Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
It would be far more useful to work on reducing food waste, which would be enough to feed everyone on the planet.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Leaked papers allege US pressuring EU over TTIP free trade deal
- Thread starter Shiggy
- Start date
- Status
It would be far more useful to work on reducing food waste, which would be enough to feed everyone on the planet.
Are you new to international politics?
Depends on how much cheaper GMO food would be. If it's only slightly cheaper, then there is no point IMO. Again money seems to be more important than potentially having health problems later in life.
As for protectionism, It depends on how much it is being used, just like pure Capitalism can also be considered wrong and harmful. There needs to be a balance as most things in life
How about reducing food waste via gm foods? Like Apple's that don't brown as easy?
making food cheaper will solve zero problems as it will lead to slashing welfare with a similar amount. there will always be people beneath the poverty line, just as in the US.
the issue of europe having/not having GMO-food will solve absolutely ZERO critical problems, it will only serve multinational corporations. I don't really have an opinion on the safety of such foods but it will absolutely fuck with our economy.
the issue of europe having/not having GMO-food will solve absolutely ZERO critical problems, it will only serve multinational corporations. I don't really have an opinion on the safety of such foods but it will absolutely fuck with our economy.
Put them in the fridge, keeps them fresh for months.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
This is perhaps the best example of entitlement i've seen. Frankly, I think we should be doing scientific experiments on those people dying of hunger. After all, they would be dying anyway.
That you still have not watched that short video that explains how GMOs are actually more controlled and understood than previous methods of plant manipulation speaks to your willful ignorance too.
What are you basing this on? Any research, facts, figures? The research I've seen out of Europe regarding the potential financial ramifications are looking at the potential boon for farmers specifically, but boon none the less. How would it fuck with the economy? Remember that GM foods are already for sale in a lot of EU nations, they're just imported.
edit: links to EU research
Uhm, yeah that helps and all - but it doesn't prevent browning - browning occurs when apples are cut and their flesh is oxygenated, because of a particular chemical - reducing the production of this chemical has no effect on the quality of food, but significantly reduces that immediate browning that happens within hours of cutting. Regardless - that was one hypothetical, there are other food waste related GMOs - my point is, would those appeal to those who think "worry about waste first!".
Ayato Kanzaki
Member
I couldn't reply before because I was at work, but here goes.
- On trade tactics: If you accept this kind of shady trick, you also accept the risk that the other party might not only refuse, but retaliate in kind. You block german cars? We block US cars in europe. The result is that both economies take a hit, people lose their jobs, relations between the US and Europe worsen, and all that because you wanted a bunch of shareholders to put even more money in their hidden panama accounts. Because we all know that this treaty is for the benefit of major companies, not the citizens.
- On GMO: I'm not opposed to the concept of GMO in itself. IF it is used for other purposes that fattening some shareholder's pockets. Should I expand on that "Round-Up resistant" GMO strain, that led to more Round-Up being bought and used in higher dosage, which increased soil pollution? If that's the kind of for-profit GMO the US want to sell us, they can keep it.
- On trade tactics: If you accept this kind of shady trick, you also accept the risk that the other party might not only refuse, but retaliate in kind. You block german cars? We block US cars in europe. The result is that both economies take a hit, people lose their jobs, relations between the US and Europe worsen, and all that because you wanted a bunch of shareholders to put even more money in their hidden panama accounts. Because we all know that this treaty is for the benefit of major companies, not the citizens.
- On GMO: I'm not opposed to the concept of GMO in itself. IF it is used for other purposes that fattening some shareholder's pockets. Should I expand on that "Round-Up resistant" GMO strain, that led to more Round-Up being bought and used in higher dosage, which increased soil pollution? If that's the kind of for-profit GMO the US want to sell us, they can keep it.
ScHlAuChi
Member
Science also told us nuclear power and smoking cigarettes is safe!
50 years later we know that both are total bollocks.
If it turns out that GMO food causes brain cancer after 30 years, all we can do is laugh at your naviety! Not that you will care, you will be drooling zombie
On your first point, the EU governance has pointed out that this is standard negotiation fare, in that both sides come in with whatever demands they want for a contract, and then come to an agreement. I can't think of any alternative ways to have a trace trade agreement, can you?
Regarding glyphosate - yes roundup ready crops increased the usage of glyphosate, but glyphosate is significantly safer than the herbicide that it replaced. Where are you getting the increased toxicity from?
Science told us smoking was safe? And nuclear power is safe, safest energy production method we have, per killowat, if we're talking about measured harm to humans. It's used extensively throughout the world, Canada, for example uses nuclear power.Science also told us nuclear power and smoking cigarettes is safe!
50 years later we know that both are total bollocks.
If it turns out that GMO food causes brain cancer after 30 years, all we can do is laugh at your naviety! Not that you will care, you will be drooling zombie
GMOs have no mechanism in which they can fundamentally have any different effect than regular bred plants. It's like saying that gene mutation in your foodstuff leads to cancer
AntraxSuicide
Banned
Yeah, we now have GMO deniers and nuclear conspiracies. I should've made a bingo card.
ScHlAuChi
Member
http://www.healio.com/hematology-on...igarettes-were-once-physician-tested-approved
Yes it is safe - if you ignore the nuclear waste that we leave for future generations to deal with. Waste that needs to be stored away safely for thousands of years!
I was an 8 year old kid playing in my sandbox when radioactive rain from Tchernobyl contaminated me - and even 30 years later alot of mushrooms/wild berrys etc are still contaminated!
If you call that "safe" then maybe our definition of "safe" differs
How is this entitlement, it's making use of the best case scenario? If we cannot provide sufficient natural food for poor people, then surely it is better to give them the best alternative there is which is GMO. Surely everything should be done to ensure people are not hungry.
I thought the whole argument about GMO is exactly that, ensuring that there is enough food for every person?
I don't understand your argument at all. Are you saying we should completely abandon natural food and go for exclusively GMO? Don't give GMO food, even though people may die? What are you trying to say?
For you to link my argument with somehow wishing to use poor people as experiment, says more about your fucked up state of mind than mine. I guess for you it would be better to leave people dying than use GMO....
That isn't science telling us cigarettes are safe, it's telling us there were a handful of paid for doctors that just said "it's fine" - scientific studies going back as far as the 30s were pretty clear on how bad smoking was.
The radioactive waste from nuclear power -can- be managed, through a variety of different ways, some of which include recycling waste.
Giant Panda
Member
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of GMOs to say they are the best alternative to "natural" foods. They're better. They can be made cheaper, with less of an environmental impact that less efficient ways of growing foods. Any nation benefits from a more efficient agriculture sector. Poor nations with less ideal land benefit the most but Europe benefits too.
Pantaghana
Member
Nuclear research focused almost exclusively and plutonium and uranium because those materials can also be used to make nuclear weapons.
Simply switching to different fissile element, like thorium, would resolve a lot of safety and nuclear waste issues.
Sadly, because it isn't suited to making nuclear weapons, militaries and governments around the world haven't funded research into thorium, and now they are too invested in plutonium and uranium reactors to switch over.
Square2015
Member
Will this boost Hillary?
lol
Where are the sources for Europe being self-sustaining, food-wise? National Geographic's measurements disagree with that assertion:
http://onward.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/13/is-your-country-food-independent/
http://onward.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/13/is-your-country-food-independent/
ScHlAuChi
Member
And how is that different from bought scientists that find exactly the result the client wants?
http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/cent...tegrity/how-corporations-corrupt-science.html
http://usrtk.org/seedybusiness.pdf
SporeCrawler
Member
Why? In principle its not a bad thing that private persons have rights they can enforce against a state. Thats already possible with administrative courts. Whats problematic is that those Disputes will be settled in front of an arbitrational tribunal
PodcastFips
Member
A deal that was bound to fail from the beginning. Especially with the current situation of right wing parties evolving all over Europe, this will never be signed in the near future.
