5 ms·

Because the ugly truth is that you can't actually feed the world population any other way. Once your money is in the Ponzi scheme, the only way to get anything

Because the ugly truth is that you can't actually feed the world population any other way. Once your money is in the Ponzi scheme, the only way to get anything back is to ride it out and hope you're at the bottom of the pyramid.

Carrok 2y ago
> you can't actually feed the world population any other way Citation very much needed. This sounds like it was written by a member of the Monsanto PR team. There are.. other ways, than indiscriminately spraying plant poison everywhere.
- AlexandrB 2y ago
  You can certainly farm in other ways, but it's a question of yield. High yield requires removing any competition to the plants you're cultivating - including milkweed. The fact that it's done with glyphosate is an implementation detail. If you want to produce the same amount of food with lower yield techniques you need more land - so more deforestation and destruction of natural habitats, which is hardly an improvement.
  - Carrok 2y ago
    Considering we waste almost a full 1/4th globally [0], and almost 40% here in the USA [1], do we need to produce the same amount of food? 0: https://www.wri.org/research/reducing-food-loss-and-waste https://www.wri.org/research/reducing-food-loss-and-waste 1: https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/ https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/
    - bradley13 2y ago
      Add to that stupid crops, like corn grown for ethanol or HFCS. Both could completely stop, and the world would be a better place.
- Mistletoe 2y ago
  https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2022/7/15/23218969/sri-lanka-organic-fertilizer-pesticide-agriculture-farming https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2022/7/15/23218969/sri-la... This is a very famous example.
  - Carrok 2y ago
    It's almost like there is more involved in a successful migration to a less synthetic approach to agriculture than simply stopping using fertilizers and pesticides.
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  > There are.. other ways, than indiscriminately spraying plant poison everywhere. You are welcome to throw your hat into the farming ring and show the world how it is done.
  - Carrok 2y ago
    You seem to be implying that no one has successfully farmed without pesticides.
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago
      Not at all. I am implying that if you know how to farm in a different manner than the current widely used methods and deliver enough food at an acceptable price to the population, then you should do it. But I suspect that people around the world who have decades of farming experience are paying for glyphosate for a reason.
      - legacynl 2y ago
        Just so you know that kind of reasoning is flawed. Farmers are perfectly capable of using less glyphosphate, but the problem is that their buyers pay them so little that it isn't cost effective to do anything other than spray glypho everywhere. With the health risks associated with glyphosphate, I assume a lot of farmers actually would love to stop using that shit.
        lotsofpulp 2y ago
        My comments were not intended to insinuate that farmers were not physically capable of producing food without glyphosate. Clearly, a farmer is not going to work for a loss, so the context of what is possible (from the farmer’s perspective) is assumed to be within the existing business and political environment. Which is obviously that not using glyphosate makes your product priced too high.
- randomdata 2y ago
  There are more expensive ways, but the world's population – even the moderately rich segment of that population – cry that they can barely afford the food as-is. Feeding the world's population requires more than the capability to produce food.
artursapek 2y ago
Sure you can. Glyphosate is used because food prices got stuck in a race to the bottom due to commoditization. Farmers deal with shrinking margins and rely on govt subsidies and poison in competition with each other to raise commoditized corn and other crops. The ultimate result is we have cheaper, less nutritious food and a devastated natural ecosystem.
- pfdietz 2y ago
  Glyphosate was demonized to create justification for trade barriers in agricultural products. The anti-GMO clamor is similar.
  - artursapek 2y ago
    Bless your heart

Carrok 2y ago

> you can't actually feed the world population any other way Citation very much needed. This sounds like it was written by a member of the Monsanto PR team. There are.. other ways, than indiscriminately spraying plant poison everywhere.

AlexandrB 2y ago
You can certainly farm in other ways, but it's a question of yield. High yield requires removing any competition to the plants you're cultivating - including milkweed. The fact that it's done with glyphosate is an implementation detail. If you want to produce the same amount of food with lower yield techniques you need more land - so more deforestation and destruction of natural habitats, which is hardly an improvement.
- Carrok 2y ago
  Considering we waste almost a full 1/4th globally [0], and almost 40% here in the USA [1], do we need to produce the same amount of food? 0: https://www.wri.org/research/reducing-food-loss-and-waste https://www.wri.org/research/reducing-food-loss-and-waste 1: https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/ https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/
  - bradley13 2y ago
    Add to that stupid crops, like corn grown for ethanol or HFCS. Both could completely stop, and the world would be a better place.
Mistletoe 2y ago
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2022/7/15/23218969/sri-lanka-organic-fertilizer-pesticide-agriculture-farming https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2022/7/15/23218969/sri-la... This is a very famous example.
- Carrok 2y ago
  It's almost like there is more involved in a successful migration to a less synthetic approach to agriculture than simply stopping using fertilizers and pesticides.
lotsofpulp 2y ago
> There are.. other ways, than indiscriminately spraying plant poison everywhere. You are welcome to throw your hat into the farming ring and show the world how it is done.
- Carrok 2y ago
  You seem to be implying that no one has successfully farmed without pesticides.
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    Not at all. I am implying that if you know how to farm in a different manner than the current widely used methods and deliver enough food at an acceptable price to the population, then you should do it. But I suspect that people around the world who have decades of farming experience are paying for glyphosate for a reason.
    - legacynl 2y ago
      Just so you know that kind of reasoning is flawed. Farmers are perfectly capable of using less glyphosphate, but the problem is that their buyers pay them so little that it isn't cost effective to do anything other than spray glypho everywhere. With the health risks associated with glyphosphate, I assume a lot of farmers actually would love to stop using that shit.
      - lotsofpulp 2y ago
        My comments were not intended to insinuate that farmers were not physically capable of producing food without glyphosate. Clearly, a farmer is not going to work for a loss, so the context of what is possible (from the farmer’s perspective) is assumed to be within the existing business and political environment. Which is obviously that not using glyphosate makes your product priced too high.
randomdata 2y ago
There are more expensive ways, but the world's population – even the moderately rich segment of that population – cry that they can barely afford the food as-is. Feeding the world's population requires more than the capability to produce food.

artursapek 2y ago

Sure you can. Glyphosate is used because food prices got stuck in a race to the bottom due to commoditization. Farmers deal with shrinking margins and rely on govt subsidies and poison in competition with each other to raise commoditized corn and other crops. The ultimate result is we have cheaper, less nutritious food and a devastated natural ecosystem.

pfdietz 2y ago
Glyphosate was demonized to create justification for trade barriers in agricultural products. The anti-GMO clamor is similar.
- artursapek 2y ago
  Bless your heart