I recently had an experience while doing a simple Google search that was so profoundly weird that it stopped me in my tracks.
Understanding this Google se...
Nestle’ sells $100B annually and Dannone almost half of that - that’s a lot of food to go missing off the store shelves - maybe not enough for people to start starving to death, but quite a few would go hungry.
Monstanto’s upstream influence affects the foundational diet of billions of people, kill their operations and lots of people would be starving to death.
Monsanto owns the patent on Roundup, and seed strains that are resistant to roundup. They don’t own the farms or farmers, they just have them in coercive contracts.
You’re assuming that if Monsanto went out of business, all of the farmers would just give up on the possibility of farming. That’s a wild assumption, and It’s insanely inaccurate. My cousin is a very successful small farmer, and he already doesn’t use anything from Monsanto.
If Monsanto disappeared right now, everyone could continue using their seed for free, but they’d likely instead start to grow different things, adding biodiversity to our food sources, and making them more resilient against unforeseen circumstances.
Your argument is either extremely disingenuous or extremely misguided.
Monsanto owns the patent on Roundup, and seed strains that are resistant to roundup.
Bt Corn (Maize), Seminis (Vegetable and Fruit Seeds), Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH / Posilac), De Ruiter Seeds, DeKalb Genetics Corporation…
They don’t own the farms or farmers, they just have them in coercive contracts.
I’m not seeing a big distinction…
If Monsanto products didn’t improve the farms/farmers’ outputs and profits, even after Monsanto takes their slice, then they wouldn’t enter into those contracts. Gank Monsanto out of the system and productivity falls. A drop of 10% to 15% in global agricultural output within a single year would likely trigger immediate, widespread, and severe global famine.
The distinction is that everything you listed is “intellectual property”, aka “thoughts”.
All of those are tools that are used to do the same shit we used to do without those tools, and if it all went away overnight, we could just go back to doing things the older way (the way we used to do things before they homogenized food in order to maximize profits, despite the reduction in nutritional value).
You are operating from the premise that profits are more important than anything else. That is flawed logic, and it’s based entirely on this specific current status quo. Outputs are not equal to profits, some farmers are paid by the government to specifically not grow things.
Your idea that the disappearance of Monsanto would cause widespread famine ignores the fact that none of Monsanto’s knowledge would die with the company. They have records, and there are living humans who know how to do everything on your list.
The existence of a corporation is not what allows agriculture to function. It functioned for thousands of years before Monsanto existed, and has functioned for less than 100 since (1945 is the year they first had anything to do with agriculture)
SearXNG ftw
indeed, using my own :)
Same
Fuck these corporations, we don’t need them
Try again: Monsanto, Nestle’, Dannone…
What about em?
Nestle’ sells $100B annually and Dannone almost half of that - that’s a lot of food to go missing off the store shelves - maybe not enough for people to start starving to death, but quite a few would go hungry.
Monstanto’s upstream influence affects the foundational diet of billions of people, kill their operations and lots of people would be starving to death.
That’s an insane perspective/assumption
Monsanto owns the patent on Roundup, and seed strains that are resistant to roundup. They don’t own the farms or farmers, they just have them in coercive contracts.
You’re assuming that if Monsanto went out of business, all of the farmers would just give up on the possibility of farming. That’s a wild assumption, and It’s insanely inaccurate. My cousin is a very successful small farmer, and he already doesn’t use anything from Monsanto.
If Monsanto disappeared right now, everyone could continue using their seed for free, but they’d likely instead start to grow different things, adding biodiversity to our food sources, and making them more resilient against unforeseen circumstances.
Your argument is either extremely disingenuous or extremely misguided.
I’m not seeing a big distinction…
If Monsanto products didn’t improve the farms/farmers’ outputs and profits, even after Monsanto takes their slice, then they wouldn’t enter into those contracts. Gank Monsanto out of the system and productivity falls. A drop of 10% to 15% in global agricultural output within a single year would likely trigger immediate, widespread, and severe global famine.
The distinction is that everything you listed is “intellectual property”, aka “thoughts”.
All of those are tools that are used to do the same shit we used to do without those tools, and if it all went away overnight, we could just go back to doing things the older way (the way we used to do things before they homogenized food in order to maximize profits, despite the reduction in nutritional value).
You are operating from the premise that profits are more important than anything else. That is flawed logic, and it’s based entirely on this specific current status quo. Outputs are not equal to profits, some farmers are paid by the government to specifically not grow things.
Your idea that the disappearance of Monsanto would cause widespread famine ignores the fact that none of Monsanto’s knowledge would die with the company. They have records, and there are living humans who know how to do everything on your list.
The existence of a corporation is not what allows agriculture to function. It functioned for thousands of years before Monsanto existed, and has functioned for less than 100 since (1945 is the year they first had anything to do with agriculture)