4 ms·
> Without them then fruit would be inaccessible to many people. This is just a lucky side effect, I'm 100% sure that main goal is for the pesticides industry j
by tuyiown 4y ago
> Without them then fruit would be inaccessible to many people.
This is just a lucky side effect, I'm 100% sure that main goal is for the pesticides industry just take their cut on the producers margin. By growing those margins, sure, but it's not something that should be forgotten.
- biorach 4y agoNo, the main goal of the pesticides industry is to supply chemicals that kill of various pests (insects, fungi etc) that would otherwise destroy a significant proportion of the harvest. Without these pesticides food would be significantly more expensive and less accessible to many people. I agree that we should talk about moving away from chemical dependent farming but we need to be aware of the full picture in order to avoid glib solutions.
- tuyiown 4y agoI realize I should have been more nuanced, but you should too. The increase of production is undeniable, I'm not challenging that, and introduction of pesticides in the second half the the 20th century lowered drastically the cost of living of many. But the pesticide industry has become predatory, and their concerns have not been public welfare for a very long time.
- biorach 4y agoTheir concerns were never public welfare. They are companies. Their concerns are profit and market share. I think what you are saying is that they have turned to predatory behaviour in order to grow profits and protect market share. Your point would have been better made if you had said just that, with examples.