|
On March 04 2013 12:24 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 12:25 sam!zdat wrote:
^the seeds spill over into fields owned by farmers who never asked for them and are now subject to copyright enforcement on seed that they own by all rights But they don't own those seeds by any rights. Those seeds indeed spilled over into their land and they are now benefiting from those seeds somehow being better. The government should be stepping in and forcing the corporation to make a fair deal with the farmer on the basis of the farmers benefit from said seeds. This isn't like a foreign concept to me. I have a relative in southern Minnesota that farms 1300 acers of monsanto corn and soybeans. He doesn't trust monsanto he really doesn't like how hes forced to deal with them but on the same hand he can't deny the huge profits hes been able to make these past few years because of the monsanto seed that he use's. Government is meant to be the grease and the hammer of the capitalist engine. Just ensure a fair playing field for all and get the fuck out of the way.
I'm all for positive externalities, but surely it's ludicrous to force a farmer to pay a corporation for seed that blew onto their land?
|
On March 04 2013 13:07 rusedeguerre wrote:
In other words, "to each according to need" never has and never will work.
you can do better than that. you don't even understand what that means. also, totally irrelevant to the topic. Son, I'm disappointed in you.
I don't see any reason why we can't forgive debts which were unjustly imposed by imperialist aggression, or taken out by Western-backed dictators who promptly put the money in their Swiss bank accounts and left their people to bear the burden "unto the seventh generation," as it were. It just ain't right, I don't care what kind of stupid rationalizations anyone gives. It's just naked imperialist aggression and extraction of tribute.
(don't you see, Sermo, that we are Caesar? Of course, maybe yours is the kind of Christianity that became a pawn of Empire and abandoned the radically subversive core of Christ's teaching)
|
On March 04 2013 13:11 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:07 rusedeguerre wrote:
In other words, "to each according to need" never has and never will work. you can do better than that. you don't even understand what that means. also, totally irrelevant to the topic. Son, I'm disappointed in you. I don't see any reason why we can't forgive debts which were unjustly imposed by imperialist aggression, or taken out by Western-backed dictators who promptly put the money in their Swiss bank accounts and left their people to bear the burden "unto the seventh generation," as it were. It just ain't right, I don't care what kind of stupid rationalizations anyone gives. It's just naked imperialist aggression and extraction of tribute.
There is no need for rationalizations, that is simply how the world works buddy. Always has and always will.
Which is why it is so crucial to break up and minimize power wherever it is found, to minimize the damage done.
Reparations after the fact are a pipe dream. The real solution is future prevention.
|
On March 04 2013 13:15 rusedeguerre wrote:
There is no need for rationalizations, that is simply how the world works buddy. Always has and always will.
I take back everything nice i've ever said about you
|
On March 04 2013 13:08 ControlMonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 12:24 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2013 12:25 sam!zdat wrote:
^the seeds spill over into fields owned by farmers who never asked for them and are now subject to copyright enforcement on seed that they own by all rights But they don't own those seeds by any rights. Those seeds indeed spilled over into their land and they are now benefiting from those seeds somehow being better. The government should be stepping in and forcing the corporation to make a fair deal with the farmer on the basis of the farmers benefit from said seeds. This isn't like a foreign concept to me. I have a relative in southern Minnesota that farms 1300 acers of monsanto corn and soybeans. He doesn't trust monsanto he really doesn't like how hes forced to deal with them but on the same hand he can't deny the huge profits hes been able to make these past few years because of the monsanto seed that he use's. Government is meant to be the grease and the hammer of the capitalist engine. Just ensure a fair playing field for all and get the fuck out of the way. I'm all for positive externalities, but surely it's ludicrous to force a farmer to pay a corporation for seed that blew onto their land?
Not really, It'd be more ludicrous for the farmer to get the benefits from the seed without paying at all for the seed. If the seed was somehow worse then the seed he was useing at the time it'd be a problem but I highly doubt that the seed would be used at all if that were the case.
Granted this situation is rife with potential abuse and could be/probably is being totally abused by monsantos lawyers but from my experience with people on the ground with monsanto the experiences with them are useualy pretty positive. Not cargill positive but still pretty good.
