 sj |
||
|
||
an EVIL plan
|
|
|
Subject: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 31 Jul 00 - 10:54 PM for me this is an Evil outrage!!! how do you feel about his?
action center Family farmers, hunger and development experts, and environmentalists around the world were stunned to learn in 1998 that genetic engineers, with the help of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), were developing a technology that would make it impossible for farmers to save their seeds for re-planting. Instantly dubbed "Terminator" technology, the GMO development was quickly denounced as an attempt to make farmers dependent on biotech companies by forcing them to buy new seed each year. Over 1.4 billion people rely on food from saved seed for their daily nutritional needs - yet companies that claim they want to "feed the world" continue to move to finalize their efforts to terminate farmers' right to reuse seeds. And they continue to be supported by our tax dollars! The USDA's Advisory Committee on Agricultural Biotechnology (ACAB) is currently meeting to discuss the Department's role in the development of Terminator technologies. Already the USDA has spent over $200 million to help genetic engineers develop this technology that can only benefit the biotech industry, at the expense of protection for family farmers, consumers or the environment. Tell the USDA to stop its support of this dangerous technology! Demand that our tax money support research and development of alternatives to risky genetic technologies and NOT terminator death-crops! Use our quick form to send an email or a fax online blueclicketything peace (Y) thosp |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 31 Jul 00 - 11:00 PM it's not so much the research fom me -- but the plan to make it impossible for farmers to use their seed -- and have to buy from companys --- although some of the research i am aware of has been done in a very dangerous way --- and i'm not happy about that either! peace (Y) thosp |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Malcolm Douglas Date: 31 Jul 00 - 11:28 PM Quite so. What particularly annoys me is that the various governments involved in testing (including the UK, where I live) still insist that it's some sort of altruistic plan to solve "World Hunger" instead of simply the insatiable hunger of the multinational corporations for profit and monopoly at the expense of people who can't defend themselves. Malcolm |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 31 Jul 00 - 11:36 PM right on the mark Malcolm ----- the sangtimonius evil b******s peace (Y) thosp |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Sorcha Date: 31 Jul 00 - 11:52 PM Because of all the OP (open pollinated) seeds now on the market, usually labelled "Heirloom" varities, and because of all the home gardeners that are saving seeds in Seed Exchanges, I am not sure it is possible. If it is, it is an abomination!! Will function, now!! |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Bugsy Date: 01 Aug 00 - 12:56 AM IT STINKS! But are you REALLY surprised??????
Cheers
Bugsy |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 01 Aug 00 - 01:31 AM surprised -- no -- angered -- yes anyway blueclickety above is defective --- for more info try thisblueclicketything peace (Y) thosp |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 01 Aug 00 - 03:22 AM But Dr. Pangloss always told me that this is the 'best of all possible worlds' and all things are as they must be! Does this coincide with Roundup ready vegetables, Gigantic farms, monocropping forest management, inadequate testing of chemical killing agents, and the utter domination of human life as we know it by corporate policy? No suprizes here... but predictions such as these could leave a lot of self satisfied corpses lying around saying see? I was right! Is Nader the answer? Can we actually allow the populus to think things through and systemically change the corrupt political adjenda into a sustainable biosphere? I don't think shopping can get us out of this one...eh pal? Thanks for your wake up call thosp! |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Steve Parkes Date: 01 Aug 00 - 03:52 AM The point of producing non-germinating seed was originally to prevent the crop from 'escaping' into the environment and contaminating other plants by cross-fertilisation. A good idea, I think. On the other hand, it does have an enormous commercial advantage to the suppliers. There were riots in India last year about this, wasn't it on the news in the USA? There's been a lot of trouble in the UK too (where the GM crops are