Thankfully.
Thankfully.
Unless you want to throw -all- science conducted under the bus here, you need to divorce the idea that scientists can be corrupted from science is corrupted. This is why there are things like peer review.
There is no evidence that shows any of this has anything to do with GMOs, for example, as there are a plethora of non-industry scientific peer reviewed studies that show no issue. If you want to say "Well scientists have been wrong before" then that reasoning means that "scientists have been wrong before, I don't believe evolution is a thing", is now a valid statement. US Right to know, ironically is almost wholly funded by the US organic industry.
Frankfurter
Member
What are you basing all of these claims on exactly? Germany is arguably one of the most competitive countries on earth and is competing extremely successful worldwide. That's especially true for its industry and has been true pretty much ever since the end of WW2 (arguably there has been a ~so-so time frame from roughly ~85-95).
This is a weird discussion lumping all GMOs together as categorically 'safe'. Of course they aren't, you'd be mad to think otherwise. The EU is also not categorically opposed to GMO foods, there are currently 49 of those approved. Saying it's science versus scare mongering is a misrepresentation of the difference. The difference is the US allows them on the market and takes them off when they prove dangerous, the EU allows them on the market only after they are proven safe. This is the main difference in paradigm. This is compounded by the fact that the EU is much stricter in its food safety, having some 1470 banned substances, as opposed to 80 in the US. Lastly, the testing is commissioned by a central authority in the EU, and by the companies in the US.
I am talking within Germany. The leading companies in the country are ~100 years old.
They aren't. Or at least you'd have to look at the countries individually. France is, maybe Poland, the rest isn't. I'd argue that's actually the reason why Europe is much more 'uptight' about what enters the market. It's a very delicate balance based on a lot of trust. It's not simply oh this company mixed in some dioxin, after we buried the bodies we'll give them a fine and use another supplier. It means bad food leading to trade breaking down as countries scramble to bring production back to their own borders.
It's also a lot of self control. In the eighties a local methanol scandal in Italy almost destroyed their entire $1B wine industry, because other countries started distrusting Italian wine. If such a thing were to happen with a company in Napa Valley, only the company would go under, because the rest of America has 'trust in their own system'. Since then Italian wine makers are hawking each other and demanding strict regulations for themselves.
You think Monsanto would ask strict regulations for itself?
Frankfurter
Member
Fine. Let's assume that's true - quite a few of the leading companies aren't 100+ years old, but anyway.
What's your point? Do you believe that the German government is actively protecting these companies against other German companies? If so, what's your proof?
Why is EU even a thing? You want to trade, get an understanding of the local Market and meet their standards. This is some bullshit.
I will give you one example, and that should be enough to illustrate the point:
Creating Uber would've never been possible in Germany; because of red tape, unions and lobbyists or as I prefer to call it: protectionism.
And_Gignac
Member
The US oligarchy cannot survive without proto-colonialism free market on steroids, it seems.
As Uber, like most of the "shared economy" stuff (e.g., AirBnB), is just a scheme of tax and safety regulations avoidance, that's actually a good thing.
Frankfurter
Member
That's really not illustrating anything. If anything atleast in terms of the importance of unions it shows a difference between the US and much of Western Europe. Considering that unions are one major reason that income inequality isn't as bad in most of Europe as it is in the US, one might argue that unions certainly have a positive effect btw. (not for corporation, but the people).
Edit: You are free to create any company in Germany, as long as you follow the laws, just btw. Germany is a market economy, but for obvious reasons not without laws that have to be followed.
CyclopsRock
Member
Obviously all the millions of people that love using it don't think "that's actually a good thing".
I can't let this go. This website legit sells magic crystals and brain powder.
And that's why this cannot work: our definitions of organic differ a lot.
Here's the complete list of products you can use when doing organic agriculture in France. Where's your toxin?
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
lmao
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
But that's exactly what you are doing.
You have made these 2 statements.
1.) GMOs are not ok for Germany, we don't want them.
2.) GMOs are ok for poor countries, they would die of starvation anyway.
You can't reconcile those two points otherwise. Why are they ok for poor countries but not for Germany. Help me figure this out, cause there is only one explanation i've derived so far.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
I honestly don't understand where you're getting the guinea pig angle from, either. For the record, I'm not against GMOs, but their point was more or less "I think they're bad but they're better than nothing." No need to read too much into it, especially when it asserts more malice than there is.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
If they are so bad, why is it ok to sell them to anyone?
1.) Is Germany suffering wide-scale hunger issue that I am unaware off? If not, why would they need GMO, when they have plenty of available natural food?
2.) GMO are not ok for poor countries, I have never said that they were....I said if there is not enough natural food available for these poor countries, then using GMO is a better alternative than starving to death, would you not agree? If there is enough natural food available, then scrap the GMO since it is not needed, just like in Germany.
What is that so hard to understand?
And most of GMO pro people, always seem to point out that GMO could end world hunger. In case you haven't noticed, world hunger is not currently occurring on mass scale in the developed countries. Going by your idiotic conclusion, most pro GMO people are racist that want to experiment on poor people......
I don't speak French, but it's there under insecticide and fungicide. It's full name Bacillus thuringiensis. Correct me if I'm wrong?
edit: Yeah, translated the document and it looks like it's approved for use, alongside a LOT of other things as pesticides, herbicides and fungicides.
The poor people in the US don't have a hard time buying food, I take it?
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
Same way it's okay to sell other goods across the world that don't meet EU standards. But this is dodging my point. It wasn't about them being bad, which I don't agree with myself, but you reading a wee bit more evil into their statements than warranted.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Oh well, I can't explain it any clearer than that.
This is of course made all the more frustrating by your lack of any willingness to learn more about the history of plants, how they were irradiated and chemically treated to force unknown mutations, the favorites of which are still in use today. Your fear of GMO seems to come almost entirely around lack of understanding of how it works versus previous methods, and since you refuse to learn anything about it, I will no longer be responding as my time would be better spent cutting my lawn with scissors.
You know the other thread wasn't closed because the mod "questions German media".
I mean, that was pretty clear I thought. It was closed due to the lack of an english source in the OP.
Muppet of a Man
Member
Neo-liberal economic's extreme stance on specialization and competitive advantage is a farce. Trading with a country that can under shoot you on price every time when the current local system of production is not quite as efficient but still more than adequate is not a good trade off in the long run. The lack of diversification within an economy, along with displacing of jobs that will likely never be replaced in any substantive form in the future, is something that we should all be well aware of that accompanies this sort of global trade (see USA and skilled labor manufacturing).
It wreaks havok economically in terms of polarization of wealth and the shrinking of the middle class. It destroys the environment by outsourcing negative externalities to countries which rely on a combination of lax labor and environmental laws to gain their competitive advantage (plus the transportation logistics to ship it all over the world). It really only benefits the rich elite on both sides of the transaction. Plus, it weakens a country's ability to deal with economic downturns in the event your industry specialization is primarily affected.
The only time "free" global trade benefits people is when there really is a substantive dearth of that particular industry or resource within a country (i.e., not enough food produced locally or no energy/fuel resources).
It wreaks havok economically in terms of polarization of wealth and the shrinking of the middle class. It destroys the environment by outsourcing negative externalities to countries which rely on a combination of lax labor and environmental laws to gain their competitive advantage (plus the transportation logistics to ship it all over the world). It really only benefits the rich elite on both sides of the transaction. Plus, it weakens a country's ability to deal with economic downturns in the event your industry specialization is primarily affected.
The only time "free" global trade benefits people is when there really is a substantive dearth of that particular industry or resource within a country (i.e., not enough food produced locally or no energy/fuel resources).
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked