How does that play in the representation of the defendants? How much will they have to pay to defend themselves from those allegations? Monsanto has an endless supply of money to throw at it... how long can they drag organic farmers through court? ...until they bankrupt the farmer? Clarify which neighbor for me?
Patent infringement, when infringement is unintentional, is another example where government has been co-opted by big business. The benefit to Monsanto, bankrupt farmers sell their land to Monsanto using farmers. The benefit to government (politicians, regulators, bureaucrats) is monetary ("campaign" contributions, and jobs - directly and for friends and family). This is not "free market".
I think if you get down to the ground level this is all about people who want to use Monsanto tech without paying for it.
Well, it turns out not all GMO are actually sterile... in fact, as we forget commonly that plants have both sexes and pollen does contaminate other crops pretty readily. In fact, it seems it's a problem that is being extenuated every growing season. Conventional farmer are forced to take measures, like planting later in the season, washing off their vehicles, and testing the product... but there are trace genetic traits of GM's each growing season among conventional farmers of non-GM. Corn and canola have practically been over run with genetic traits of GM, that is now almost impossible to grow non-GM corn or canola in the US. "A study published in 2010 by scientists at the University of Arkansas, North Dakota State University, California State University and the US Environmental Protection Agency showed that about 83 percent of wild or weedy canola tested contained genetically modified herbicide resistance genes" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food_controversies All while GM are finding their way around the world in unwanted places. http://earthopensource.org/index.ph...f-gm-contamination-occurs-it-is-not-a-problem A nice little byproduct of Roundup Ready products have caused a problem in just under 15 years, might look familiar to the superbug... superweeds and superpests...
Superweeds are only a problem to the extent they have to be manually removed, and that was the process before RoundUp. RoundUp, is a godsend by the way. How much are we talking for Heirloom seeds? Dirt cheap? Cheaper then Dirt actually which is pretty expensive? No way we are in the pennies per plant area yet. An acre of seed goes for what, like $.50? Your study deals with the old reproducible crops. That is not the thing they are complaining about now. Sterile crops cannot cross pollinate either, otherwise they would not be sterile, they would be cross pollinators. Different. Every eat a honeybell? That is a cross pollinator, no one considers it sterile, just not capable of self fertilization. A sterile plant is like a mule, never going to enter a breeding program.
It is? Some heirloom seeds, that are generations old, are contaminated with the traits of GM. There is no price on a families cost in losing the specialty of their own heirloom and organic seeds to GM cross contamination. Here is a collection of heirloom seeds for sale... " This collection may include: 1 asparagus, 2 beans, 1 broccoli, 1 beet, 1 cauliflower, 1 cabbage, 1 celery, 1 carrot, 1 corn, 1 cucumber, 1 oriental green, 1 other green, 1 kale, 1 lettuce, 1 European melon, 1 American Melon, 1 okra, 2 onion, 1 garden pea, 1 sweet or snap pea, 1 hot pepper, 1 sweet pepper, 1 parsnip, 2 radish, 1 rutabaga, 1 spinach, 2 summer squash, 2 winter squash, 1 swiss chard, 1 pink tomato, 2 red tomato, 1 green tomato, 1 yellow tomato, 1 purple tomato, 2 watermelon, 1 turnip, 1 herb, 1 flower, 1 eggplant, 1 endive, and 1 leek" ...cost 99.00... that is .48 cents per seed. You'll find that heirloom seeds are actually pretty damn expensive. And yet organic farmers are being dragged through court and forced in bankruptcy over what is considered to be sterile and unable to contaminate... do you really read what you are writing or are you just spit balling with every post?
Are you buying seeds off of Ebay? Try Wal-Mart, $.25 for 100. Farmers buy wholesale though of course. This whole argument with me was about non reproducing seeds, please read previous posts without jumping to conclusions. It isnt this big problem you are trying to make it out to be.
