Major Victory: GMOs Totally BANNED in Jackson & Josephine, Oregon

[Brainonska511]

I think everyone gets that, i also think everyone gets that to be able to compete you will have to use their crops which will eventually create a monopoly.

What then? This isn't a company that wants you to have cheap food or for farmers to have cheep seeds, they are in the business to make as much money as they can and when they have most or nearly all farmers then none of them can go back to their original investment and just replant.

At that point Monsanto can charge what they please and you WILL pay it or you won't eat.

You act like there is only one entity in this market. That is hardly the case. There are other agritech companies that develop their own lines of seeds, both GE and non-GE.

 

[MasterOfUsers]

You act like there is only one entity in this market. That is hardly the case. There are other agritech companies that develop their own lines of seeds, both GE and non-GE.

Name 3 that are big enough to compete on price.

If you had read my reply properly you would know that your answer and this question above are completely unnecessary.

See, Monsanto is already so big that they can just buy anyone or just outcompete them with price if they should become a threat.

Or they will do what Google and Apple are doing, decide there is enough room for two or three to set the same price for everything.

Does that matter? Is a duopoly really better than a monopoly? Of course not.

Then comes the big catch, only one already has pretty much all of the market and will have it for all forseeable future because to change brings a MASSIVE cost.

 

[Brainonska511]

Name 3 that are big enough to compete on price.

If you had read my reply properly you would know that your answer and this question above are completely unnecessary.

See, Monsanto is already so big that they can just buy anyone or just outcompete them with price if they should become a threat.

Or they will do what Google and Apple are doing, decide there is enough room for two or three to set the same price for everything.

Does that matter? Is a duopoly really better than a monopoly? Of course not.

Then comes the big catch, only one already has pretty much all of the market and will have it for all forseeable future because to change brings a MASSIVE cost.

Syngenta, Bayer Cropscience, DuPont, BASF, Dow...

Perhaps you'd like to read the perspective of a farmer, there is choice within the market and it isn't limited to only Monsanto products:
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.o...arm-in-choosing-seeds-im-no-pawn-of-monsanto/

 

[MasterOfUsers]

Syngenta, Bayer Cropscience, DuPont, BASF, Dow...

Perhaps you'd like to read the perspective of a farmer, there is choice within the market and it isn't limited to only Monsanto products:
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.o...arm-in-choosing-seeds-im-no-pawn-of-monsanto/

Not ONE of them is even close.

But nice try.

 

[Brainonska511]

Not ONE of them is even close.

But nice try.

Those are all very large companies, but apparently they aren't large enough for you?

Eg: BASF and DuPont are two of the world's largest chemical companies.

 

[MasterOfUsers]

Those are all very large companies, but apparently they aren't large enough for you?

Eg: BASF is one of the world's largest chemical companies.

In this field the three of them together has about as much market share as Apple if you consider Monsanto to be Microsoft.

This is a problem because it's a lock in deal, it's cheaper to buy your own crops that you produced using Monsantos crops than it is to buy completely new crops.

 

[Brainonska511]

In this field the three of them together has about as much market share as Apple if you consider Monsanto to be Microsoft.

This is a problem because it's a lock in deal, it's cheaper to buy your own crops that you produced using Monsantos crops than it is to buy completely new crops.

Monsanto's approach isn't the only game in town. Bayer and BASF do very well with large-scale screening of crops that have been zapped with X-rays to mutate them. There are practically no regulatory hurdles to that approach and they can market them easily in places with irrational hatred and fear of Monsanto. But let's not let facts get in the way. Dow is pushing forward with their 2,4-D resistant soy (aka, Weed-B-Gone resistant, an herbicide you can buy in your local garden supply store). Etc...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...-sales-where-monsanto-denied-commodities.html

 

[MasterOfUsers]

Monsanto's approach isn't the only game in town. Bayer and BASF do very well with large-scale screening of crops that have been zapped with X-rays to mutate them. There are practically no regulatory hurdles to that approach and they can market them easily in places with irrational hatred and fear of Monsanto. But let's not let facts get in the way. Dow is pushing forward with their 2,4-D resistant soy (aka, Weed-B-Gone resistant, an herbicide you can buy in your local garden supply store). Etc...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...-sales-where-monsanto-denied-commodities.html

So what? This has absolutely nothing to do with the argument we're having at all. (and you can buy roundup in your local garden supply store too so i don't know why you'd mention that)

 

[Brainonska511]

So what? This has absolutely nothing to do with the argument we're having at all. (and you can buy roundup in your local garden supply store too so i don't know why you'd mention that)

The argument you presented is that Monsanto has a disproportionate size of the market and all the other big players have a neglible share, (your example: Microsoft vs Apple). I'm simply pointing out that you are just plain wrong. The examples are simply presented to try to get you to realize that there is more choice and more players in this market than you think, and Monsanto isn't the only big guy in town.

 

[MasterOfUsers]

The argument you presented is that Monsanto has a disproportionate size of the market and all the other big players have a neglible share, (your example: Microsoft vs Apple). I'm simply pointing out that you are just plain wrong. The examples are simply presented to try to get you to realize that there is more choice and more players in this market than you think, and Monsanto isn't the only big guy in town.

And you have yet to show where i'm wrong. Yes, other players get some scraps and that was exactly what i was saying.

What you do not seem to get is that none of them can compete with Monsanto based on exactly what i will now repeat for the third time, lock in.

 

[gotsmack]

I'm very confused by these statements. Are you saying you think people should starve to death instead of using a safe technology that would provide the necessary amount of food to sustain the population?

What is there to be confused about? Poor countries should grow their own food, if they can't then they should starve because the land can't support the population.

I am against gene spliced gmo, but it it can help a poor country then let the generations of human trials of gmo food be done there, provided they grow it themselves.

 

[Attic]

Most folks want GMO foods labeled as such. This wasn't working because Mansonto has been actively poisoning the well in any area putting the labeling of GMO foods to a vote.

So label the foods rather than hiding what's GMO and wants not when folks shop at markets. If this doesn't work I can see banning GMO's outright as a solution as well.

Monsanto is what I take issue with. GMO food is available, Monsanto has been instrumental in ensuring folks don't know what is and isn't GMO. Whether folks are right or wrong, they ought to be able to decide with full and ready disclosure what foods are GMO and what aren't.

 

[shira]

And you have yet to show where i'm wrong. Yes, other players get some scraps and that was exactly what i was saying.

What you do not seem to get is that none of them can compete with Monsanto based on exactly what i will now repeat for the third time, lock in.

I spent exactly one minute doing a web search and found the following:

World's top 10 seed producers

According to the table, Monsanto controls 23% of the global market in proprietary seeds, with Dupont second at 15% and Syngenta third at 9%. 15% and 9% are hardly "scraps" compared with Monsanto's 23%, and claiming that these companies "can't compete" with Monsanto's 23% is just absurd.

 

[jpeyton]

Ban what you want, but nature will cross pollinate without any interest in local laws.

Unless they plan on locking those counties down "Under The Dome" style.