country of origin labeling (COOL) has been contested by Canada and Mexico since December 2008, with the U.S.'s final appeal being denied by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the last several months. The finding of the WTO was that the COOL provisions discriminated against Canada, Mexico and other countries from a technical perspective because the information required of slaughterhouses and processors was substantially greater than that disseminated to the public. This translates to a conclusion that imported products received less favorable treatment than domestic products; thus the U.S. violated its WTO obligation.
And most likely, they are going to again.
Canada to oppose U.S. proposals to renew country of origin labeling, ministers say
Reuters
March 7, 20235:14 PM CSTUpdated a year ago
March 7 (Reuters) - Canada will firmly oppose U.S. proposals to renew mandatory country of origin labeling for pork and beef and is concerned by measures that could cause disruptions to North American livestock supply chains, two Canadian ministers said on Tuesday.
The statement by Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau and International Trade Minister Mary Ng came in response to a proposed U.S. rule requiring meat, poultry or eggs labeled as a U.S. product to be raised and slaughtered within the country.