Sure they do, but you want to cherry pick your information, I'll cherry pick mine. How cheap would a previous heirloom seed that was once sold as organic price as a GM food because of contamination? Organics are pricier then any GM counterpart. It is harder to maintain an organic field over that of a RoundUp Ready because primarily the threat of contamination. Planting later in the season, washing vehicles off, testing the product for contamination... and they take greater care of the fields by using more expensive organic and biodegradable fertilizers that are safe for the environment and do hand pull weeds... have more involvement in storing and reusing the reproductive seeds the next year. It simply takes more effort to grow and sell organic products... but this is what the farmers are trying to do to bring their product to an organic wanting consumer. Really? Let's see... 700 farmers sued for patent infringement forced to settle out of court... A court case up holding on the grounds Monsanto won't sue any more heirloom, organic, or conventional farmers for patent infringement due to contamination. 83% of wild and weedy canola is contaminated by GM... corn, soybean, and canola is virtually impossible to grow in the US without the threat of GM contamination. Products contained in RoundUp are toxic to humans, birds, animals, and aquatic life. Monsanto is known to falsify records and deceive the public about the safety and environmental impact of their RoundUp Ready product. The RoundUp Ready product as created a new strain of infestation refereed to as superweeds and superpests... negating the very implementation and viability of the product in the first place. GM's infiltrated into national markets where they have been banned. Wonderful... sounds like the makings of a bad sci-fi flick.
Round up is safe. Farmers don't shop at rareseeds.com 700 is a tiny amount, likely people who were using Monsanto seed purposefully Monsanto obviously doesn't see it in their interest to be seed police and are moving to non reproducing because of it. All corn grown in America is GMO, or highly modified. Wild stocks have been contaminated for years. You eat nothing that looks like the wild counterpart. Tomatoes started out cherry size etc... Your heirloom farmer complaining about neighboring crops that are sterile makes no sense. When they are not sterile he will suffer the same loss as anyone plantine heirloom seeds next to a a field with another variety. They can get a hybrid that doesn't produce, that produces poor yield food etc... Seed producers usually isolate crops to ensure the seeds grow true. Organic farmers have other reasons their prices are high. Lower supply of organics jacks up their margins. Extra labor, lower yield, shorter shelf life, smaller farms, government regulation, subsidies less valuable if existent because the cost to get them is divided over a smaller operation etc..,then there is marketing costs, hooking up with organic stores etc...plus all the fertilizer is more expensive the pesticide doesn't work, and weeds are pulled by hand taking up big time.
Bingo. Its not, not even close. Its corporatist. Fascist if you want to call it that too. You've got government subsidize and legitimizing fraudulent banking practices. Its basically big business violating the principles of a free market, with a government in on the profits with them instead of protecting everyone else.
The free market is a summary term for an array of exchanges that take place in society. Each exchange is undertaken as a voluntary agreement between two people or between groups of people represented by agents. These two individuals (or agents) exchange two economic goods, either tangible commodities or nontangible services. The extent to which this process is interfered with (usually in the form of government laws, interventions, etc), or exchanges are misrepresented (usually in the form of corporate fraud) is the extent to which an economy deviates from the free market ideal. And the US economy has both of the deviants.
Myth - Fact - Myth - Fact - http://www.progressive.org/0901/lil0901.html Myth - Fact - Verified- ???... Chewing face More BS - Again Reissued -Fact - A ploy of the desperate, degrading the organic farmers has having to work harder, and smarter. Use environmentally safe fertilizers and pesticides to have to get the job done. Preserve their fields natural integrity and insure their own crops to be free of contamination... all while maintaining a blooming 80 million dollar trade industry with foreign nations. While Monsanto creates
In this system free market is (near? or) impossible. First a different system need to be created (by people who want to see a real free market before the end of their live, who are committed), not based on capitalism (not money, gov and controlled energy based type of system (the current one is), but based on ecological energy sources. And no current type of 'political' system, because politics has clearly only one main purpose, to organize the voter instead of solving their problems (problems people have never caused, so who did) Voting and elections have worked against freedom, because voting and elections have never caused more freedom, less problems and free market (that's why so many people are talking about these topics, the problemd shouldn't be here) You don't have the power to vote for the president, you can only vote (give up your power is what you do) Only the voting system/part itself is 'democratic', that is that you can 'cast your vote'. People have no influence on the system (are very dependent on the system in all ways, food/water, energy, transportation, leisure, school) Free market has to do with independency (but independency sounds like there is still a government out there) Free market does not need a government. People need to govern. The world does not need renewable energy, it needs inexhaustable (that are electric energy from geothermical heat and from the tidal and perhaps solar collectors) energy (endless 'profit', society benefits from the energy itself, it keeps everything going forward, progression in every way), so a complete different type of market will emerge, because the cost of that inexhaustable energy is very low (if you still need a money based system, a trade type of system is perhaps the answer, that's how money started thousand years ago) People should disconnect themselves from this 'matrix' that was created by a few powerful men over the last hundred fifty years. How did they became so powerful? by creating a money based system, a financial system, and by corruption. Here we are couple of thousands of years of gold and centuries of money.
That was a case by organic farmers against Monsanto, to declare that Monsanto patents weren't enforceable at all, and the seeds can be used by anyone. Don't get your info only from socialist anti American websites. Here is a better source: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/...ry+Judgment+Action+Brought+By+Organic+Farmers
Round Up products are used on so much food you eat, you ate RoundUp treated products today, I use it on my lawn. Me, you and the dog are fine. It has been used for decades. Monsanto has NEVER sued someone for inadvertent use of their products. EVER. And you cannot cite a case otherwise. Any organic farmer whose seeds are open to nearby farms will have contamination. If the neighbor had inferior corn, it would have bred with hers. If your farmer wants true seed, they should specialize in isolated cultures, like all reliable seed suppliers. Why are the moving to sterile seeds if they want their products to spread? Please explain, you just can't say "myth", that is of course ignorant. No, your vegetable are highly changed from wild counterparts. You couldn't identify wild original vegetables if you saw most of them. Ploy of the desperate nothing. It is common sense and economics. If Monsanto products didnt give farmers a competitive edge, why do most farmers and the vast majority of fields in this country use their products? In any event, your organic farmer just can buy seed and use that. It is cheaper then dirt. You have not spent any time farming in your life. It shows.
What are you smoking? Printed money, is money the government prints. It's not debt. If you got a small island with 10 people, and you decided to have your own currency, and printed out a million Monkey Dollars, who would you automatically owe money too? No one. You don't owe any body anything, by printing money. Think about that logic for moment... If printing money caused debt, then Mafia Crime Families engaged in counterfeiting money, would drive themselves into bankruptcy by printing money. You need to reconsidered your position, and get back to me, when you have something more logical. Inflation is in fact inherent to all currency systems. Even if you went all the way back to a barter system, there would be inflation. So the problem isn't the existence of inflation, but rather the rate of inflation. Now it is true, and I agree with you, that government using a Fiat Currency, can drastically devalue the currency, and cause massive inflation. But for the past 20 years, inflation has been amazingly low. So far in 2013, we've been hoovering around 1.5%, which is great. That said, inflation has nothing to do with debt, and inflation does nothing at all for governmental debt. Finland's school system isn't quite as great as people would claim. Not saying it's bad, but it's not the holy cow it's made out to be. The recent claims to their amazing schools, was based on a single test, which was very broad based, and didn't focus on in depth understanding of crucial areas. Even people in Finland, have disregarded that one test, because other test show a decline. Perhaps not a massive decline, but a significant one that bucks the "it's amazing!" theory. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/06/is-finland-a-choice-less-education-miracle/ I have been able to verify the TIMSS results, that show very clearly, that 2012, 8th grade Finnish students, have tested worse than 7th grade Students in 1999. That's pretty bad. Now, granted clearly Finnish students, are still doing better than American students or UK Students, there is no argument about that. There's a number of reasons for this. 1. Finland, and all Nordic countries, are very homogenous societies. Despite all the unsupportable claims that diversity is this wonderful thing, in reality it is not. Every country that has openly adopted 'cultural diversity' has resulted in decline. And typically that decline show up first in education. 2. As much as the government schools do provide, the number of students enrolled in private non-government schools is about 30%. Government schools face real competition from private schools. 3. Competition. All schools are chosen by the student, or students parents. This causes competition between government schools, as well as private schools. 4. High school is not compulsory in Finland. Once a student reaches age 15, or 7th Grade US equivalent, they are no longer required to go to school. If they want to go to high school, they can, but they are not required. So if they want to smoke dupe and fart around on the streets, they can do so without bothering students who want to succeed in life. This alone is a positive factor. 5. Lastly, not only is high school not compulsory, but they are not forced to admit anyone. A student who wishes to go to any particular high school, must apply to that school, and must have the grades to meet their requirements. Everyone that has ever looked at this, say that this grade requirement alone, causes kids to take study and education more seriously in lower grades, so they can get into a better high school. Very much unlike American kids who don't seem to care, because the high school they go to is not their choice, and has no choice but to take them, no matter what their grades are (unless they are absolutely failing). See here in America, students and parents can't choose where their education dollars go. Even if you put your kids in a private school, you still pay the taxes, and fund the public school that sucks. Not so in Finland. If a public school doesn't meet the standards, and everyone pulls their kids out, that school is gone. And especially at the high school level, where students don't have to show up if they don't want to. There is more direct competition between schools, even if they are still run by the government. This free-market competition, forces them to make the grade, or be closed. Yes, he was in public schools here in Columbus. Nothing private, or free-market about it. It was a socialist utopia. By the way, I also happen to meet some kids at a private school here in Columbus, and just for giggles, I looked at their homework assignments. They were learning in 8th grade, what I was learning in 12th. Clearly this private school, was doing vastly better than my school was. That's because your list is wrong. Now if you get cancer.... which country would you rather be in? One of those countries with the ~55% survival rate? Or the US with a 66% survival rate? I knew a guy who had no insurance, and went to the hospital, and they started him on Chemotherapy. No money, no insurance. *I* personally went to the hospital TWICE, without insurance, and they sent me a bill, and I paid the bill. I make $10/hr. I sent them what money I could. Sometimes It was just $50 a month. But if I could pay more I paid more. I paid back the entire bill. This idiotic idea that only the rich get health care in the US, is just bogus crap. If you show up at the hospital, by law they must help you. No one is dying in the street from lack of health care. Yes, they might get a bill. But I'd rather pay a bill, and survive, then save money and die in another country with free health care. Where did you get that list by the way? Just for my own amusement. Well I thought you were making a general statement of "I hate all corruption", which... I mean I'd love for that to happen. But... it's just not. Now as for paying interest on the debt.... the solution here is incredibly simple........... STOP BORROWING MONEY. Well... how do we do that? STOP THE GOVERNMENT FROM SPENDING MONEY! It's just that simple. Banks can't force the government to do ANYTHING..... The government, is who is spending money it does not have.... which requires it to borrow. Stop spending........ thus..... stop borrowing... It's that easy. You are talking to someone who lived this. In 2001, I was $12,000 dollars in debt, while I earned a whooping $20,000 a year. Today, I am completely 100%, debt free. I owe no one, anywhere, anything. I don't owe anyone for my car. I don't owe any credit cards. I have no lines of credit. No loans. No payday, Check$mart or anything else. How did I do this? I spent nothing, and paid off debt. No movies. No beer. No parties. I didn't even buy clothes for years. All my shirts were worn and faded. No cell phone, no cable TV, no eating out at IHOP, or anywhere else. I worked, and I paid debt. But see, we are trying to do the opposite. We're trying to expand government health care.... yet we have no money! See a problem here? That forces us to borrow. If we borrow, then we're going to be force to pay interest. That's how this system works. Cause and effect dude. But my point is, that is the same as all people. Look, if you didn't profit from going to work..... .... duh.... you wouldn't go to work. The entire reason you get up in the morning, and drive to a place, where you work all day, is because you want to profit from it. Similarly, if you opened your own business, you wouldn't work the CEO average of 50 to 60 hours a week.... except... you profit. You wouldn't hire an employee, except.... you profit from him working for you. Well... why would ever expect anyone else to be any different? Why would you expect a company to not be motivated by the exact same thing you are? Now again, there are a few exceptions, where you are right, but generally the corporations who profit..... end up benefiting everyone in society. The vast majority do this. When Apple profited in the 90s, they came up with Ipods, which I love my Ipod. I benefited from Apple profiting in the 90s. We all have benefited from Apple. Smart Phones, Itunes, MP3 store, and millions of other things exist because of Apple profiting. And the same is true of nearly all corporations. Look around you right now at your computer. Nearly everything in your visual range right now, exists ONLY because a corporation profited. Your chair, your desk, your electricity, your computer, whatever is around you right now. Everything you have, everything you enjoy, everything you use on a regular basis, with few exceptions, only exists because a corporation profits. Again, the only real exceptions, is when government taxes your money, and gives it to a corporation. But oddly, people excuse that all the time. "Research grants are good!" "Alternative energy subsidies are good!" You complain bitterly about the very thing, that you turn around and support. I had a car, a 1990 Chevy Lumina, that lasted 20 years. That's as long as a solar panel lasts, or a wind mill. And actually after that, I had an 82 Buick, that I was driving up till 2008. So that car last much longer than either a wind mill or a solar panel lasts. Sort of true, sort of not. A solar panel will 'function' for decades. But the problem is, the amount of energy produced declines rather quickly. The basic estimate is 1% decline in production per year, depending on how hot they get, and how much power they generate per year. Obviously if you live in an area that gets little sun, they will last longer. http://scitizen.com/future-energies/how-long-do-solar-panels-last-_a-14-2897.html While that may not seem like much, given their cost, that's a huge drop in power. Again, 9.8¢ for a 1,000 watts. $3,000 for a 1 Kilowatt panel that after 10 years is producing a fraction of it's rated power. The bottom line is, you will never produce enough power from that panel, to break even. Never. The longer you have it, the less power it creates, so that it is impossible to break even. (see below before responding) But that's not true in this example. What if the man who fishes, was charging big bucks to teach people to fish? He could make billions on teaching people to fish. In order for your example to apply, the Solar Panel company would have to be giving away solar panels for free. They are not. Which is why Tom Werner selling solar panels, made a cool $4.6 Million. $17,531 worth of power, is roughly 182,614 KiloWatt Hours of power. A 1 Kilowatt solar panel would NEVER make even a fraction of that power over 20 years. For example, here in Ohio, a 1 Kilowatt solar panel, will produce approximately 100 Kilowatt Hours (kWh) per month. Thus over 20 years, it would produce about 24,000 Kilowatt Hours. Which at 10¢ a kWh, is $2,400. So you paid $3,000 to get $2,400 worth of power over 20 years. And that assumes that the solar panel doesn't degrade, and is still producing rated power after 20 years, which we already know isn't true. At 10 years, it would only be producing 90 some kWh a month, and by 20 years, it would only produce 80 some kWh a month. And we're also ignoring many other factors. Like that $3,000 only being for the product. Who is going to install it? That can cost $5,000 just for that. If you do it yourself, and burn out the panel, they don't cover that, you just lost your money. I personally know a guy who bought a solar panel system, and a it worked great for a month and quit. He got up there to look at it, and found a Squirrel had chewed through the wires, and burned out the system. That is not covered, and in his own words, he lost thousands. If you have a hail storm, and a ball of ice cracks your panel, that isn't covered either. You just lost your money. Now, solar panels do fit a niche market. I know ranchers who have massive land areas, and has shacks out in the middle of nowhere, that have no access to public utilities. Solar panels are perfect for that. But for those connected to the grid, solar panels are money losers. You will never make enough power from a solar panel, to justify its existence. Links: 1. Government. 2. Fail... that was a fraud against the bank. Not the bank. 3. J.P. Morgan 4. J.P. Morgan 5. Bank of America (selling mortgages the government pushed them to make) 6. Bank of America (buying Merrill Lynch which government pushed them to do) 7. Abacus Federal Savings Bank (how anyone could take a bank with this name seriously is beyond me) 8. Golden First Mortgage Corp So lets review. Out of 8 citations, one was government, one was a fail, and the rest were JP Morgan, Abacus, Golden First, and Bank of America. Now you can disagree, but as far as I'm concerned, you can throw out Bank of America. They were specifically pushed into buying Merrill Lynch by the Government. This is widely documented. And, the toxic assets, namely bad sub-prime loans, were also directly pushed for by government. Blaming BoA for doing what government told them to do, is a non-argument in my book. That leaves 3 banks. Do you realize how many banks exist in America today? Over 1 Million. You have examples of 3 different banks doing bad things. Ratio...... 1 to 333,333 And you think that justifies a claim that "Banks and financial institutions are just as inherently corrupt as governments"? I don't think so. The ration of corrupt government to non-corrupt government is about 1 to 1. Not even close. And I completely support this. This is exactly what we should have done. We should have closed each and every one of those banks in 2009, and sent them all into bankruptcy. Still doesn't support your claim that banks are inherently as corrupt as government. Not by a long shot.
I just wanted to chime in.... I didn't directly respond to the other post on this topic, because I honestly don't know enough about it. But just from what I have heard and read, everything here, matches with what I have gotten from other second hand sources. The only thing I do know first hand, is that wild vegetables are nothing like domestic farmed vegetables. I've been out in the back woods of Southern Ohio, and found wild unrefined vegetables, and without a farmer in the extended family that told me what they were, I **NEVER** would have guessed what they were in a million years. Just my 2 cents.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1673618 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15862083 A hot line - http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/poison/roundup-grass-and-weed-killer-poisoning/overview.html http://www.naturalnews.com/033772_Monsanto_Roundup.html http://foodpoisoningbulletin.com/2013/ingredient-in-roundup-weed-killer-found-in-food/ http://www.arc2020.eu/front/2012/01/monsanto’s-roundup-slowly-poisoning-animals-and-humans/ http://www.i-sis.org.uk/DMPGR.php Please site to me a case where Monsanto proved that organic farmers intentionally used their product before the organic farmers were forced to settle out of court to negate further financial loses due to court preceding and the threat of bankruptcy. Otherwise, read between the lines "A court case up holding on the grounds Monsanto won't sue any more heirloom, organic, or conventional farmers for patent infringement due to contamination." So contractual Monsanto farmers don't have to? Heirlooms that cross breed with heirlooms still sell as organics... organics that are GM contaminated sell as cattle feed. For sterile plants... It's planting season. A Monsanto farmer goes out and starts planting his seeds, up pops a wind gust and the seeds are blown in the wind and land in an organic farmers field that is also planting the same variety of crops... or animals carry the seed to the organic fields inadvertently. The organic crops are now contaminated with GM's seeds. They look just like the other crops, they produce just like the other crops, yet that yield of that plant is GM. It goes into the harvest and is shipped to a perspective customer who tests the harvest for GM's. By chance some of the GM mixed in with the organic harvest are tested and come up with the unwanted GM traits... the whole harvest is deemed contaminated and sold at market for cattle feed at a fraction of the cost. You understand how chaos theory works right? ...especially when it comes to nature? Does a consumer particular wanting non-GM foods care what you are saying here? A competitive edge that uses toxic chemicals, falsely identified as environmentally safe to sterilize lands and create stronger variants of unwanted plants and pests. While strong arming organic and heirloom farmers for patent infringement when organic and heirloom are contaminated by Monsanto's products, dragging them through expensive court preceding before a judgement ruled that Monsanto must promise not to sue anyone else for contamination. Unleashing an uncontrolled GM contamination of corn, soybean, and canola that leaves the entire farming nation at the hands of selling, by market standards, an inferior product, and infecting the shores of nations that have banned the defective GM products. Ah, and your understanding of heirloom products that have been developed over generations and generations on family farms should easy be changed over to whatever cheap (which you have yet prove) heirloom seed that meet their developed specificity of their previous product, all at the simple contamination of their heirloom crops by a GM that cause their crops to be deemed as inferior product? Yes, your understanding of farming far exceeds the average monkeys.
Oh, boy... I thought for a bit you might of been informed, but, I suppose this might end up being one of those situations where arguing with an idiot, others may not tell the difference.... Let me put it in very simple terms... If the Treasury can print a bond, the Treasury can print a bill. A bond is just a promissory note to pay debt, as bill is a promissory note, as a check is a promissory note. If we paid all our debts off right now, there would not a scrape of paper money left. Banks by bonds... which are by definition "A marketable, fixed-interest U.S. government debt security"..."A United States Treasury security is a government debt issued by the United States Department of the Treasury through the Bureau of the Public Debt. Treasury securities are the debt financing instruments of the United States federal government, and they are often referred to simply as Treasuries." The result is that an enormous proportion of the US debt is actually owed from the Treasury to the Federal Reserve. So I gave all my Monkeydollars to someone else and now I have to borrow it from them... at interest... along with everyone else. Yes, this is exactly what is going on. I think the logic eludes you. Tally sticks, colonial script... the rate of inflation is equal to the trade of goods and services...which is natural inflation... money making money = hyper inflation. And how does that equate to the value of a dollar in 1913... $100 which would have probably bought you a hand carved and crafted oak desk that took an expert craftsman a great deal and time to build that becomes a priceless family heirloom compared to a $100 particle pressed board desk pumped out by the thousands, with plastic fasteners and a two year life span? This is the value of a dollar today. The dollar should have the power to purchase more goods over time, not less... The results were based on the same test that every other country took and the tests spanned nearly a decade... Never the less, a properly funded education program is obviously the key to any educational system, do we base learning on people's ability to pay money, or base learning on people raising their educational level? A higher educated work force is higher paid, are we challenge students to pay off loans or challenging students to pursue a career, because more often they get trapped in the prior and little chance at the latter. The NCEE describes America's educational system middle of the road compared to more educated countries. "...recommends that states take more of a responsibility for funding schools, moving away from the majority local-funded system the country uses now." And puts majority of poverty stricken regions of the US to lack any proper educational system... by limiting resources to those areas which are profitable. You're using a cancer statistic to judge the health of countries? OK http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/24/worldwide-cancer-rates-uk-rate-drops http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy Cancer rates per Country... Average Life Span per Country 1. Denmark ... 79 2. Ireland... 81 3. Australia... 82 4. New Zealand... 81 5. Belgium... 80 6. France... 82 7. US... 79 Bloomberg report... of worlds healthiest countries... again... you won't find the US on it. http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2012-08-13/world-s-healthiest-countries.html#slide22 IT'S IN THE CONSTITUTION: ART 1 SECT 8 "CONGRESS: HAS THE POWER TO COIN MONEY" IF YOU DON'T GET THAT THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T HAVE TO BORROW TO SPEND THEN I AM BEATING A DEAD HORSE. AND STOP USING CAPS AS IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT DEFINES YOUR ARGUMENT... BECAUSE IT DOESN'T. You don't own your car... you have a certificate of title... the state owns your car. Try not licensing it or registering or insuring it... see who really owns your car. So why are we trillions and trillions in debt? Do you see trillions and trillions of value represented where you stand? What represents 16 trillion dollars? Because the GDP only represents 15 trillion, and that is actually represented by fractions of reserves held by banks. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Debt + Inflation + Interst = Welfare, Poverty, Disparity. ...chewing your face... I think I'm leaving a pretty good argument why Monsanto doesn't represent anyone's interests except those of profits which has damned a nation to contamination and toxic chemicals... How are oil companies fulfilling everyone's best interest by producing a product that spews carcinogens and heavy metals from extraction to use? Again, if the only motivation for a company is to seek profits above all else, humans will come second. You're Iphone gave you a joy... it didn't for the Chinese FoxConn factory workers who rather than just quit their job, jumped to their deaths to escape the working condition of the factory that brought you your little toy. It didn't work out for the victims of the Bangladesh factory workers who where smashed under tons of concrete and re-bar after escaping flooding from their self sustained villages in the delta regions. They are listed among this centuries climate change refugees and found work to feed their families making shoes and shirts for the people of nations whose activities help drive them from their homes in the deltas. It didn't work out for the 2.3 million people living next to an rare earth mining operation in China that mines the materials to make that Iphone, as pollution from toxic materials where dumped in a near by lake to contaminate an entire city. It's not all puppies and rainbows, kid. Give that money to a organization like NASA, that have put men on the moon, have probes exiting the solar system, telescopes to peer into the beginnings of time, have a joint venture orbiting laboratory, brought us the internet, cell phone technology, and satellite communications... NASA has done more in development and the furthering of scientific knowledge and betterment of society than any one corporation that is now only able to barely get a man into orbit... 40 years after NASA stepped foot on the moon. If my taxes are only paying for interest, why isn't it interest on a treasury system that is supporting furthering our endeavors, rather then perpetuating in borrowed consumerism? Chews face... I'll play along... That's great... we all kinda hope that a car does... but for the 7,000,000 accidents recorded each year in the US... some just don't make it... yes, it's so sad. This is why they are guaranteed... if they are not meeting specific rates, they are replaced by the company. The degrading is an issue in quality, not an issue that all solar panels degrade or that solar systems are invalid. From your article: "The backing materials used to create the solar panels should be less susceptible to discolouration. So typical lives of thirty or more years can probably be assumed." Hmmm... and you have actual practical experience with this? I've had this argument in another thread... I almost don't want to go through this again... start here and read through... http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...e-practical-fuel-source-5.html#post1062831629 And the first person he taught sat next to him and charge less than he did to teach someone to fish, then so forth and so on, until everyone was teaching everyone to fish and no one was making any money on it. Everyone was fed, but no one was rich. Would you like to compare local solar DC efficiency rates to AC transmission efficiency rates, because that is where solar is all about... most of your electronic devices run on DC (average of 20volts) 120 AC volts = overkill., and AC appliances can be replaced with DC. Charging from solar using DC locally is leaps and bounds more efficient and cost effective than producing AC miles and miles away then sending across lines of resistance. If I can build a electric bicycle and charge it daily with a solar station and travel over 30,000 miles on it with the system being under $1,000 to build, how would that compare to me owning a vehicle pulling the exact same 30,000 miles... factoring in car cost, maintenance, insurance, registration, and fuel? DC solar is as easy to put together as putting a battery in your flash light. Installation is just a measure of basic carpentry skills and a little electronic know how... like the red wire is positive and the black wire negative... pretty much straight forward stuff... if you're friend can't do it, then I apologize for the level of intelligence you're circled in. If hail is breaking solar panels, it's breaking car and house windows too... time to call the insurance company. The Federal Reserve is government? Could you direct to the articles within The Constitutional articles that prove that the Federal Reserve or even the IRS is an Constitutional entity of any branch of the government. "There are no shares of the Washington Fed Board organization; the only ownership of the Fed is in shares of each of the 12 regional banks which are entirely owned by the private member banks within their respective districts, according to a formula based on their size" I suggest you read it in it's entirety... http://www.monetary.org/is-the-fede...r-a-privately-controlled-organization/2008/02 Ah... blurring the lines will easily dismiss that ..."Banks and Financial institutions are not even a fraction as corrupt as our government. Not by any reasonable measure in existence." claim. Well... you certainly hope so... but it doesn't... not by a long shot. The government now is a revolving door between financial entities and the seats of administration, when you talk of the government your speaking of private financial entities, when you speak of private financial entities you are referring to government... this idea might elude you for a while... Mayer Amschel Rothschild - "Let me issue and control a nation's money, and I care not who writes its laws." James Madison - "If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations. " Thomas Jefferson - "Bank-paper must be suppressed, and the circulating medium must be restored to the nation to whom it belongs."
RoundUp as mixed is safe, dissipates within a short time after use. Nearly all food you eat has been touched by it, anyone who has a lawn service lives next to it. Apple Juice contains arsenic, why dont you complain about that. I already cited a case where they are estopped from doing that very thing. They volunteered it, and it is company policy only to sue those farmers using seeds purposefully. I do not have to prove a negative when I have cited to you already they do not do this. That isn't what the case said at all. It didn't say they would stop suing them in the future. It said they would not sue at all for such a thing, never have, and the farmers complaints were unfounded. The court agreed. They have to follow the rules on their contract Trash. Why do you think they would breed and come up with a new useful crop? You would get a field of 100 different varieties, and it would be crap. This is why seed suppliers are isolated and come up with a single variety to use. If a Sugar Snap breeds with a Cascadia, what do you get? No, that isn't how the world works at all. Means some scientists want to get you all alarmed about something they can't prove or predict. They should just buy organic then. There is tons of it out there, just low demand. How about yuu buy what you want and worry about the toxins etc...and the rest of the country do what they want. You can get cheap organic varieties of all those plants, who are you trying to kid? Why should they get a special pass? Don't their varieties cross contaminate others? Aren't there varieties non natural? They sell them in seed catalogs. It is not my fault wholesale pricing does not get published to the public. They obviously dont pay rareseeds.com prices like you tried. This place is also overpriced, but here you are: http://sustainableseedco.com/certif...-lettuce-seeds/organic-bibb-lettuce-seed.html 7000 plants, $20 - Which is still super high believe it or not. They are running over 100% margin there. Probably because I grew up on an organic farm and I know all the stuff you are saying is BS coming from politicians and not experience behind a plow.
I don't disagree with this per se because wrongful lawsuits can be expensive to defend against. It can be noted though that a farmer that can produce documentation that they're only planting organic seed would logically have an excellent defense in such a case and doesn't require much legal representation. This was in response to the proposition that one farmer was using organic seed while the neighbor was using genetically engineered seed. It is the responsibility of both to ensure that their "seed" doesn't "contaminate" their neighbor's field. While I don't see the "genetic" seed user filing a lawsuit against the organic farmer there is cause for the organic farmer to file a lawsuit against the "genetic engineered' seed user as that seed would be a contaminate related to the genetically grown crop. It is "pollution" so to speak. To avoid this the "genetically engineered" seed farmer might be required to keep the fields watered so that the seed doesn't blow from their field into their neighbors. They might even have to start the seedlings in an enclosed greenhouse and then transplant them into the field. Whatever it takes they have a legal obligation to not contaminate their neighbor's "organic" crop production as the "organic" farmer would suffer a financial loss if their crop was not "organic" because of contamination by the neighbor. Of course the issue could be resolved by the "neighbor" using genetically engineered seed to simply grow a different kind of crop but that's a decision that the neighbor needs to make.
Legal tender currency is a promissory note authorized by Article I Section 8 Clause 1 that authorizes the legislature to "borrow on the credit of the United States" and is not "money" which is coinage authorized by Article I Section 8 Clause 4 according to the US Supreme Court decision on "legal tender" in it's historic Juilliard v Greenman decision in 1884. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/110/421 I would highly recommend reading this Supreme Court decision by everyone that wants to discuss lawful "legal tender money" and lawful "legal tender currency" authorized under the US Constitution.
