LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 05-14-2010, 05:45 PM   #1
jiml8
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,171

Rep: Reputation: 115Reputation: 115
Is this right?


I rather firmly distrust government and I'm convinced that the US is turning fascist. However, I am also firmly fact-driven, and I've run across something that I find myself (to this point, anyway) unable to evaluate.

I saw a link to this page in a facebook post, so I followed it and read it. Well, the tone was somewhat alarmist, but the topic was...perhaps...credible.

So I went here and read the bill. Now, reading the bill is hard because of the constant references to deletions then additions to the US Code. But I did note some rather sweeping language in the additions specified in the bill.

So, investigating further, and found this. Again, the tone is alarmist and Monsanto is obviously the Bad Guy, but it really does look credible. The language quoted is indeed the language of the bill, and the issue therefore is one of interpretation and whether the interpretation provided in the blogs make sense.

I grew up around farms and as kid I worked in the fields for several summers. I know how it goes "down on the farm", but I haven't been there for a very long time.

So, the conspiracy theory is that the giant food factories are trying to gain complete and absolute control of ALL food production - not merely in the US but around the world, and to the point that you would be committing a crime by growing tomatoes in your backyard and giving some to your family and neighbors.

And, superficially at least, the case looks presentable. And it would be fully consistent with corporate behavior we are seeing in other industries.

But, I confess to not having enough information about that industry to really know.

Does anyone here have a decent opinion?
 
Old 05-14-2010, 07:04 PM   #2
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware14.2 64-Bit Desktop, Devuan 2.0 ASCII Toshiba Satellite Notebook
Posts: 2,674

Rep: Reputation: 733Reputation: 733Reputation: 733Reputation: 733Reputation: 733Reputation: 733Reputation: 733
I think perhaps corporations do have a considerable amount of influence. What I notice most, is the misinformation and insistence that farmers USE insecticides/chemicals to 'safeguard' their crops, rather than let things go naturally. There is always an acceptable loss of crop due to bugs, but in reality is never anything 'damaging' as the corporations would like you to believe. Also, the whole genetically modified seeds is something too. Countries in Africa, as poor and hungry as they are, most of the time turn down food offered by countries that offer them modified crops that grow. So what does that say, when even third world countries turn down such help?

Sure you get a high yield, but in the long run you will not get another crop. Why do you even think that scientists in Norway decided to store unmodified, PURE seeds in a so-called 'doomsday' cellar? Is it because most of what is grown today essentially modified chemically/genetically? I think so

Conspiracy or not, but there are things that are hard to ignore. Assume however I am wrong: I challenge anyone in the US when they finish eating a fruit that has seeds, or vegetable that has seeds to try and plant that seed and see if it grows. I am willing to bet that nothing will come from that seed, because that fruit or vegetable that you have consumed has essentially been manufactured from a crop to yield an unnatural amount. Therefore the seed itself will be a sterile seed, and nothing will come from it.

You can even buy seeds from a flower shop to plant cherries, or whatever fruit seeds they have. Will it yield fruit? Sure, but how about a second, third, fourth generation of plants & furit? Nope, I don't think so because those seeds won't yield anything anymore. Otherwise the shop that sold you those seeds in the first place would begin to lose business.

There is actually an element of control here. A society that is even remotely semi-self sufficient is less likely to spend as much money, and there is no profit in an independent society.

This is not just food, it goes into medicine too. Spending money into researching a cure is usually a bad financial decision. It is far more profitable to design drugs that keep a person alive enough to spend more money on that drug.

Ok, I know that I am also sounding like either an 'alarmist' or whatever, and if I strayed too OT, I apologize. The thing is there is a rather huge corporate presense in our lives these days.

Last edited by Jeebizz; 05-14-2010 at 07:08 PM.
 
Old 05-14-2010, 07:09 PM   #3
smeezekitty
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Washington U.S.
Distribution: M$ Windows / Debian / Ubuntu / DSL / many others
Posts: 2,339

Rep: Reputation: 231Reputation: 231Reputation: 231
edit:OMG!
Wat if there is some sort of food shortage? you are not allowed to EAT?
That is such BS infact if that passes i might even move to another country

Actually read the bill! its a prank.

Last edited by smeezekitty; 05-14-2010 at 07:19 PM.
 
Old 05-14-2010, 07:34 PM   #4
damgar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: dallas, tx
Distribution: Slackware - current multilib/gsb Arch
Posts: 1,949
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 201Reputation: 201Reputation: 201
If you watch late night TV you'll see an ad for a seedbank that sells non-hybridized seeds so that in the event of society's collapse you can grow food. The inbreeding and genetic modification of all types of different crops frequently leads to sterile crops either by design or as an unnecessary trait that was lost in the mix since plants are cloned from cuttings in the industry.

Just trying to get my yard redone I'm having to deal with this since the best hybrid bermudas can only be propagated vegetatively, which makes them MUCH more expensive to get going.


That was probably off-topic.

EDIT: Don't the Obama's have a vegatable garden in the white house lawn?

Last edited by damgar; 05-14-2010 at 07:39 PM.
 
Old 05-14-2010, 08:01 PM   #5
smeezekitty
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Washington U.S.
Distribution: M$ Windows / Debian / Ubuntu / DSL / many others
Posts: 2,339

Rep: Reputation: 231Reputation: 231Reputation: 231
http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/organic.asp
 
Old 05-14-2010, 10:17 PM   #6
jiml8
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,171

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 115Reputation: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeezekitty View Post
Well, that is certainly interesting, but I'm afraid it might not be relevant. It is dealing with a bill that was apparently introduced in the House in the 2009 session, while the links I reported are dealing with a bill introduced in the Senate in the 2010 session.

The email addressed by Snopes is way over the top in both wording and claims; had I read it I would promptly have dismissed it. The blogs, however, do quote from the current bill - and quote accurately, I might add.

There are apparently differences between the bill discussed in Snopes and the current one; for instance, Snopes says:

Quote:
MYTH: H.R. 875 would mean a "goodbye to farmers markets" because it would regulateand penalize "each farmer who wishes to sell locally."

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would result in farmers markets beingregulated, penalized by any fines, or shut down.
However, the current bill contains specific language that would apply to farmer's markets. It names "small businesses and organizations that sell directly to consumers" (or words to that close effect), which clearly would include farmers and gardeners.

So I don't think we're talking about the same thing here.

However, what the Snopes link DOES show is that this is not a brand new issue. Apparently this has been tried before and didn't make it through Congress. It also shows that there is some kind of opposition in place (though how sane that opposition is...is something I'm still trying to figure out).

Snopes usually does a good job when they research something. I have to say that the email they were addressing does not give me a great deal of confidence in the group opposing this kind of legislation.

Nonetheless, the claims made in the blogs, with the appropriate quotes from the bill, still look quite credible to me.

If it's true, it's extremely important. I'll be traveling for the next couple of days, but I do think this deserves more research.

Last edited by jiml8; 05-14-2010 at 10:19 PM.
 
Old 05-14-2010, 10:41 PM   #7
jiml8
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,171

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 115Reputation: 115
...also, upon further review, I note that the Snopes article discusses a claim in the email, whereby the bill is to be used to ban seed banks and make it illegal for farmers to save seed from year to year. The Snopes response is that there is no language in the bill that mentions seed.

However, the second blog I linked addresses that exact point, quoting from the current bill and putting forth an interpretation - that certainly looks plausible - that shows how the law could indeed have the effect of banning seed banks if a specific (and reasonable looking) interpretation is used (i.e. just define seeds as food, thereby causing them to fall under other provisions of the bill regarding handling and storage).

Either what the bloggers are saying is true, or I am certainly missing something. I'm not expert in the field; I need to know whether or not I'm missing something.
 
Old 05-14-2010, 10:48 PM   #8
Dogs
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Houston
Distribution: Slackware 13.37 x64
Posts: 105

Rep: Reputation: 25
Let me ask you this, my friend.. To whom does everyone owe money?

That is who owns the corporations, the politicians, and by proxy, everyone else. The corporations do not want control over everything, it is their owner who wants control over everything.


Attachment 3570

NOTE: I don't mean the fed is the owner, I mean the fed is the American owner. If you dug into the fed before they destroyed all the evidence, then you would figure out who the real owners actually are, or at least come closer to knowing, anyhow.


Gotta remember, though. These are the best damned hackers that ever existed, so being lazy will get you defeat.

Last edited by Dogs; 05-04-2012 at 04:10 PM.
 
Old 05-14-2010, 10:53 PM   #9
smeezekitty
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Washington U.S.
Distribution: M$ Windows / Debian / Ubuntu / DSL / many others
Posts: 2,339

Rep: Reputation: 231Reputation: 231Reputation: 231
I still think it is an understanding error as such a thing will not fly.
 
Old 05-14-2010, 11:14 PM   #10
Dogs
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Houston
Distribution: Slackware 13.37 x64
Posts: 105

Rep: Reputation: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeezekitty View Post
I still think it is an understanding error as such a thing will not fly.
It might not fly today. Perhaps tomorrow you'll be more worried about something else.

To clarify that.. The healthcare bill is ~30 years old.

Hell I might as well rephrase the whole thing.. It might not fly today, but perhaps tomorrow you will know all the reasons that are important to you that it must be so.

Last edited by Dogs; 05-14-2010 at 11:37 PM.
 
Old 05-15-2010, 01:30 AM   #11
lumak
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Location: Phoenix
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 799
Blog Entries: 32

Rep: Reputation: 111Reputation: 111
and how is this any more disturbing than roundup developing seeds that will not germinate until you spray them with roundup?

How is this any more disturbing than food production becoming so much like a factory that almost all the seeds grown commercially are from a handful of sources that cause a lack of genetic diversity that makes them more susceptible to disease and infestations?

The problems with food production are already here and are in every corner of the market.

Why do you think that bee populations are declining? commercial bee farmers purposefully breed their bees stupid because it makes them easier to handle. They don't even care about the honey produced by them, they just want the quick cash from the farmers for pollinating the fields. My grandpas bees were not like that. They were perfectly adapted to the harsh desert weather of southern California at the cost of being a bit more hostile from being slightly africanized. BUT! the honey production was much higher and they were a lot more healthy than other bees. I say were because the bees were all sold and the new owner breeded them with tamer bees.

The human race is already dead. We just don't know it yet.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:29 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration