WaPo: Does anybody else think these agriculture subsidies are getting out-of-control?
posted at 8:41 pm on February 19, 2013 by Erika Johnsen
There is no sector of the American economy that has been so systematically and unnecessarily coddled for so long as agriculture. Stretching back to the 1800s, the federal government has been steadily piling on a hugely complex network of subsidies, payouts, grants, insurances, exemptions, regulations, loan programs, tariffs, production controls, protections, and who even knows what else meant to help out the supposedly struggling agricultural industry — except that none of the ostensible reasons for which the government claimed they did so actually apply anymore, if they ever did in the first place.
Alleviating farmer poverty? Farm household incomes are well above the national median. Saving the family farm? The vast majority of federal subsidies benefit the largest and wealthiest echelon of agribusiness growers of the ten biggest crops, not the small farms producing the organic butternut squash and boutique tomatoes we’re told we should be eating. Ensuring a cheap and stable food supply? The government constantly distorts market signals that jack up prices and misallocate resources — the free market just does it better. Protecting the environment? Big fail there, too: The government’s subsidies are become a part of lands’ values and create incentives for bringing marginal lands into production.
All of these agriculture and rural subsidies are so politically entrenched, however, as to have rendered them practically infallible — which is a darn shame, because as even the Washington Post editors opine, America is directly enriching an industry that doesn’t need the help in the slightest.
Actually, farming no longer resembles the hardscrabble family enterprise of so much mawkish marketing. Much of it is dominated by large operators supplying not only the U.S. dinner table but also far-flung export markets. Notwithstanding a major drought, net farm income for 2012 reached $112.8 billion, according to the Agriculture Department, down only slightly from the previous year’s record of $117.9 billion in 2011. USDA expects farm income to hit a post-1973 high of $128.2 billion in 2013. …
Farmers are wealthy, the U.S. food supply is not remotely at risk — and yet the government still piles on the subsidies. They totaled an annual average of $11.5 billion over the past four years, according to USDA. …
But limiting agricultural corporate welfare to a quarter-million dollars per couple is a far cry from a total rethink of farm policy, which might start with this question: Perhaps God made the farmer, as Paul Harvey says. But does the federal taxpayer have to make him rich?
The Post also points out that big agriculture-related companies are major recruiters on Midwest college campuses, and that students majoring in agricultural studies have the third-lowest unemployment rate of any undergraduate major. This is hardly an industry on the strugglebus — it’s food, people. The demand won’t be going away anytime soon.
The government only gets in the way of innovation and efficiency as they dole out what usually amounts to corporate welfare for the politically favored few.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Uber DC won one regulatory battle, but they still haven’t won the regulatory war
Ireland: Yes, we have sweet international tax incentives, sorry we’re not sorry
Report: DOJ seized multiple White House, Fox News records in Rosen ‘investigation’
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Directive 27 states that all Soylent will be grown according to State regulations. Violators will be sent to processing.
Bishop on May 8, 2013 at 8:45 PM
Amnesty is next for these undocumented seeds.
Electrongod on May 8, 2013 at 8:46 PM
To hell with Monsanto.
NorthernCross on May 8, 2013 at 8:49 PM
I foresee… homogeneous seeds eventually causing soil nutrient deprivation and then dust bowls… which will be blamed on AGW.
sadatoni on May 8, 2013 at 8:49 PM
The unintended consequences should be devastating.
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 8:50 PM
Oh deary someone already committed to damning the great Satan. northern cross do you know anything?
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 8:52 PM
If you didn’t see this coming you haven’t been paying attention. The non-comically funny thing is it is coming soon from a politician near you.
Rio Linda Refugee on May 8, 2013 at 8:53 PM
The law also forbids farmers from keeping their own seed for next years’ crop.
Which is what Monsanto does here in the US, essentially having been granted ownership of all the food.
BobMbx on May 8, 2013 at 8:53 PM
This goes in the Evil category.
A massive PC bureaucracy controlling food supply and the ability to have your own garden or farm? All I can visualize is famine.
INC on May 8, 2013 at 8:54 PM
We have enough stupidity being heaped on us here to be too concerned with the Europeans problems.
