all 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I didn't like the video. The real enemy is the US Justice system and science funding. Companies that do everything to profit off this are symptomatic for a systematic problem. Also they quote russian propaganda way too often for being true journalism. This makes me think this video is about ragebait and not information.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Is it so bad? I really liked some of the stuff they made in the past.

    They are one of the ones that were sold to private equity, right? So maybe the decline is unavoidable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago
    [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    Farmers haven't wanted to plant their own seed ever since the first hybrids came out, you plant for yield and seed saved from hybrids will give varying yield, whereas all of the F1 hybrids and such will give you a more controlled yield.
    Also It costs a lot of time and money to, clean,sort,dry,and store seed and if something goes wrong you won't have seed for next year.

    I'm beginning to wonder why Veritasium is beating these old ass dead horses all of a sudden this shit is older then the internet and was BS back then.

  • source
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago*

    Because they purchased GM seeds and aren't using their own. They pollination bullshit was just that. The farmers that were caught up did purchase their seeds and were trying to get away with it.

  • source
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago

    that's really not my takeaway.

  • source
  • 30 comments in c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I have seen plants sold in shops with warnings that you can't propagate them. Dunno why because it was so easy to do.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I've seen that, but I always assumed they meant you couldn't take a cutting from a plant in the store without buying the whole plant, which, I feel like that's fair. Trying to prevent people from propagating their own plants after they've paid for them is asinine though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Oh, were back to this? Feel like it's been a decade since this was all in the spotlight. Haven't watched it yet, but has anything changed, or is it the same stuff as before? I actually was wondering not too long ago what happened to them because, at least for me, I didn't hear anything about them for years now.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago
    [–] 12 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    But Bill Nye said Monsanto was the best so ????????

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    There’s nothing wrong with genetically modifying foods. The problem is the exploitative legal contracts that they come with.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    I don't think that it's unreasonable to expect to recoup the millions you spent on R&D for developing a new crop.

    Yes, the length of ownership should be much shorter, but until the world governments collapse, technological advancements cost money and resources.

    If you remove the ability to recoup R&D costs before addressing the need for private r&d at all, you're going to stifle innovation.

    This isn't an endorsement for the current system, but these processes will continue to exist until the current system is replaced.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Of r&d came from any sort of university program or study at the facilities by any graduate or undergrads we already paid for the r&d more than likely it’s like when the government sold means and military vehicles vans gear to local cops we already paid once for it the first time and we are getting charged again

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    You can argue that until you're blue in the face and it won't mean shit.

    While the system of government these drugs/crops are developed under is capitalist, we're stuck with the same shit.

    This is an instance of "don't hate the player, hate the game."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    I will hate the game and the player, thank you very much. Even under this system, other choices could have been made that are neither illegal or financially nonviable, so Monsanto is very much responsible for the choices they did make. They're not victims of the systems, they're gleefully pursuing everything the system lets them get away with.

    Of course, if you want things to change, it is indeed changes to law and government incentives that need to be pursued. But in order for that to happen, you need enough people to get upset about the current state of things, and for that you need concrete examples. And it doesn't get more concrete than this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I've been looking into this a little more and apparently Carey Gillam is buddy-buddy with RFK Jr. So I'm not sure how much I trust her.

    Still, I had no idea Monsanto was responsible for Agent Orange. Learning that was enough to make watching this video worth it. Still, as with any other topic, you'll want to look for multiple resources.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    The farmers caught replanting seeds time and time again have been shown to intentionally skirt the rules.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Never thought I'd see Monsanto shilling on Lemmy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Sorry to interrupt your circle jerk.

    The reality is farmers could use their own seeds. They don't because Monsanto saves them money and updates the seeds year to year to optimize with changing conditions.

    The "Oh your seeds fertilized mine and I can't do anything about it" is bullshit.

    Frankly fresh inexpensive and healthy meals are available at rock bottom prices in the state for over 85% of the population. Our local grocery stores would make kings and sultans enraged with jealousy. I have little issue with the American and Western food chain. Monsanto whether you like it or not contributes heavily to it's success.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Imagine how much cheaper food would be if Monsanto wasn't constantly hitting farmers over the head with a legal club

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    No, there is no question of Monsanto's greed here. This what capitalism does, it incentivizes greed over sustainability.

    Rather than requiring farmers to dump saved seeds and purchase new patented seeds each year, they could use a licensing system with a fair royalty on crop yields so that farmers do not have to take on the massive administrative burden of ensuring Monsanto seeds/crops don't mix with non Monsanto ones (because if they don't do this, they'll get sued into oblivion). Those that have a license can use saved seeds from the prior year.

    This is the corporation that said Round Up was "safer than table salt" and "practically nontoxic" to mammals, birds and fish. The International Agency for Research on Cancer recognizes Round Up as a probable human carcinogen at sufficiently high exposures.

    Monsanto also supplied the US government with Agent Orange during the Vietnam war which, as we all know, caused countless cases of cancer among US war veterans and the people of Vietnam.

    Fuck Monsanto.

  • source
  • parent