We arn't really ceaser we're more Sherman then anything. We'd rather just burn down the whole place and rebuild it in a better image like we did successfully with Germany and japan. The reason why it didn't work in the middle east and why it won't work in Africa is because those areas aren't as developed as we are and wouldn't take to the things we give them that are successful. Tribalism over nationalism is a hard cultural trait to get over for nation success. My Christianity is the kind that is willing to question almost anything if you can find justification in christs teachings for it. I'm pretty sure we're still the one growing denomination in america.
|
How does the world work exactly?
Edit @rusedeguerre
|
On March 04 2013 13:15 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:11 sam!zdat wrote:On March 04 2013 13:07 rusedeguerre wrote:
In other words, "to each according to need" never has and never will work. you can do better than that. you don't even understand what that means. also, totally irrelevant to the topic. Son, I'm disappointed in you. I don't see any reason why we can't forgive debts which were unjustly imposed by imperialist aggression, or taken out by Western-backed dictators who promptly put the money in their Swiss bank accounts and left their people to bear the burden "unto the seventh generation," as it were. It just ain't right, I don't care what kind of stupid rationalizations anyone gives. It's just naked imperialist aggression and extraction of tribute. There is no need for rationalizations, that is simply how the world works buddy. Always has and always will. Which is why it is so crucial to break up and minimize power wherever it is found, to minimize the damage done. Reparations after the fact are a pipe dream. The real solution is future prevention.
That's precisely why we need to break up corporations.
|
On March 04 2013 13:19 ControlMonkey wrote:
How does the world work exactly?
Survival of the fittest, rule by the strongest, aggressive use of power yields gains.
No need to be in denial of this fact, or imagine some unrealistic utopia where we are all altruistic saints and judge the world according to it. The goal should be harm reduction without rejecting the given constraints.
|
On March 04 2013 13:20 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:15 rusedeguerre wrote:On March 04 2013 13:11 sam!zdat wrote:On March 04 2013 13:07 rusedeguerre wrote:
In other words, "to each according to need" never has and never will work. you can do better than that. you don't even understand what that means. also, totally irrelevant to the topic. Son, I'm disappointed in you. I don't see any reason why we can't forgive debts which were unjustly imposed by imperialist aggression, or taken out by Western-backed dictators who promptly put the money in their Swiss bank accounts and left their people to bear the burden "unto the seventh generation," as it were. It just ain't right, I don't care what kind of stupid rationalizations anyone gives. It's just naked imperialist aggression and extraction of tribute. There is no need for rationalizations, that is simply how the world works buddy. Always has and always will. Which is why it is so crucial to break up and minimize power wherever it is found, to minimize the damage done. Reparations after the fact are a pipe dream. The real solution is future prevention. That's precisely why we need to break up corporations.
You really want to compare government abuses to corporate abuses? Please, don't challenge me on this. A single world war will negate your entire argument.
|
How is breaking up corporations going to help anyone? Corporations drive industry and only though industry is there capitalism. Minimizing risk is minimizing reward. You regulate risk more and regulate reward less.
Please tell me I didn't walk into an anti capitalism argument here.
|
On March 04 2013 13:23 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:20 Roe wrote:On March 04 2013 13:15 rusedeguerre wrote:On March 04 2013 13:11 sam!zdat wrote:On March 04 2013 13:07 rusedeguerre wrote:
In other words, "to each according to need" never has and never will work. you can do better than that. you don't even understand what that means. also, totally irrelevant to the topic. Son, I'm disappointed in you. I don't see any reason why we can't forgive debts which were unjustly imposed by imperialist aggression, or taken out by Western-backed dictators who promptly put the money in their Swiss bank accounts and left their people to bear the burden "unto the seventh generation," as it were. It just ain't right, I don't care what kind of stupid rationalizations anyone gives. It's just naked imperialist aggression and extraction of tribute. There is no need for rationalizations, that is simply how the world works buddy. Always has and always will. Which is why it is so crucial to break up and minimize power wherever it is found, to minimize the damage done. Reparations after the fact are a pipe dream. The real solution is future prevention. That's precisely why we need to break up corporations. You really want to compare government abuses to corporate abuses? Please, don't challenge me on this. A single world war will negate your entire argument.
Ah, you mean the world wars between competing capitalist imperial powers, driven to fascism and military aggression by the monetary crisis caused by liberal orthodox economy policy? Please, don't challenge me on this.
|
On March 04 2013 12:15 Foblos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 11:43 rusedeguerre wrote:
Monsanto doesn't force anyone to do anything. It is, once again, the government doing all the forcing around here. But I'm sure we can just "reform" the government by giving them more power and hoping they use it in our interests this time instead of abusing it. I wouldn't keep my hopes up though. Um, yes they do. They scatter their seed in the wind and then show up to farms and go "Hey bro we just want to see if our seed has blow over here, can we test?" And if people say yes, they test and when they find the seed (which they know they will before asking) they force the person to pay royalties and then only allow their seed to be purchased. If they person says no they go through the courts and get a court order to allow search and then the end is the same. Monsanto is evil, and corporations like that need to be severely limited in power and relation to the government.
Does Monsanto really do that?
For years, the biotech giant Monsanto has provoked outrage among its critics for suing farmers who save and replant seeds, such as soybeans and canola, from the company's patented Roundup Ready crops.
Some of that outrage is based on a decade-old case in Canada, in which a court ruled that a farmer, Percy Schmeiser, violated Monsanto's patents by planting canola that he "knew or ought to have known" contained Monsanto's Roundup Ready gene. Schmeiser argued that he didn't want the gene in his fields, and that it had become incorporated into his canola via wind-blown pollen.
Monsanto won that case, but the company might have been better off losing because the victory has been a public relations disaster. Around the world, many people now believe, mistakenly, that Monsanto is suing farmers for growing patented seeds that wandered into their fields without the farmers' knowledge and against their will. Source
If someone could provide more info on this I'd appreciate it.
|
On March 04 2013 13:19 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:08 ControlMonkey wrote:On March 04 2013 12:24 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2013 12:25 sam!zdat wrote:
^the seeds spill over into fields owned by farmers who never asked for them and are now subject to copyright enforcement on seed that they own by all rights But they don't own those seeds by any rights. Those seeds indeed spilled over into their land and they are now benefiting from those seeds somehow being better. The government should be stepping in and forcing the corporation to make a fair deal with the farmer on the basis of the farmers benefit from said seeds. This isn't like a foreign concept to me. I have a relative in southern Minnesota that farms 1300 acers of monsanto corn and soybeans. He doesn't trust monsanto he really doesn't like how hes forced to deal with them but on the same hand he can't deny the huge profits hes been able to make these past few years because of the monsanto seed that he use's. Government is meant to be the grease and the hammer of the capitalist engine. Just ensure a fair playing field for all and get the fuck out of the way. I'm all for positive externalities, but surely it's ludicrous to force a farmer to pay a corporation for seed that blew onto their land? Not really, It'd be more ludicrous for the farmer to get the benefits from the seed without paying at all for the seed. If the seed was somehow worse then the seed he was useing at the time it'd be a problem but I highly doubt that the seed would be used at all if that were the case. Granted this situation is rife with potential abuse and could be/probably is being totally abused by monsantos lawyers but from my experience with people on the ground with monsanto the experiences with them are useualy pretty positive. Not cargill positive but still pretty good.
I'm all for patent law (in theory anyway) and IP protection(in theory again), but I don't agree that it's reasonable for Monsanto to sue farmers for seed that blows onto their land.
I have no doubt that they are happy with the seeds they get from Monsanto, but its not like they signed up for it. IMO Monsanto should let them have the seed, and if its so great, put their testimonials in the brochure.
|
On March 04 2013 13:23 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:20 Roe wrote:On March 04 2013 13:15 rusedeguerre wrote:On March 04 2013 13:11 sam!zdat wrote:On March 04 2013 13:07 rusedeguerre wrote:
In other words, "to each according to need" never has and never will work. you can do better than that. you don't even understand what that means. also, totally irrelevant to the topic. Son, I'm disappointed in you. I don't see any reason why we can't forgive debts which were unjustly imposed by imperialist aggression, or taken out by Western-backed dictators who promptly put the money in their Swiss bank accounts and left their people to bear the burden "unto the seventh generation," as it were. It just ain't right, I don't care what kind of stupid rationalizations anyone gives. It's just naked imperialist aggression and extraction of tribute. There is no need for rationalizations, that is simply how the world works buddy. Always has and always will. Which is why it is so crucial to break up and minimize power wherever it is found, to minimize the damage done. Reparations after the fact are a pipe dream. The real solution is future prevention. That's precisely why we need to break up corporations. You really want to compare government abuses to corporate abuses? Please, don't challenge me on this. A single world war will negate your entire argument.
You're inventing an argument to beat down. I never compared corporate to government. I said corporations need to be broken up because we need to minimize power.
|
On March 04 2013 13:22 rusedeguerre wrote:Survival of the fittest, rule by the strongest, aggressive use of power yields gains. No need to be in denial of this fact, or imagine some unrealistic utopia where we are all altruistic saints and judge the world according to it. The goal should be harm reduction without rejecting the given constraints.
So feudalism is how the world works?
edit: I need to stop using TL as a distraction from accounting homework 
|
On March 04 2013 13:31 ControlMonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:22 rusedeguerre wrote:On March 04 2013 13:19 ControlMonkey wrote:
How does the world work exactly? Survival of the fittest, rule by the strongest, aggressive use of power yields gains. No need to be in denial of this fact, or imagine some unrealistic utopia where we are all altruistic saints and judge the world according to it. The goal should be harm reduction without rejecting the given constraints. So feudalism is how the world works?
feudalism is a little more complicated than that. but we don't have to get into it.
|
On March 04 2013 13:27 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 13:23 rusedeguerre wrote:On March 04 2013 13:20 Roe wrote:On March 04 2013 13:15 rusedeguerre wrote:On March 04 2013 13:11 sam!zdat wrote:On March 04 2013 13:07 rusedeguerre wrote:
In other words, "to each according to need" never has and never will work. you can do better than that. you don't even understand what that means. also, totally irrelevant to the topic. Son, I'm disappointed in you. I don't see any reason why we can't forgive debts which were unjustly imposed by imperialist aggression, or taken out by Western-backed dictators who promptly put the money in their Swiss bank accounts and left their people to bear the burden "unto the seventh generation," as it were. It just ain't right, I don't care what kind of stupid rationalizations anyone gives. It's just naked imperialist aggression and extraction of tribute. There is no need for rationalizations, that is simply how the world works buddy. Always has and always will. Which is why it is so crucial to break up and minimize power wherever it is found, to minimize the damage done. Reparations after the fact are a pipe dream. The real solution is future prevention. That's precisely why we need to break up corporations. You really want to compare government abuses to corporate abuses? Please, don't challenge me on this. A single world war will negate your entire argument. Ah, you mean the world wars between competing capitalist imperial powers, driven to fascism and military aggression by the monetary crisis caused by liberal orthodox economy policy? Please, don't challenge me on this.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao....
Not exactly poster boys for liberal capitalism.
Capitalism has long been the scapegoat for every ill under the sun, but you cannot deny it has been the greatest deliverer from poverty and totalitarianism the world has ever seen. The historical alternatives have been far from inspiring. Even modern European "socialist" nations necessarily operate according to a market system.
|
dude you don't know what you are talking about. How did Hitler come to power? Do you have any idea? Mao and Stalin don't have anything to do with the financial crisis and imperial expansion that led to the world wars...
history is not just a scorecard where you count the bodies and root for the home team. c'mon man, I know you have more of a head on your shoulders than that. You are being pathetic today.
|
On March 04 2013 13:35 sam!zdat wrote:
dude you don't know what you are talking about. How did Hitler come to power? Do you have any idea? Mao and Stalin don't have anything to do with the financial crisis and imperial expansion that led to the world wars...
history is not just a scorecard where you count the bodies and root for the home team. c'mon man, I know you have more of a head on your shoulders than that. You are being pathetic today.
The financial pains that Germany suffered were a consequence of the first world war. In other words, government actions, not liberal economic policies. I'm sure you have some theoretical gymnastics to end up blaming capitalism for it all though, since you've made blaming capitalism your occupation.
|
What led to the first world war that put Germany in the position of having to pay crippling reparations?
It's all the same war, just with a big interlude for the crisis to build up again. And, yes, the financial crisis preceding the Great War was caused by liberal monetary policy and the international exchange system tied to the gold standard.
The liberals wanted to pretend that economics and politics are two separate things. Unfortunately, the world doesn't work like that, nor should it.
On March 04 2013 13:39 rusedeguerre wrote:
since you've made blaming capitalism your occupation.
but why would I do this, if it has brought me so much material wealth? That doesn't make the least bit of sense. Y'all got pretty much two options 1) sam is crazy 2) sam is on to something. pick one, I don't care which.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