HornetSting on May 8, 2013 at 8:55 PM
Shut Up.
Mind your own business.
Shut Up.
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 8:56 PM
I don’t think so. Could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 8:58 PM
Ive always wondered why hating pioneer just isn’t as sexy.
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 9:04 PM
Seed Nazi’s!!
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:04 PM
EU has a disastrous Agricultural policy.
workingclass artist on May 8, 2013 at 9:05 PM
fify
workingclass artist on May 8, 2013 at 9:06 PM
“Hello citizen, we are from the Bureau of Plant Verification. We got an anonymous report that you are growing an unauthorized tomato plant on your patio. Please come with us for interrogation.”
Bishop on May 8, 2013 at 9:06 PM
*Cough-Cough*
Hidden hand of Monsanto!!
(sarc)
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:06 PM
Stinger, this is just previews for our upcoming stupid legislation
Rio Linda Refugee on May 8, 2013 at 9:07 PM
The new regulations will streamline the regulations that were supposed to regulate streamlining regulations regulating regulations but didn’t.
SparkPlug on May 8, 2013 at 9:08 PM
This looks like the type of nanny-statism run amok that would make even Mayor Bloomberg proud.
===========================
The Eastern Seed Wall is making a comeback,er wait……
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:08 PM
Is this part of agenda 21 as well?
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 9:08 PM
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:06 PM
Funny flucking thing is tho it ain’t fracking hidden!!!!
What did Obama do under the radar just a couple weeks ago?
This: http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-grants-monsanto-immunity
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:09 PM
You conspiracy theorists have left out Con-Agra &Cargill
Rio Linda Refugee on May 8, 2013 at 9:10 PM
President Obama has given Monsanto immunity with the signing of Senate bill HR 933, affectionately known by opponents as the Monsanto Protection Act. Late Tuesday night while most of the country was enthralled in the DOMA debate, provisions were passed, effectively barring federal courts from being able to stop the sale or planting of controversial genetically modified or genetically engineered (GE) seeds, despite what health issues may arise concerning their use in the future. Wrapped in a “farmer-friendly” package, this Monsanto-driven rider is simply a biotech industry ploy to continue to plant GE crops even when a court of law has found they were approved illegally. News spread quickly among concerned citizens leading to protests outside of the White House yesterday.
“In this hidden backroom deal, Senator Mikulski turned her back on consumer, environmental, and farmer protection in favor of corporate welfare for biotech companies such as Monsanto,” Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety, said in a statement. “This abuse of power is not the kind of leadership the public has come to expect from Senator Mikulski or the Democrat Majority in the Senate.”
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:11 PM
HR 875 & S 425
Rebar on May 8, 2013 at 9:11 PM
Oh wow man……….
antipc on May 8, 2013 at 9:12 PM
Lolz. (:
SparkPlug on May 8, 2013 at 9:12 PM
Fother Mucking dems can’t leave anything ALONE!!!!!!!!
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:14 PM
HR 875 & S 425
Rebar on May 8, 2013 at 9:11 PM
Now that is some dastardly stuff right there.
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 9:14 PM
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 9:14 PM
It ALL is!!
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:14 PM
The new regulations will streamline the regulations that were supposed to regulate streamlining regulations regulating regulations but didn’t.
SparkPlug on May 8, 2013 at 9:08 PM
SparkPlug:)
Conspiring Conspirators,in a Conspiratorial Seed Conspiracy!!
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:15 PM
Seed Nazi’s!!
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:04 PM
Lolz. (:
SparkPlug on May 8, 2013 at 9:12 PM
SparkPlug:)
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:15 PM
The seeds will one day turn into plants which give off oxygen which allows men to live who pollute the planet. These seeds must be stopped now.
SparkPlug on May 8, 2013 at 9:16 PM
You conspiracy theorists have left out Con-Agra &Cargill
Rio Linda Refugee on May 8, 2013 at 9:10 PM
Rio Linda Refugee:D*mmitt!
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:17 PM
Seed Nazi’s!!
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:04 PM
Lolz. (:
SparkPlug on May 8, 2013 at 9:12 PM
SparkPlug:)
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:15 PM
You guys crack me up!!!! ;-D
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:18 PM
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:06 PM
Funny flucking thing is tho it ain’t fracking hidden!!!!
What did Obama do under the radar just a couple weeks ago?
This: http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-grants-monsanto-immunity
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:09 PM
Scrumpy:Yuppers,heard that off of,CoastoCoast Radio!:)
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:19 PM
Gotta sneak in this quote from Futurama:
“Soylent Green? What’s that taste like?”
“Oh, it varies from person to person.”
Skywise on May 8, 2013 at 9:19 PM
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:19 PM
You know I did too!! ;;)
You ever listen to Clive Lewis (GroundZero)?
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:20 PM
.
You forgot Archer Daniels Midland.
ExpressoBold on May 8, 2013 at 9:24 PM
That doesn’t bother me too much. I think it just protects companies from lawsuits from people who want to claim GMO foods damaged them.
IMO, that tactic is another eco-nut ploy to damage companies who are not in the eco-nut model.
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 9:27 PM
E-bold ,my bad , you are correct sir
Rio Linda Refugee on May 8, 2013 at 9:29 PM
All your seedling are belong to us .
EnglishRogue on May 8, 2013 at 9:29 PM
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 9:27 PM
So it’s ok to modify genetically the food we eat, and if it makes us sick, what difference does it make? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:33 PM
Want to test those GMO‘S?
Top 10 excuses for Obama signing the Monsanto Protection Act
News2Use on May 8, 2013 at 9:36 PM
News2Use on May 8, 2013 at 9:36 PM
Thanks for that. I needed a good laugh.
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 9:40 PM
Seeds have been modified for quite awhile. It’s what seed breeders do.
The danger from these foods is in the same ballpark as global warming fears or “organic” foods being more “nutritious” and “healthier”.
I don’t buy the schtick as a danger. What evidence is there?
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 9:43 PM
Hybrid varieties can’t be kept; a lot of the genetically engineered seeds may be hybrid and thus if not entirely sterile, unlikely to produce viable seed.
I would guess that in terms of big agribusiness, groups like Monsanto hold the cards – they have the methods to produce the seeds and people must buy from them. The seeds are better in terms of the properties of the plants they produce, but they forge a permanent dependency on the producer. I once saw a documentary about this happening in India; on the promise of better yields, farmers got loans to get the hybrid seeds, but what would happen is that the amount they needed in equity each year to support their farm business was much higher, and even if their yields were better the plants are not invincible and failures were catastrophic.
The upside was that their farmland would be bought by conglomerates and larger entities… I mean, the upside for big biz.
RiverCocytus on May 8, 2013 at 9:44 PM
Must regulate those assault-sprouts. Cant have a sprout feeding device that allows more than 5 seeds…… Someone might get hurt.
TX-96 on May 8, 2013 at 9:46 PM
Thats funny. Reminds me of the science of fracking causing water to explode.
Back in the real world, where are all the people with all these tumors and such?
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 9:47 PM
Most of it is “greenwashing” and hype.
I don’t like the idea of Monsanto being so close with the Ag. Dept. and patenting so many plants though. Their business practices are scummy.
Regulatory capture is not good.
tetriskid on May 8, 2013 at 9:49 PM
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:19 PM
You know I did too!! ;;)
You ever listen to Clive Lewis (GroundZero)?
Scrumpy on May 8, 2013 at 9:20 PM
Scrumpy:Yes,he comes on before Coast:)
=======================================
http://tunein.com/radio/Paranormal-g292/
http://tunein.com/search/?query=Clive+Lewis
http://tunein.com/
canopfor on May 8, 2013 at 9:51 PM
The only reason there is a “dependency” on them, is because they are superior seeds that produce superior results.
Any farmer can make the choice to grow “heirloom” varieties. But they, and all their workers who depend on the jobs, will be out of business in a short time.
No the upside is for ‘big biz’ and for the people who buy the produce.
In the last 50 years, we have been able to produce more than enough food on 60% less land.
This land goes back to nature or other uses.
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 9:54 PM
Are you inquiring about those living or dead or both?
News2Use on May 8, 2013 at 9:56 PM
I get what you mean, but it’s not that easy a choice.
It’s like the people who would point to Halliburton etc. as having a unfair gig going with the government. In reality, there are few corporations that do that kind of work. The same with seed producers and the results of their work.
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 9:58 PM
Both.
Death caused by what? Global warming? un”organic” food? GMO food?
Start with the living. They can be scrutinized.
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 10:01 PM
…how come I’m laughing… pretty hard too!
KOOLAID2 on May 8, 2013 at 10:01 PM
You have some major self-edification in your future. Begin with The Weston Price Foundation. Then get back to us about what you have learned about Monsanto, Cargill, and ADM. I think you will be stunned. When you are finished with that, go to the book “Seeds of Deception” and read about horizontal gene transfer. You will never eat a tomato from a tomato plant from Home Depot again. When you are finished with that book, head over to Seed Savers Exchange. You will thank me!
herm2416 on May 8, 2013 at 10:09 PM
That sounds like a lot of wasted time and money.
Why don’t you just state what it is that you fear from the food production system?
More to the point…what is it that you’re claiming?? That may be a good place to start.
Is it poison?..should we all be afraid of the cob of corn??..will my pea vine strangle my cat?? What?
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 10:14 PM
Waiter! Someone put fish in my tomato!
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 10:16 PM
Seeds of deception should be a laugh a minute. Im sure it is backed by the american corn growers association, union of concerned scientists, center for public food safety and all the other wackadoodle leftist religious groups.
There is a lot of money to make in being anti-.
tom daschle concerned on May 8, 2013 at 10:22 PM
http://unreasonable.org/node/1642
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 10:26 PM
Growing heirloom seeds is no more difficult than growing hybridized or gene spliced seeds.
Even if a package of heirloom seeds cost more than hybrid or gene spliced seeds just remember, if you save seeds from this year’s crop you will have “free” seeds for next year. If you grow hybrids you have to buy more seeds each year. Relevant information is widely available in the Internet.
JohnFLob on May 8, 2013 at 10:57 PM
I’m not sure about that. I believe its true in the home garden as I went thru my “heirloom is better” phase, and have at it., but in a commercial, raising food for the nation setting, I would guess they fall behind, and rather than being better and cheaper, they require more fungicides and pesticides than the crops grown with resistances bred into them. This may out strip the advantage of “free” seeds. The “free” seeds need care in harvesting/selecting and facilities and man hours to dry sort and store.
Mimzey on May 8, 2013 at 11:27 PM
Whenever they talk about conservatives being anti-science, I talk about liberals and GMO’s and vaccines.
Over half a million acres have been planted with GMO’s with nearly 6 trillion meals served. And in all that time, there has not been one single peer-reviewed article that concludes that GMOs are dangerous. They’ve implied with articles till they’re blue in the face, but are yet to have evidence after years of trying.
Now they’re trying to blame the collapse of beehives on GMOs when in the U.S. we have substantial evidence it’s a combination of things.
Ah well…..
itsspideyman on May 8, 2013 at 11:32 PM
Universal background checks for every seed!
The Rogue Tomato on May 8, 2013 at 11:48 PM
Not to worry! As long as there are Kermit Gosnells & Planned Parenthood centers around there will be plenty of Soylent Green for everyone!
/sarc….maybe.
BlaxPac on May 8, 2013 at 11:51 PM
It won’t matter a jot after 2025 when the annual riots in the Paris banlieux don’t settle down after a week and turn into a France-wide Islamic uprising that spreads rapidly across Europe. Their new Islamic overlords won’t give a rats about approved seeds.
The Thin Man Returns on May 9, 2013 at 12:13 AM
Meanwhile in the land of the free, we allow a single mega-corporation with heavy government support and protection to essentially do the same thing. Condemning those who dare to oppose them with endless bankrupting lawsuits and the loss of their family farms.
Yeah….big difference. Fascism vs. Socialism. At least in the EU they ban GMOs.
matthewbit07 on May 9, 2013 at 12:47 AM
Shouldn’t be too hard to link a credible report buttressing your allegation.
tom daschle concerned on May 9, 2013 at 1:15 AM
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Monsanto
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/search/monsanto
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Goliath_and_David:_Monsanto%27s_Legal_Battles_against_Farmers
But I guess I’m just a lefty, right? You know, for seeing this as a huge national security and economic issue (and frankly, on a personal level, an issue of morality). For wanting a nation once more of small land owning farmers. For a more secure, healthy, and prosperous local food supply. That makes me a lefty today because we have become the very stereotypes our political and ideological opponents paint for us. To destroy something, simply lead it to its extreme.
matthewbit07 on May 9, 2013 at 2:17 AM
I might also add, for daring to believe that we should support and protect small businesses, small family farms, and destroy government-corporate alliances that lead to little more than corruption and the destruction of life and liberty. What horrible left-wing ideas I preach! When, exactly, did conservatives decide to protect the government sponsored corporation over the individual, the small business, the family?
matthewbit07 on May 9, 2013 at 2:40 AM
Its a religion for some. Center for food safety? lmao.
I’ve never argued anything about Monsanto’s perceived collusion with Government. Most of it is hysteria. You certainly are awfully defensive and full of assumptions.
Is agriculture different from other businesses in patent law and copyrights? Would you contend that agribuisness shouldn’t recoup losses because you perceive their technology to be immoral? Do you rage against Pioneer Hi-Bred as well?
tom daschle concerned on May 9, 2013 at 2:50 AM
It doesn’t make you a lefty in my eyes, just a Luddite.
tom daschle concerned on May 9, 2013 at 2:52 AM
I’m not opposed to technology. Not in the least. However, what we have here is a company that controls 90% of the seed supply in the US. A company that has a large team of active lawyers who go around spying on and suing farmers who dare to collect their own seeds. Essentially, we have a monopoly, and its supported by the government. Do we support the corrupt green energy subsidies? The bailout of GM or the banks? No, then why is this different? Truthfully, I think this is a far more important issue than GM or green energy because it is destroying small businesses and small family farms across the country, and forcing others to bend and bow to only one supplier and their rules.
I am not a Luddite, but I do believe very firmly that as we move further and further into a post-industrial age with greater and greater automation of jobs, we are going to see more and more workers pushed out of the workforce. In other words, a job shortage for millions of Americans. I think a fair amount of the long term unemployment we see today is in part a result of what I describe above. I believe part, PART, of the solution lay in the American people going back to the land and producing more things locally. Why does VA produce a large amount of cattle, only to ship it to the Midwest to be slaughtered, packaged, and then sold back to Virginians at a greater cost? Would it not produce more jobs and better the local economy if those cattle were raised, slaughtered, and packaged in VA? We always say that small, local businesses are the backbone of the economy, that they produce the majority of jobs. Do we believe that or not? Just my opinion, but I believe the way to greater prosperity in the 21st century lay in doing more locally.
matthewbit07 on May 9, 2013 at 3:09 AM
I can’t help you if you think they have a monopoly.
tom daschle concerned on May 9, 2013 at 3:26 AM
Nice refutation.
matthewbit07 on May 9, 2013 at 3:31 AM
Honestly, I don’t work there anymore and I can’t muster the desire to do anything but mock you people. Your religious fervor and slavery to radical leftists sites for your info just isn’t worth it.
tom daschle concerned on May 9, 2013 at 3:41 AM
Don’t, or can’t?
And why is protecting small family farms, small businesses, the little guy and his life and liberty, promoting a healthy and moral lifestyle, protecting local economies, a radical leftist idea? Again, when did this become leftist? Yes, the American left has taken the lead in this ONE area, agriculture, but I believe it is one conservatives should also embrace because it is at its roots a conservative issue. How ironic is that the American left loves organic, local produce, yet they run to the very government that destroys the thing they love? Again, this is an issue American conservative should embrace. There are fertile minds to win over here, and more importantly, this is a critical issue on so many levels; economic, national security, health, moral.
matthewbit07 on May 9, 2013 at 4:03 AM
Yeah..thats a fairly typical lefty catechism.
The left and liberals have pushed idiocy to the extreme, and that hasn’t become destroyed yet.
But, nice bumper sticker wisdom.
Mimzey on May 9, 2013 at 6:43 AM
Yeah, Thomas Jefferson, what a lefty punk. Health, prosperity, community, pphhttttt….leftist garbage! Such a lack of common sense is why I support neither party.
I would suggest this age of irrational thinking has hurt the left as well as the right.
matthewbit07 on May 9, 2013 at 7:10 AM
Thanks for catching that – obviously, a lot of the public has come to expect exactly that kind of abuse of power from the Dems; welcome to the club, Mr Kimbrell!
This thread is an interesting discussion on conservative vs. leftist values, and how they sometimes overlap and conflict. Maybe this is a sign that we should retire the current labels* and some of our one-size-fits-all ideas of party and policy**.
*Not to be confused with advocating that there be “No Labels”, just that the current ones are so barnacle-encrusted that they aren’t useful for much except broad-brush demonizing and obfuscation.
**In other words, collapsing our multi-dimensional individual beliefs on a wide range of factors into TWO buckets makes it hard to have a coherent dialogue with people who might actually share some of our positions, because we only look at which bucket we think they are in based on our differences on other positions. (and vice versa, of course)
AesopFan on May 9, 2013 at 7:46 AM
Doesn’t the idea of making NATURE against the law seem UNATURAL?
Bill Hicks
Not-a-Marxist on May 9, 2013 at 7:46 AM
This is one topic on which the Green Party actually has pretty good ideas. I wonder how this is getting through Brussels despite their strident opposition.
thuja on May 9, 2013 at 8:05 AM
SLow down everyone. I give Monsanto no quarter but the reporting in the anti-monsanto side is getting ridiculous.
Farmers have been trying to use cross pollinating to acquire monsanto hybrids without paying monsanto. That is all the fuss – straight monsanto plants themselves wouldn’t allow for saving seeds. Their plants as hyprids will not be able to produce much usable seed.
WHat has occurred is the use of “heirloom” seeds next to monsanto fields to then create a monsanto hybrid. That is what this is all about. It is their intellectual property – they have a right to protect it.
The concern over GMO is silly as it is just another version of hypridization that has been going on for centuries. I have yet to see any study showing the danger of the seeds. You don’t want to use them great! Don’t. Try to “borrow” their technology, excuse me if Monsanto gets a little miffed.
As to the EU – crazy stuff. Creating regulations to create barriers so that only Monsanto and the like can comply is a problem – and you can approve of the complaining about big agri-biz using regulation to snuff out the smaller guys. It is real and a problem and deserves to be called out.
I grow a mix of heirloom and modern hybrid garden plants. I like them for different reasons, but heirlooms will never feed the planet population alone. Saying modern hybrids are evil is tantemount to accepting the death of hundreds of millions of people.
Zomcon JEM on May 9, 2013 at 8:33 AM
Something is dangerously wrong if we really have hit the point where Frankenfood is necessary to avert mass starvation, and I’m not at all convinced we’re there yet.
MelonCollie on May 9, 2013 at 11:47 AM
There’s nothing dangerous about it imo. It is just the intelligent thing to do. If you can grow the same amount of food on 60% less land and resource use….why would you not do that?
Whats wrong with “Frankenfood”? Lets call it “Earth Friendly Food”. *Poof*..now it’s like a puppy.
Mimzey on May 9, 2013 at 1:55 PM
One more thing..Why is that? Whats dangerously wrong with anything that would avert mass starvation?
Mimzey on May 9, 2013 at 1:58 PM
There is a logical fallacy in this religious statement.
tom daschle concerned on May 9, 2013 at 4:34 PM
The only objection I have is that we are literally ‘hacking’ living organisms, not by selective breeding (which has been done since Abraham’s time) but by directly editing their genetic makeup. The idea that we can do this with impunity…just seems to me to be incredible hubris.
There is nothing religious about that statement, Mr.Daschle, and for the love of pan-fried peanut butter I don’t know where you saw such.
MelonCollie on May 9, 2013 at 10:41 PM
The idea that we can do this with impunity…just seems to me to be incredible hubris.
Or maybe like everything else in science, it is a calculated risk.
tom daschle concerned on May 9, 2013 at 11:32 PM
What is so scary about moving genes around? You worried you are going to catch one?
tom daschle concerned on May 10, 2013 at 1:35 AM