ColdBlooded said:
Let them eat carrots. Serious that's the dumbest thing i've heard in a long time.
I don't appreciate you calling that statement dumb when, if you understood asian agricultural practice and lifestyle, you would realize that they cannot just pick up a carrot and eat it. Rice comprises the majority of the diet of the Chinese. Those of us in the developed world take the diversity of food for granted, when not all of us have that luxury.
2-0-Sixx said:
Also, a recent report has shown that most organic farmers fail because it is not profitable. There is a high demand for organic food but the consumers are not willing to pay the high costs of organic food, thus forcing farmers to go the GM route.
Very true. Organic farmers are going bust because no-one wants to pay any more than they have to for food. I do it myself on a daily basis - you walk into the supermarket (or green-grocer) and theres two types of tomato - one for $2 a kilo and the other for $5 a kilo. Which one do you think I'm gonna buy? And yes, the American government does provide massive amounts of money to subsidise farming. However, very little of this money goes to the small farmer, it mainly goes to the big farmers. This also causes major problems on the international scale - the more farmers grow, the more money they get in subsidies. Thus, American farmers can afford to grow massive excesses of their crop and then sell it to the global market at an extremely cheap price (they don't need the money, they're getting it from the government - it's like welfare). This has caused a large percent of farmers world-wide, primarily African and South American farmers, to stop farming because they can't make a profit (again, it's the same argument as for organic foods - why would you buy oats from a brazilian farmer for $100 per tonne when you can get it from an American farmer for $50 a tonne?). Check the WTO website for more information on this topic if you want to find out more.
Heresy, the agricultural chemical companies who run the show are mainly Monsanto, Pioneer Hybred (Du-Pont) and Bayer cropscience. They are also the ones who are paying scientists to develop round-up ready varieties (because they produce the roundup). These GM crops are bad, REALLY bad - after all, these companies claim that the production of these crops will reduce the use of roundup. Logic tells you that, if they are the companies who make roundup to start with, why would they produce plants in order to get less sales? Instead, just think about the science behind it. Round-up ready means that the plants can tolerate higher levels of roundup. Therefore, the farmer can spray twice as much roundup on their crop without reduction in yields.
However, on the flip side of GM crops, there are varieties in development right now which have genes incorporated into them which provide natural means to combat disease (and don't kill all of the Monarch butterflies while they're at it!), give the crops the ability to produce significant yields with much less water, poorer soil quality, higher salinity and in colder climates than they would naturally grow in. If these get to market, then we will be able to spray far less chemicals than we currently do on conventional crops and, because these crops require no catalyst for growth (you don't have to spray anything foreign on these crops in order for them to grow), not only would it NOT hurt the soil, but, with the reduction in use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides, it would really HELP the soil.
I love the idea of purely organic farming - as you suggested before cold-blooded, the addition of rhizobium and mychorrizae species to increase organic nitrogen and phosphorus uptake, crop rotation, the addition of natural species to fight infections etc. But the world in which we live, the situation our farmers are facing, it's a case of adapt or die. They can't afford to ignore the revolution that is taking place. If they do, they will be forced to submit to the big agri-chemical companies, and that would be doing none of us a favor let alone the farmers themselves. The lesser of two evils IMO, which one should we choose?
And finally, I completely understand where you're coming from Tokztli when you say leave it up to the scientists and politicians. However, money makes the world go round, and by going against companies such as Monsanto, Du-Pont and Bayer, the American government has a lot to lose (particularly those in the upper eschelons of power). Also, a large percentage of the scientists who are voicetrous on the subject actually work for these big companies. All in all, we can't listen to a word they say. If we, as a PLANET, want to make an informed decision, each of us must understand the situation on even a basic level. We all know that if we left everything up to the world governments, then they'd all be mega-rich and we'd all be mega-fucked.
