Stuck on Roof for Katrina
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Monsanto: The evil corporation in your refrigerator
When we consider the rogue's gallery of devilish, over-sized, greedy and disproportionately powerful corporations, we generally come up with outfits like Microsoft, Bechtel, AIG, Halliburton, Goldman-Sachs, Exxon-Mobil and the United States Senate. Yet somehow, Monsanto, arguably the most devilish, over-sized, greedy and disproportionately powerful corporation in the world has been able to more or less skulk between the raindrops -- only a household name in households where documentaries like Food Inc. are regarded as light Friday evening entertainment. My house, for example. But for the most part, if you were to ask an average American for their list of sinister corporations, Monsanto probably wouldn't make the cut.
It should.
Founded by Missouri pharmacist John Francis Queeny in 1901, Monsanto is literally everywhere. Just about every non-organic food product available to consumers has some sort of connection with Monsanto.
Anyone who can read a label knows that corn, soy and cotton can be found in just about every American food product. Upwards of 90% of all corn, soybeans and cotton are grown from genetically engineered seeds, also known as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). These genetically enhanced products appear in around 70% of all American processed food products. And Monsanto controls 90% of all genetically engineered seeds. In other words, Monsanto controls -- and owns patents on -- most of the American food supply.
When you consider, as Walletpop originally reported, that one-in-four food labels is inaccurate, that the F.D.A.'s testing is weak at best, then how can we trust one corporation to have so much control over our produce? The answer is, we can't.
Recently, a study by the International Journal of Biological Sciences revealed that Monsanto's Mon 863, Mon 810, and Roundup herbicide-absorbing NK 603 in corn caused kidney and liver damage in laboratory rats. Scientists also discovered damage to the heart, spleen, adrenal glands and even the blood of rats that consumed the mutant corn. A "state of hepatorenal toxicity" the study concluded.
This hasn't slowed down Monsanto's profit machine. In 2008, Monsanto cleared over $2 billion in net profits on $11 billion in revenues. And its 2009 is looking equally as excellent.
Author and food safety advocate Robyn O'Brien told me, "Monsanto is expecting gross margins in Q2 2010 of 62%, its corn and soy price mix to be up 8-10% and its glyphosate revenue to expand to an estimated $1 billion in gross profit by 2012, enabling Monsanto to further drive R&D into seeds and to price those seeds at a premium – further driving price increases on the farm and in the grocery stores."
This, O'Brien says, in the same year when farm income declined by around 34%.
Because Monsanto claims that its GMOs create higher yields and therefore comparatively higher revenues per acre for struggling American farmers, they're certainly a tempting option. On the surface, that is. Monsanto controls its seeds with an iron fist, so even if you happen to own a farm next to another farm upon which Monsanto seeds are used, and if those seeds migrate onto your land, Monsanto can sue you for royalties.
Additionally, if you use seeds from crops grown from Monsanto seeds, a process known as "seed cleaning," you also have to pay royalties to Monsanto or it will sue you. All told, Monsanto has recovered $15 million in royalties by suing farmers, with individual settlements ranging from five figures to millions of dollars each.
Back in 2004, farmer Kem Ralph served eight months in jail and was fined $1.3 million for lying about Monsanto cotton seeds he was hiding in his barn as a favor to a friend. They weren't even his seeds (yeah, that's what they all say!). By way of comparison, the fine in Ralph's home state of Tennessee for, say, cocaine possession, is $2,500.
In keeping with the Orwellian nature of modern marketing, one of the first phrases you see on the front page of the Monsanto website is "we help farmers." Funny. In a cruelly ironical way, that is.
In fairness, the argument in support of Monsanto is generally "it makes more food for lower prices." Of course this is a red herring. Basic economics proves that choice and competition create lower prices. Not monopolies. This applies not only to American grocery stores, but also in terms of feeding developing nations where food is scarcer. Moreover, stronger Monsanto herbicides, compatible with herbicide resistant seeds, are giving rise to mutant Wolverine-ish super weeds that have adapted and are rapidly spreading through the air to farms that don't use Monsanto GMOs, destroying obviously vulnerable crops. Say nothing of the inevitable mutant bugs that will adapt to the pesticides that are implanted into the Monsanto Mon 810 genetic code. And if further studies indicate similar organ damage in humans, the externalized costs to health care systems will begin to seriously out-weigh the benefits of cheaper food.
Ultimately, there are better, healthier ways to make cheaper food. Until then the best thing we can do is to demand further investigations and buy organic products whenever practical.
And if you can't afford to buy organic, O'Brien recommends, "A great first step, given how pervasive these ingredients are in processed foods that often use these ingredients to extend shelf life, is to reduce your exposure to processed foods and stick with pronounceable ingredients and foods that your grandmother would have served her kids."
Meanwhile, let's endeavor to make Monsanto a household name. But not in a good way.
On January 15, the Obama Justice Department launched an anti-trust investigation against the corporate behemoth over its next generation of genetically modified "Roundup Ready" soybean seeds. The very next day, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms, which challenges the safety of genetically modified agricultural products -- the centerpiece of the Monsanto empire. If the investigation fails, farmers will have to switch over to the next generation of Roundup Ready seeds in 2014. And the cycle of corporate abuse and monopolization will continue.
See full article from WalletPop: http://srph.it/bpzXks
It should.
Founded by Missouri pharmacist John Francis Queeny in 1901, Monsanto is literally everywhere. Just about every non-organic food product available to consumers has some sort of connection with Monsanto.
Anyone who can read a label knows that corn, soy and cotton can be found in just about every American food product. Upwards of 90% of all corn, soybeans and cotton are grown from genetically engineered seeds, also known as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). These genetically enhanced products appear in around 70% of all American processed food products. And Monsanto controls 90% of all genetically engineered seeds. In other words, Monsanto controls -- and owns patents on -- most of the American food supply.
When you consider, as Walletpop originally reported, that one-in-four food labels is inaccurate, that the F.D.A.'s testing is weak at best, then how can we trust one corporation to have so much control over our produce? The answer is, we can't.
Recently, a study by the International Journal of Biological Sciences revealed that Monsanto's Mon 863, Mon 810, and Roundup herbicide-absorbing NK 603 in corn caused kidney and liver damage in laboratory rats. Scientists also discovered damage to the heart, spleen, adrenal glands and even the blood of rats that consumed the mutant corn. A "state of hepatorenal toxicity" the study concluded.
This hasn't slowed down Monsanto's profit machine. In 2008, Monsanto cleared over $2 billion in net profits on $11 billion in revenues. And its 2009 is looking equally as excellent.
Author and food safety advocate Robyn O'Brien told me, "Monsanto is expecting gross margins in Q2 2010 of 62%, its corn and soy price mix to be up 8-10% and its glyphosate revenue to expand to an estimated $1 billion in gross profit by 2012, enabling Monsanto to further drive R&D into seeds and to price those seeds at a premium – further driving price increases on the farm and in the grocery stores."
This, O'Brien says, in the same year when farm income declined by around 34%.
Because Monsanto claims that its GMOs create higher yields and therefore comparatively higher revenues per acre for struggling American farmers, they're certainly a tempting option. On the surface, that is. Monsanto controls its seeds with an iron fist, so even if you happen to own a farm next to another farm upon which Monsanto seeds are used, and if those seeds migrate onto your land, Monsanto can sue you for royalties.
Additionally, if you use seeds from crops grown from Monsanto seeds, a process known as "seed cleaning," you also have to pay royalties to Monsanto or it will sue you. All told, Monsanto has recovered $15 million in royalties by suing farmers, with individual settlements ranging from five figures to millions of dollars each.
Back in 2004, farmer Kem Ralph served eight months in jail and was fined $1.3 million for lying about Monsanto cotton seeds he was hiding in his barn as a favor to a friend. They weren't even his seeds (yeah, that's what they all say!). By way of comparison, the fine in Ralph's home state of Tennessee for, say, cocaine possession, is $2,500.
In keeping with the Orwellian nature of modern marketing, one of the first phrases you see on the front page of the Monsanto website is "we help farmers." Funny. In a cruelly ironical way, that is.
In fairness, the argument in support of Monsanto is generally "it makes more food for lower prices." Of course this is a red herring. Basic economics proves that choice and competition create lower prices. Not monopolies. This applies not only to American grocery stores, but also in terms of feeding developing nations where food is scarcer. Moreover, stronger Monsanto herbicides, compatible with herbicide resistant seeds, are giving rise to mutant Wolverine-ish super weeds that have adapted and are rapidly spreading through the air to farms that don't use Monsanto GMOs, destroying obviously vulnerable crops. Say nothing of the inevitable mutant bugs that will adapt to the pesticides that are implanted into the Monsanto Mon 810 genetic code. And if further studies indicate similar organ damage in humans, the externalized costs to health care systems will begin to seriously out-weigh the benefits of cheaper food.
Ultimately, there are better, healthier ways to make cheaper food. Until then the best thing we can do is to demand further investigations and buy organic products whenever practical.
And if you can't afford to buy organic, O'Brien recommends, "A great first step, given how pervasive these ingredients are in processed foods that often use these ingredients to extend shelf life, is to reduce your exposure to processed foods and stick with pronounceable ingredients and foods that your grandmother would have served her kids."
Meanwhile, let's endeavor to make Monsanto a household name. But not in a good way.
On January 15, the Obama Justice Department launched an anti-trust investigation against the corporate behemoth over its next generation of genetically modified "Roundup Ready" soybean seeds. The very next day, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms, which challenges the safety of genetically modified agricultural products -- the centerpiece of the Monsanto empire. If the investigation fails, farmers will have to switch over to the next generation of Roundup Ready seeds in 2014. And the cycle of corporate abuse and monopolization will continue.
See full article from WalletPop: http://srph.it/bpzXks
Friday, July 30, 2010
Thursday, July 29, 2010
The Mediocrity Man...
I read this little short story a while back by Gabe Suarez & thought that I would post it for the sheeple that are on the fence,Maybe it will make them think.....
The Mediocrity Man...
From the Gabe Suarez 4.7.10 Newsletter...
I want to introduce you to a hypothetical man named John Smith. John Smith is a private citizen. That means that he is not hampered by political directives or policies at federal, state or local levels. But John thinks he is "just a civilian". John has sought mediocrity his entire life. John was bred to be mediocre from the time he was enrolled in first grade. It is what he was trained for since birth....don't make waves...be a nice guy...you can't do this...you can't do that...do as you are told and be a good mediocre civilian citizen.
Then John realized he'd better buy a pistol and carry it because his neighbor was robbed, beaten, raped or brutalized, and the police did not come in time for anything but the report. Being a father and a husband, he did have a glimmering of the understanding of responsability.
So he went to the local gunstore and allowed the patronizing oversized cigar-smoking salesman to talk him into buying a double action only Smith and Wesson because it had several safeties and a real heavy and long trigger pull. "It is great for a mediocrity-seeking civilian like you John", announced the salesman as he wiped doughnut juice on his dingy Local Police Revolver Club t-shirt.
John asked about the Glocks and XDs and M&Ps that looked so modern and cool, and about how many bullets the clip held.
"Oh no...those are for professionals son....you are a civilian...you don't need anything like that. And why do you need more than seven rounds son. You're not gonna go commando on us are you?". Being a mediocrity seeker, and not wanting to be guilty of the sin of arguing, John blushed and chuckled nervously. He bought the Smith and Wesson and went home. He did go to a free handgun clinic at the local range taught by an ex-security guard after he passed his CCW class. But all the guy talked about was how he would get sued if he ever shot anyone so not to shoot anyone. John went to that range a couple of times and shot one round per second like a good mediocre citizen.
Someone told him about more comprehensive classes teaching gunfighting, but John laughed nervously again. Shaking his head he told himself, I am not a gunfighter...I am just a civilian...what do I need to do with gunfighting?" He was a civilian and did not need to go to one of those "commando schools", or learn how to kill like that crazy ad said. He didn't like carrying a gun in the first place and was beginning to convince himself to just leave it at home. That is what his wife would want even though she had allowed him to buy the gun in the first place.
So John went on with his life doing his best to avoid bad things, bad places and bad people. But one day, as much as he tried, as much as anyone tries, trouble came to him. He found himself at church when some crazy terrorist decided today was going to be Judgement Day. After shooting the pastor in the head, he began shooting people in the crowd. The congregation was also full of mediocrity seekers, and those that did not get shot outright, ran away like properly conditioned civilians are trained to do.
But John was torn about running with the rest of the herd, or fighting. He drew his pistol and tried to aim it but it felt strange in his hands....after all civilians did not need to train like Delta Force so John had spent his free time playing tennis and watching television instead. He wondered if he was ready to do what he was thinking of doing. At that moment a round from the terrorist caught his frozen wife right in the face and dropped her dead at his feet. As he turned open-mouthed, to see her die, three rounds hit him in the chest, two piercing his heart.....and the last thought that he had before he faded into blissfull unconscious death was,
"......but I am just a civilian".
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Monday, July 19, 2010
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)