fertile), with worries that genes will escape; some crops were trashed. Many farmers ploughed their GM crops in before they could flower, at no small financial loss to themselves; and this at a time when lots of smaller farmers are going out of business. Steve |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Llanfair Date: 01 Aug 00 - 04:16 AM The known implications of Genetically Modified crops are frightening enough, but it's the unknown, long term implications that scare the pants off me. Do you know that, because of all the hormones fed to cattle that end up in the water, fish are changing gender and fertility has dropped dramatically. Also, the routine feeding of antibiotics to cattle means that we can't rely on them to cure our ills any more. And what about the feed companies that thought it was OK to grind up the bits left over after butchering the meat to feed to the (vegetarian) cattle as a protein supplement. We still don't know what percentage of the population will die from BSE. Can they REALLY be so stupid??? Bron. |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Escamillo Date: 01 Aug 00 - 05:49 AM It seems that the Terminator technology has not been put into practice until now, as far as the information from GreenPeace and RAFI is up-to-date. I'll try to investigate what happens in Argentina (I work with large cereal, soybean and oil seeds exporters). I may be too optimistic, but think that the USDA should have made some publication on this issue and it would be interesting to see what they say. I still hope that our authorities and USA authorities have not been sold to private companies YET. However, it's our responsibility as citizens to prevent it. Un abrazo - Andrés |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: MMario Date: 01 Aug 00 - 09:11 AM Most commercial crops do not come true from seed; thus the farmers already purchase new seed annually, and most have lieterally for generations. (This is not true for a small minority in developed coutnries who grow open pollinated varieties and 3rd world countries who DO save seed. But they wouldn't be buying GM plants to begin with). As I understand it, the effort to produce non-geminating seed was PRIMARILY to reduce hysteria about the GM plants spreading wildly and taking over eco-systems. Oddly enough, many of the same arguments against GM plants were used when F1 hybrids were first being introduced. NOTE: I am not saying I approve of everything they are trying to do with GM plants and animals, but we HAVE been manipulating plant and animal genetics for our own benefit for about 4000 years. this is NOT that different. |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: kendall Date: 01 Aug 00 - 09:41 AM FOR THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL. |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: folk1234 Date: 01 Aug 00 - 10:03 AM Science-bashing is an old trick of the uninformed or misinformed. My words are perhaps a bit too harsh - There are many truly good people who seek the truth and are informed, but not always by an open and unbaised source. It is true that some people, in the name of 'science', have done some terrible things. But GM seed production is generally a good thing. The 1.4 billion (thosp's number) people who rely on crop-from-seed for their daily bread, also rely on Mother Nature (or some other higher authority) for more rain, less disease, fewer insects and pests, and no lightning fires. Anticipated results of this amazing research include higher yields per acre, uniform crop formation, drought, insect, and disease resistance, and as stated above, controlled propagation. No cure yet for lightning fires! For those few family farmers who have survived into the 21st century, this will mean an increased chance of survival into the next generations. Thank goodness for a Federal Agency, USDA, that is committed to agricultural research. Please take no offense at my comments. I'm just representing the education, science, research, engineering, and economics side of the table. |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: GUEST,Luther Date: 01 Aug 00 - 10:51 AM Misdirection is an old trick of the PR industry hired to deflect criticism of the purely venal. My words aren't nearly harsh enough, but hey, this is a family forum. folk1234, if you truly mean something when you say you represent "education, science, research, engineering, and economics" -- in other words, if the truth really matters to you, you better do a little (no, a lot) more research on this issue. All your current position reflects is the effectiveness of Monsanto's PR flacks.
|
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: GUEST,Ron Date: 01 Aug 00 - 11:08 AM Farmers are free (and should be) to decide for themselves. If this technology is better for a given farmer, he will use it, if not... he won't. (and "better" can mean a LOT of things!) Put your confidence in the judgement and liberty of the farmers. And if YOU want a vote that matters... go buy a farm! |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 01 Aug 00 - 11:59 AM i don't believe i'm science bashing -- i'm very much in favor of responsible scientific reasearch --- actually i'm facinated and excited by much of it -- but i'm not blind to the fact that there is a lot of research done irresponsibly --- also 30+ years ago (and longer) some people were concerned about things like water pollution and emmissions of various gasses into the air etc. -- companys and many government officials assured that there was NO problem --- and that the people who were concerned were science bashers and against progress --- today these are recognized as serious problems-- maybe it's time to listen a little earlier and more carefully ---and here's another blueclicketything peace (Y) thosp |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: kendall Date: 01 Aug 00 - 12:18 PM the USDA is a joke |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: folk1234 Date: 01 Aug 00 - 12:51 PM Thosp: Thanks for the "peace Y". I certainly understand what you're saying, and don't necessarily disagree. I simply have a great deal of trust in our (federal, university, corporate) research efforts across the entire engineering and scientific spectrum. The real purpose of scientific inquiry is to expand the envelope and eventually make better mousetraps. Let's learn more and hope that super-seeds are what they are "cracked up" to be. In my not-so-naive mind, I can't believe that the purpose of GM seeds is to starve the needy. Now if Monsanto makes some money selling 'the seed', then "Hurray for them", they deserve it. |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Mark Clark Date: 01 Aug 00 - 01:16 PM Greetings from Iowa! The subject isn't music but I think I'll post on this one anyway. You all are making a number of important points here, on both sides of the question. The chief biological question seems to be the potential for contaminating the global gene pool and distupting the natural balance. This is a very real concern and I, for one, come down on the side of "the greens." Still, if one doesn't come face to face with agriculture on a frequent basis, one may not entirely understand how it is conducted today. Soil: Soil today serves two primary functions in commercial agriculture: it keeps the crops from falling down and it absorbs and holds the manufactured chemicals that serve alternately to protect and to feed the crop. Most cultivated land is completely poisoned each year so that virtually nothing lives. The poison is designed to decompose after doing its work and become harmless before spring planting. Commercial fertilizer (mostly anhydrous amonia) is added to the soil each year as nutrients for the crop. This practice obviates the need to rotate crops or apply manure. For the most part, agricultural soil is no longer the "living organism" we read about in school. Seeds:Except for primative cultures and a few hobbyists, I think seeds are almost never saved. Seeds are grown commercially and are hybrids created by cross-pollinating the host plants with pollen from another variety. Often, the hybrids are not genetically stable; that is the seeds from the hybrid plant would not produce an identical or even a necessarily useful offspring. This doesn't create a problem because it's usually the seeds of the hybrid plant that are eaten as food. Almost any food vegitable you can buy anywhere is a hybrid. Genetic engineering: This has been going on since the days of Mendel and, before. I would guess that even anciant peoples saved the seeds from strong crops and disgarded the seeds from fields of inferior crops. By doing that, they reinforced genetic traits that may not have survived otherwise. Perhaps a greater threat than the new patented biology is the growing dependence, worldwide, on a limited gene pool. Global distribution of hybrid seeds causes crops all over the world to have the same strengths and weaknesses. The right blight or insect could theoretically wipe out an entire global crop. The new engineering is different mostly because it is done by operating directly on the gene itself rather than rely on the reproduction process for gene modification. For the most part, the new "engineered characteristics" have already been observed in ancestoral populations.
Economics: The economics of modern agriculture tend to work against both the farmer and the consumer. Only the processors and distributors make any money. Farming is now such a low-margin operation that our young people can no longer expect to enter the business. There is no size farm for which the net income will service the debt on property, equipment, chemicals and seeds. If you can't inherit a farm, you aren't going to become a farmer. Even farms with no property mortgage have a tough go. Crops must typically be sold into the futures market before they are planted just so an operator can have some expectation of return. Anything an operator can to to increase yield must be done just to survive. All this reminds me of another money song - Banks of Marble:
I saw the starving farmer, plowing sod and loam,
In the meantime, I'll continue to watch what I eat and support those businesses that seem to me to be the best "world citizens." Cheers, - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 01 Aug 00 - 01:26 PM Corporate Farming is a nightmare. Most kids are totally unaware of the magical potential of rural living. We blame the kids. Why has living with the land become a folk tale? Because corporations have convinced us that technology is a one way street leading to conglomerate farms, and 'care free' people living in quiet suburbs... Why don't we apply our incredible gift of technology to family farming? We dont have to live like we are "in a third world country" when we have a small farm, unless the government gives subsidies to undercut, isolate, and then buy outright the land that we live with. Every time I shave I think of the effect corporations have had on rural living. This upsets the connection between the muse (nature spirits) and childhood, and consequently between employment and the earth. People just don't know any better, because most of us have little or no contact with rural sensibilities, and strangely enough, we carry out the corporate adjenda subconsciously by snubbing people who don't share our (de)mused detatchment from all things earthen. Long live Kokopele!!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Irish sergeant Date: 01 Aug 00 - 03:01 PM First let me state, I am not against research. Ignorance like violence are handy weapons in a despots arsenal. However, I don't trust the government or big business all that muchremember these are the people who brought us; Government: Watergate, Vietnam, the Kennedy assassination, all the sh***y little plots the CIA had a hand in and let us not forget the poster boy for the conservative element in this country, Oliver North. BIG BUISNESS brought us the following: Love Canal, Bophal, the failure to provide alternative energy sources(I also fault our Government here)I could go on but I think that says enough. However, before trusting them too far especially when it comes to our food, I would go back and read "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. Big Business doesn't change until they are forced to by economic necessity or active government intervention. If this isn't clear, study the tobacco industry's ads of the last ten years. I can't comment on other governments and I still believe our system works and works well but no system is perfect. Kindest reguards, Neilwhoisonhisusualelectionyearantiestablishmentrantuntilpossibly decemberwhenmyanticrasscomercialismrantwillkickin |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: dick greenhaus Date: 01 Aug 00 - 05:25 PM Ah history- Former candidate for the Presidency, Henry Wallace, campaigning on the Progressive ticket in 1948, made his money with hybrid corn. Which had to be purchased each year. |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: GUEST,Luther Date: 01 Aug 00 - 10:26 PM Repurchasing seed isn't really the issue, but the links Thosp gave will give a general idea what the issues really are. Mark Clark touched on most of them. One of the best sources for info on this and other environmental issues is Rachel's Health And Environment Weekly (formerly Rachel's Hazardous Waste Weekly). The stuff is meticulously researched, sources cited -- check it out at http://www.rachel.org
|
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 01 Aug 00 - 10:37 PM thanks Guest,Luther here's the peace (Y) thosp |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 01 Aug 00 - 10:44 PM if at first - try the blueclicketything again |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: GUEST,Rich(stupidbodhranplayerwhodoesn'tknowbetter Date: 01 Aug 00 - 10:48 PM Thosp, thanks for bringing this to light. I think this downright further threaten our already inadequate food supply is downright genocidal! And for the record, the USDA once thought that DDT was a pretty good idea, too. Rich |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Steve Parkes Date: 02 Aug 00 - 03:36 AM I think we should clear up this point: selective breeding is NOT the same as genetic modification. A hybrid can only inherit characteristics that are present in its parents' genes. GM allows a gene from another source to be incorporated in the plant or animal. I'm not against this kind of research. I have a friend who is eight years old. She has a condition called epidermolysis bullosa, which basically means that due to a faulty gene she doesn't have the structures that hold the layers of our skin together. Her skin blisters at the least touch. This means that her mum can't cuddle her or pick her up; she can't wear clothes with seams - she has to wear her underwear inside out; she can barely eat any more, and has to be fed directly into her stomach. A lot of research has been done on the condition, and a gene therapy will be available in a few years, which will be able to correct the genes in her skin cells, but will need to be applied frequently, as it wears off. This is because it could be very dangerous to make something would permanently change the genetic composition of her whole body; it won't be able to spread to toher people. No-one's going to make money out of this, which is maybe why they can afford to be so cautious. Steve |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Joe Offer Date: 02 Aug 00 - 04:38 AM There's an air of hysteria in this discussion that troubles me. I know that liberal dogma dictates that it is heresy to use chemicals or genetic engineering or any sort of science in agriculture. Somehow, though, I'm afraid we'd end up back in the dust bowl days if we didn't use science in our farming. I suppose it's also heresy to encourage underdeveloped countries to use science in agriculture instead of pure, traditional methods that must be vastly superior to anything we could teach them - but they certainly do need some kind of help. I guess maybe I should turn in my liberal credentials – but I don't think the conservative demagogues would agree with me, either. You think horrible people who control the very food we eat are victimizing us all? Nope, sorry, I don't buy it. I can go to the supermarket and find food that is far better than what people could buy in the 1930's. I've been eating that food for over 50 years, and I'm still pretty healthy. I live in a valley that could be a desert most of the year, except for a few wetlands here and there that served as home for mosquitoes that bore yellow fever and malaria and encephalitis. Instead, my Central Valley of California is one of the richest agricultural areas in the world. You wouldn't want to live on a "family farm" on the sun-scorched West Side of our Valley, down near Coalinga and Buttonwillow and Kettleman City - but the cotton sure grows well down there. The soil around Sacramento is very poor in nutrients - but you wouldn't believe the amount of rice and tomatoes we ship to the rest of the world. We also have smaller farms that grow wine grapes and vegetables and tree fruits, but science has turned our vast wasteland into a rich agricultural area that serves a good part of the world. We also have one of the most prestigious agricultural schools in the world, the University of California at Davis. Some people believe the place is full of evil plant geneticists and U.S. Department of Agriculture bureaucrats who are out to poison the world. I've met a lot of those people - the farmers, the ag scientists, and the USDA bureaucrats. I suppose a few of them are greedy, self-interested SOB's, but most of them seem like dedicated knowledgeable professionals who love the land. Most of them are very good at what they do, and they have a sincere concern for the environment. Certainly, there are problems in agriculture. Certainly, some of our uses of chemicals and genetics in farming have been mistaken. We need to study these problems and solve them. On the whole, though, agriculture is doing quite well. We produce a lot of good food at reasonable prices, and people seem to live a long time if they eat it. Sorry, but I see very little evil in our agriculture. -Joe Offer-
|
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Steve Parkes Date: 02 Aug 00 - 05:55 AM Yes, don't forget that everything is made of chemicals! Dihydrogen monoxide (aka water) is very corrosive; so is oxygen, and it's poisonous too. The organic fertilisers you get from your compost heap have been chemically altered by the bacteria and bugs that live in it. The Chilean guano that provides all those tons of NPK fertiliser is a natural product; it doesn't even need processing. Agriculture, however simple, is tampering with Nature. Without it most of us wouldn't be here. On the other hand, I believe we're right to be concerned about, among other things, genetic modification. While there are undoubtedly incredible benefits to be gained, we are still in the early stages of development and discovery; there is an awful lot we can't predict about the consequences of GM at the moment. We have to be very cautious: once let the genie out of the bottle (to borrow that hackneyed phrase), there's no way we can get it back in. If a gene (no "i"!) escapes to another species it could be very bad. For example, if a herbicide resistance gene got into a weed you'd have an indestructable weed, and you'd have defeated the object of the introducing the gene in the first place; you'd have no advantage and a serious disadvantage. Sorry if I'm labouring the point, but it needs to be laboured! Steve |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Penny S. Date: 02 Aug 00 - 08:26 AM I want to be able to tell what I'm buying - and the USA government is trying to make it illegal to label food over here to show that it does, or does not contain GM products. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: GUEST,Joerg Date: 02 Aug 00 - 09:26 PM I have no right of voting in the US, but maybe I'm allowed to tell my opinion: If that is true - Chtulhu for President (the smaller evil)! Love Joerg
|
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Gypsy Date: 03 Aug 00 - 01:36 AM Couple of points to pass on...since we make our living from the soil, I feel qualified to make an opinion. GM seeds are not the same as selective breeding. When you consider that these seeds are being structured to have "built in" insectisides, you must look at the long range. Insectisides become obsolete in a very short period of time, by creating stronger, healthier bugs. Now the organic farmer uses organic methods, such as bacteria, and predators, when all else fails. In the case of BT, it is now being engineered into the seed. Which means that in a very short period of time, it won't work. Next point: seed saving. On large agri-business type establishments, this doesn't happen. However, on a local scale, who supplies the farmers markets, i must tell you that most of us save seed. And trade seed. And so on. Monsanto is the company behind this particular controversy. I might add, that it is also one of the companies behind the "White List" which is another whole can of worms. GM seeds, and food? Start looking at the long range, and then see how you feel. |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: DougR Date: 03 Aug 00 - 01:48 AM Joe Offer and folk1234, I agree with you 100% but your raining on a lot of people's parades. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 03 Aug 00 - 02:53 AM It is complicated, and interwoven, this agribusiness concern. First, the average food product in this country travels 1400 miles to the consumer. Second, pesti/herbicides are in our ground water, and some stay active in the soil for a long time. Third, the genetic AND the hybrid research seldom covers nutrition, and my personal conversations with 'experts' made this plainly obvious. The agribusiness representitives assured me that the american public is more concerned with how their fruits and vegetables look than how nutritious the new strains are. Fourth, it is a mistake to automatically assume that the food we buy from chemical based farm businesses is good for us. Fifth, because we have built strip malls and condominiums over the top of much of our most firtile lands, we are loosing the ability to farm locally; at an amasing rate. Sixth, the american public is categorically over fed and under nourished, and we have to assume that this is partly due to our food growing techniques. Seventh, though Organically grown food can be less nutritious than its chemical counterparts, the simple reality is that it is often vastly more nutritious, more disease resistant, as well as being a good environment for the kids. Eight, the chemical killing agents that are systematically used create profits for chemical companies, not the farmers. THIS is the main point! The only people who benefit in the long run... (the ones who have no soil to poison, the ones who do not work in the fields with 'specified toxicity ratings', the ones who don't live down stream, the ones who can't afford highly efficient water filtration systems, and the ones that need little nutrition from their food) ...are the chemical companies themselves. Straight out of world war two, they came to us from the bomb factories. Now it is a war on the environment, and as usual, regular people are providing themselves to play the casualty roles. I Know we can do better than this! END OF RANT. ttw |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: the copycat Date: 03 Aug 00 - 04:03 AM ummm....ok...?? |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: GUEST,Luther Date: 03 Aug 00 - 12:02 PM Joe Offer, Concern about Monsanto is well grounded both in science and in the past and current behavior of the corporation. There's not room here for a full history, I've chosen one incident that I hope will shed a little light on what you perceive as "hysteria." I can assure you it has nothing to do with "liberal dogma". Briefly, Monsanto was one of the manufacturers of the dioxin-contaminated herbicide Agent Orange, and the company that provided falsified dioxin toxicity data to the government. This falsified data was then used as a basis for denying compensation to Vietnam veterans suffering from dioxin poisoning. I've chosen this incident, because it was mainstream media news, and is well documented on the web. The link I'm providing is to an internal EPA memo written at the end of the investigation. The few lines that comprise this post in no way reflect the time I've spent in preparing it. I've struggled for hours to come up with a polite, non-confrontational answer to your post, one that would point in the direction of understanding. I hope you will do me, and the others here whom you dismiss as "hysterical", the same courtesy, by following this link and reading. Here's the link: http://pwp.lincs.net/sanjour/monsanto.htm Thanks, Luther
|
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Aug 00 - 07:16 PM Well, Luther - I'm sure you're correct. My question is not about individual incidents, but about the scale of those problems. We need to be aware of the problems and deal with them with a level head, but I think we must keep our outlook in perspective. I suppose there are two kinds of people in the world - those who believe that the world is ruled by an all-powerful, evil conspiracy, and those who don't. I don't. Certainly, there's evil in the world - but there's a hell of a lot more good. -Joe Offer, evil, conspiratorial Mudcatter- |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: DougR Date: 04 Aug 00 - 03:14 PM Joe Offer: well there is at least two of us. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 04 Aug 00 - 03:54 PM Gifted are the ones who play By rules the selfish win the day Unspoken are conspiracies We choose to help, we choose to tease |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: Lox Date: 05 Aug 00 - 08:29 AM The developing world or third world (Whatteva-yawwan-cyaalit) is suffering the consequences of crop "tampering" Aid is given on condition that farmers use certain high yield seeds. Local strains of crops die out, damaging biodiversity and therefore the ecosystem at large The soil suffers because it can't sustain these new additions to it, and because it has lost plant species that are indigenous to it. These high yield crops don't produce seeds so farmers become dependant on the companies who produce them for more seeds. Farmers are then required to buy the company's recommended fertilizer to "fix" their soil These cause further environmental damage and the codependancy spiral grows worse too The company will "recommend" the "right machinery" to ensure that the crops are harvested properly, but spare parts have to be imported. In an attempt to make enough money to pay off their debt, farmers need to continue to grow their new high yield produce. But, being dependant on their "benefactors", they end up spending more than they make. = Debt spiral & eco-damage spiral Profit is the motive, and poverty + environmental damage are the results. It isn't so much an "evil plan", as it is an "evil trade". I want to write loads more, but this is a thread, not an essay competition. (and I was just starting to enjoy the sound of my own voice) |
|
Subject: RE: an EVIL plan From: thosp Date: 05 Aug 00 - 10:11 AM you were on a roll Lox (pun intended) well said! peace (Y) thosp |
| Share Thread: |