EU and US free-trade talks launched

[crazy canuck]

Do you think there would be support on both sides of the Atlantic to remove them?

Years ago there was wide support the world over the jointly remove them, but it fell through for the reasons dps identified - the farm lobby in Western countries is very strong.

Just imagine all those tractors lining up on Paris streets if French politicians even thought about doing this.

[garbon]

I never condemned anything. Its other people doing that.

?? Most of us interpret "US agricultural policies leave a lot to be desired" as a condemnation.  Please explain how it is not.

Because you cut off "it would seem."
Its Japan and Europe who are having problems in their negotiations with the US due to the policies. I've no idea what they are.

So basically you're telling us that you posted something with zero-sum content?

[Josquius]

[

So basically you're telling us that you posted something with zero-sum content?

Both Japan and Europe have problems with the American policies.
Really seems to be some issue with the American policies as its not just Europe having problems with them.

[Admiral Yi]

Both Japan and Europe have problems with the American policies.
Really seems to be some issue with the American policies as its not just Europe having problems with them.

Any country that has a vocal and powerful farm lobby, as Japan and Europe do, with inefficient, protected producers, is going to have issues with US policies.

[Tamas]

Both Japan and Europe have problems with the American policies.
Really seems to be some issue with the American policies as its not just Europe having problems with them.

Any country that has a vocal and powerful farm lobby, as Japan and Europe do, with inefficient, protected producers, is going to have issues with US policies.

[Iormlund]

I for one would consider handing over food security to a foreign-controlled monopoly a valid concern.

As for productivity, it is not that one-sided according to FAO statistics. US wheat yields per ha, for example, are less than half those of Western Europe and well below Southern Europe, Eastern Europe or Japan.

[Admiral Yi]

I for one would consider handing over food security to a foreign-controlled monopoly a valid concern.

As for productivity, it is not that one-sided according to FAO statistics. US wheat yields per ha, for example, are less than half those of Western Europe and well below Southern Europe, Eastern Europe or Japan.

Land does not have a fixed cost and land is not the only input in agricultural production.

You seem to have latched onto the monopoly trope.  What monopoly do you have in mind?

[Iormlund]

Land does not have a fixed cost and land is not the only input in agricultural production.

Right. I was under the impression that your post was extolling the virtues of US agricultural industry by comparing it to a fictional reality where the rest of the world has extremely low population density.

You seem to have latched onto the monopoly trope.  What monopoly do you have in mind?

For starters one has to wonder how vulnerable a GM crop is to plagues due to reduced genetic diversity - and how "productive" it is for them to invest in ways of reducing that risk.

[Admiral Yi]

Dude, I honestly have no clue what you're getting at.

[Berkut]

Dude, I honestly have no clue what you're getting at.

It's all a conspiracy!

[The Minsky Moment]

For starters one has to wonder how vulnerable a GM crop is to plagues due to reduced genetic diversity - and how "productive" it is for them to invest in ways of reducing that risk.

Haven't GM crops* been used for many years now?  What does the evidence say?


*where GM crops is defined as those produced using genetic engineering techniques specifically, as opposed to those crops genetically modified by human agency generally, which would constitute every food crop in use today.

[Berkut]

For starters one has to wonder how vulnerable a GM crop is to plagues due to reduced genetic diversity - and how "productive" it is for them to invest in ways of reducing that risk.

Haven't GM crops* been used for many years now?  What does the evidence say?

There is no evidence, we are only left to wonder.

[Iormlund]

For starters one has to wonder how vulnerable a GM crop is to plagues due to reduced genetic diversity - and how "productive" it is for them to invest in ways of reducing that risk.

Haven't GM crops* been used for many years now?  What does the evidence say?


*where GM crops is defined as those produced using genetic engineering techniques specifically, as opposed to those crops genetically modified by human agency generally, which would constitute every food crop in use today.

I have no idea, I don't really follow these things and I'm certainly not qualified to make a valid analysis in any case. I'm just voicing my concerns.

Decreasing diversity is a result of selecting for more productive crops. As you mention we've been doing it for ages using traditional methods. The difference is with GM tech we can go nuts, and that the number of players might be reduced further.

And it'll be fine until a plague targets a vulnerable spot. It doesn't even have to be natural: it's not hard to imagine a biological agent developed to attack certain breed, so you can crush your enemies' economy or use it as a terror weapon.

[Razgovory]

If you type in "genetically modified foods" into google and do an image search you can see other people's concerns.  Is anyone here addressing the problem that Monsanto may turn children into the undead?

[Viking]

I have no idea, I don't really follow these things and I'm certainly not qualified to make a valid analysis in any case. I'm just voicing my concerns.

Decreasing diversity is a result of selecting for more productive crops. As you mention we've been doing it for ages using traditional methods. The difference is with GM tech we can go nuts, and that the number of players might be reduced further.

And it'll be fine until a plague targets a vulnerable spot. It doesn't even have to be natural: it's not hard to imagine a biological agent developed to attack certain breed, so you can crush your enemies' economy or use it as a terror weapon.

The thing is this applies just as well to the GMOs we started developing 12,000 years ago through selective breeding. Monoculture in Ireland set it up for the potato famine without the involvement of modern techniques. Humans share 99.9% of our DNA, other species have similar levels of similarity, adding a gene or two or hundred to a human doesn't change any significant figures in that number. Synthesising a GMO doesn't make it any more veulnerable to disease that a non-synthasise organism. In my opinion having a GMO industry protects us from such blights, limiting the damage to one planting season, since the next planting season will be done with immune seed.

We already have variation within food crops, since that is what consumers want. GMOs will probably mean more variation in food crops to suit the varied tastes of different consumers, since that variation can be controlled by more sophisticated factors than merely replanting the seeds of the plants that are closest to the farmers desired outcome.