News:

Welcome to week4paug.net 2.1 - same as it ever was! Most features have been restored, but please keep us posted on ANY issues you may be having HERE:  https://week4paug.net/index.php/topic,23937

Main Menu

Everyone look at gay marriage while I sign this.....

Started by Guyute, March 28, 2013, 11:22:16 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Guyute

Well, the Monsantos Protection Act snuck its way into a spending bill this week. 
http://www.ibtimes.com/furor-growing-against-obama-over-monsanto-protection-act-1156459#
Odd that Hillary has strong ties to the group.   To their credit, Monsantos is working with the Gates Foundation to develop wheat they can grow in starving nations. 

That said, have you tried to eliminate GMO's from your food, its tough, real tough.   May just be me, but the idea of a corn that pesticides can't kill does worry me a little.
Good decisions come from experience;
Experience comes from bad decisions.

About to open a bottle of Macallan.  There's my foreign policy; I support Scotland.

nab

The philosophical idea that GMOs are part of the human food chain bothers me little.  All of our major agricultural crops are the product of genetic modification.  The process of genetically altering organisms, or organism patterns, to suit human food needs is at least in the 10's of thousands years along, and probably longer.       

However, this stance does not exonerate Monsanto.  My main beef (HeHeHe..) with their business practices has to do with their heavy handed use of patent law and their insistence on the chemical model for food production. 

The GMO science that is currently focused on creating chemically resistant crops should instead be focused on disease and pest resistant crops.  But this is a slow and old fashioned process, and one that comes with real human dilemmas (anticipated by the promise to feed the masses by Monsanto no doubt).

But it is hard to notice the impasse elephant lurking in the room; especially in a more eco-centric atmosphere:  Save ourselves or save the organisms that feed on our food.       

sls.stormyrider

"toss away stuff you don't need in the end
but keep what's important, and know who's your friend"
"It's a 106 miles to Chicago. We got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses."

rowjimmy

The notion that all new seed must be purchased annually is an inappropriate strangelhold on traditional farming.

Guyute

Quote from: rowjimmy on March 29, 2013, 01:37:52 PM
The notion that all new seed must be purchased annually is an inappropriate strangelhold on traditional farming.

I want to agree with this part, but I don't have a problem with it.  They spent millions of dollars developing a product and wrote the rules for purchasing it and its reuse which farmers know going in.   The way around this is to farm with traditional seed rather than a GMO seed and stop furthering the poison Monsanto produces.

My problem is the GMO's.  Look at wheat, were were fine eating it for thousands of years, not there are all kind of wheat/gluten intolerance.  Why, production of high gluten wheat.  We actually grow a wheat that is banned in many European nations, corn that in raw for cannot be consumed by human beings with the sole purpose of turning it into modified food additives.
Good decisions come from experience;
Experience comes from bad decisions.

About to open a bottle of Macallan.  There's my foreign policy; I support Scotland.

mbw

first, the title of this thread sucks.
the gay marriage issue is not some conjured up distraction created by obama to sneakily sign this bill to help out his good buddies at monsanto.

the gay marriage issue is the last battle for civil rights in this country.
its very important, and we should be grateful it appears its time has finally come.

second.  yes it sucks this provision was in this bill.
it's capitalism at its worst.
did obama have a choice but to sign this bill at this time?
i'm not sure he did.

third, it is only valid for the next six months.
if you feel strongly about this make sure to write your reps and the white house to let them know you wont stand for it anymore.

don't, however, discredit the gay marriage movement sweeping over the country right now because you are upset with a provision in this bill.

sls.stormyrider

Quote from: Guyute on March 29, 2013, 03:25:01 PM
Quote from: rowjimmy on March 29, 2013, 01:37:52 PM
The notion that all new seed must be purchased annually is an inappropriate strangelhold on traditional farming.

I want to agree with this part, but I don't have a problem with it.  They spent millions of dollars developing a product and wrote the rules for purchasing it and its reuse which farmers know going in.   The way around this is to farm with traditional seed rather than a GMO seed and stop furthering the poison Monsanto produces.

My problem is the GMO's.  Look at wheat, were were fine eating it for thousands of years, not there are all kind of wheat/gluten intolerance.  Why, production of high gluten wheat.  We actually grow a wheat that is banned in many European nations, corn that in raw for cannot be consumed by human beings with the sole purpose of turning it into modified food additives.

the problem is the wind.
Let's say I buy seeds from Monsanto and plant my crops. You live in the next farm over, and being the hippy Phish fan that you are want to be all natural, organic, and hate all things GMO.
Pollen from my wheat is carried by the wind, travels and pollinates your wheat. You can't re-use your seeds that have DNA from Monsanto, even though if you had your way you wouldn't have farmed with a GMO seed. Monsanto has spent a ton of money on court cases protecting their "copywrite" and will prevent you from saving seeds. You, being a hippy farmer, don't have the resources to fight it in court, and even if you did, the courts have protected Monsanto
"toss away stuff you don't need in the end
but keep what's important, and know who's your friend"
"It's a 106 miles to Chicago. We got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses."

birdman

Paug FTMFW!

Guyute

Quote from: mbw on March 29, 2013, 06:27:30 PM
first, the title of this thread sucks.
the gay marriage issue is not some conjured up distraction created by obama to sneakily sign this bill to help out his good buddies at monsanto.

the gay marriage issue is the last battle for civil rights in this country.
its very important, and we should be grateful it appears its time has finally come.

second.  yes it sucks this provision was in this bill.
it's capitalism at its worst.
did obama have a choice but to sign this bill at this time?
i'm not sure he did.

third, it is only valid for the next six months.
if you feel strongly about this make sure to write your reps and the white house to let them know you wont stand for it anymore.

don't, however, discredit the gay marriage movement sweeping over the country right now because you are upset with a provision in this bill.

Seriously?   Chill out, it was a joke.     I would never try to do something to diminish the gay marriage movement.  It was meant to be a joke because Obama signed it while everyone was fired up about another issue.  It could have been any number of issues.

I was fortunate enough to work for and be friends with someone who was helping lead the charge that got Civil Unions in Vermont which was the first form of gay marriage in the country.  I got to see first hand the hatred and the venom towards him at that time when all he wanted was to be able to walk into a hospital when his partner was sick and not have to call his partners father, who hadn't spoken to his son in over a decade, to get permission for treatment.  They already owned a house together, had buried friends together, and were standing by each others side while 1 was getting very ill.

I do feel strongly and have written.  This has been extended for 6 months multiple times.  Obama has ties to Monsanto, Hillary is or was on the board, the whole thing stinks.  Obama is just showing he has his cronies, they are just agriculture, not oil.
Good decisions come from experience;
Experience comes from bad decisions.

About to open a bottle of Macallan.  There's my foreign policy; I support Scotland.

mbw

ya seriously.  its not as if you are the first person on the internet to phrase it that way, many of whom believe just that, and i'm tired of reading about it.

but yeah.  so how do we go about getting corporate money out of our law making?
and get our law making all the fuck up in some corporations, balls deep?

barnesy305

Quote from: mbw on March 29, 2013, 10:42:10 PM
ya seriously.  its not as if you are the first person on the internet to phrase it that way, many of whom believe just that, and i'm tired of reading about it.

but yeah.  so how do we go about getting corporate money out of our law making?
and get our law making all the fuck up in some corporations, balls deep?

The short answer is never. Sorry.

Guyute

Quote from: mbw on March 29, 2013, 10:42:10 PM
ya seriously.  its not as if you are the first person on the internet to phrase it that way, many of whom believe just that, and i'm tired of reading about it.

but yeah.  so how do we go about getting corporate money out of our law making?
and get our law making all the fuck up in some corporations, balls deep?

Sorry, it was meant to be taken directly from the headlines, not be original.  I just reread my response and it sounded more snarky than intended.

A few quick changes I see to get started are:

1. Politicians are allowed to take corporate donations.  Corps can donate more than most individuals and become a majority shareholder to the politician.  Eliminate corporate donations to politicians, I know, lot of loopholes to close on this one.

2. Politicians sit on the boards of these companies, enough said.  This must be eliminated.

3. Eliminate PACs.   Many are just fronts for companies and rich doners.

3.
Good decisions come from experience;
Experience comes from bad decisions.

About to open a bottle of Macallan.  There's my foreign policy; I support Scotland.

VDB

Quote from: slslbs on March 29, 2013, 07:23:22 PM
Quote from: Guyute on March 29, 2013, 03:25:01 PM
Quote from: rowjimmy on March 29, 2013, 01:37:52 PM
The notion that all new seed must be purchased annually is an inappropriate strangelhold on traditional farming.

I want to agree with this part, but I don't have a problem with it.  They spent millions of dollars developing a product and wrote the rules for purchasing it and its reuse which farmers know going in.   The way around this is to farm with traditional seed rather than a GMO seed and stop furthering the poison Monsanto produces.

My problem is the GMO's.  Look at wheat, were were fine eating it for thousands of years, not there are all kind of wheat/gluten intolerance.  Why, production of high gluten wheat.  We actually grow a wheat that is banned in many European nations, corn that in raw for cannot be consumed by human beings with the sole purpose of turning it into modified food additives.

the problem is the wind.
Let's say I buy seeds from Monsanto and plant my crops. You live in the next farm over, and being the hippy Phish fan that you are want to be all natural, organic, and hate all things GMO.
Pollen from my wheat is carried by the wind, travels and pollinates your wheat. You can't re-use your seeds that have DNA from Monsanto, even though if you had your way you wouldn't have farmed with a GMO seed. Monsanto has spent a ton of money on court cases protecting their "copywrite" and will prevent you from saving seeds. You, being a hippy farmer, don't have the resources to fight it in court, and even if you did, the courts have protected Monsanto

That to me is the real evil part of it, and I can't believe courts have let this stand. It would be akin to the music industry forcing you to pay them because your neighbors like to listen to records with the windows open and you can hear it at your place.
Is this still Wombat?

McGrupp

This is all bullshit. there's no such things as the "Monsanto Protection Act". The President signed the "Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act", a budgetary-continuing resolution that lets the government keep operating through September 2013 (it was also debated and passed the House and Senate over a course of weeks, so regardless of it's content, it didn't 'sneak by').

The part of it that relates to agriculture is a rider that states, in dense legislative language:
Quote"SEC. 735. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary's evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary's authority"
All of that^, and correct me if I'm wrong, translates to, if a GMO crop comes under review during the middle of a growing season, the grower is allowed to keep growing it while the review process is underway. Prior to this, I believe, the grower was required to immediately cease growing. So, if a crop came under review, but was then cleared as safe, the grower would still have to sacrifice an entire growing season, and depending on the size of the grower, it could result in financial destitution (meaning this helps smaller farms). also, its not instantly allowed to keep growing when its crop comes under review, it is granted a temporary permit by the Secretary of Agriculture on an individual grower-by-grower basis.

all of that sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Just two whiskies, officer.

Quote from: kellerb on November 30, 2010, 10:40:51 PM
I'm not sure if I followed this thread correctly, but what guys are saying is that Dave Thomas sold crack in inner-city DC in the mid-80's, right?

runawayjimbo

I don't have a problem with the GMO aspect of it, but the cronyism blows donkeys.

Quote from: mbw on March 29, 2013, 06:27:30 PM
it's capitalism at its worst.

LOL, not capitalism.

Quote from: McGrupp on March 30, 2013, 10:40:48 AM
This is all bullshit. there's no such things as the "Monsanto Protection Act". The President signed the "Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act", a budgetary-continuing resolution that lets the government keep operating through September 2013 (it was also debated and passed the House and Senate over a course of weeks, so regardless of it's content, it didn't 'sneak by').

This provision, submitted anonymously at the last minute, was unknown to most lawmakers at the time of passage. There was debate on the law, but not this section. It is the very definition of "sneaking by."

But to me, the larger issues are:

1. Roy Blunt (R-MO) worked directly with Monsanto to craft the language. That's troubling regardless of how long this particular provision stays in place.

2. You now have the situation where the legislators are giving the authority to the executive to interfere with the judicial branch. This effectively prevents the courts from performing their constitutionally granted duty. That has more far-reaching consequences than what this specific provision may or may not accomplish.
Quote from: DoW on October 26, 2013, 09:06:17 PM
I'm drunk but that was epuc

Quote from: mehead on June 22, 2016, 11:52:42 PM
The Line still sucks. Hard.

Quote from: Gumbo72203 on July 25, 2017, 08:21:56 PM
well boys, we fucked up by not being there.