The Opposition to Genetically Modified Food Has Killed Millions

[crazy canuck]

And Yi, that is the kind of price manipulation I think Mongers is talking about.

Then he picked a very strange link to try to make his point.

I assume that is what he was talking about since that is the standard argument.

[Neil]

I guess the guys who made the orange carrot had their patent expire a long time ago.

They forgot to pay the lobbyists.

[Neil]

One good argument is the intellectual property rights the GM seed producers have and the extent to which they go to enforce it.  Have a farm close to a GM farm that has had cross contamination because the seed from your neighbours plot got blown onto yours?  Too bad, you now owe the GM seed producer royalities.

Yeah, but the part that you leave out is that it's all your fault, lawyer.

[Razgovory]

I guess I don't get the anti-GM food arguments.

One good argument is the intellectual property rights the GM seed producers have and the extent to which they go to enforce it.  Have a farm close to a GM farm that has had cross contamination because the seed from your neighbours plot got blown onto yours?  Too bad, you now owe the GM seed producer royalities.

Want to keep seed from last years crop to plant next years crop?  Cant do that.  You need to buy the seed every year from the GM seed company. Trying to produce your own GM seed from their product is a violation of their intellectual property rights.

The net result.  More expensive seed = more expensive product.

Now for the real kick in the nuts.  Because of the way in which the US subsidizes its food market (particularly grains) those poor starving folks cant begin to compete in their markets.  The result is hunger where there should be plenty.

And Yi, that is the kind of price manipulation I think Mongers is talking about.  As discussed in the other thread.  US food policy has had dramatic impacts on the world for a very long time.

Has the rate of starvation around the globe increased or decreased since GM food came onto the market?

[Admiral Yi]

Your answer of how monopolies are broken only holds if the market is not distorted.

No it doesn't.

The EU ag market is without doubt very distorted through subsidies and import tarrifs.  Yet I'm unaware of any single actor enjoying monopoly pricing power.  There might be an exception for that Italian dairy or yogurt company.

[jimmy olsen]

One good argument is the intellectual property rights the GM seed producers have and the extent to which they go to enforce it.  Have a farm close to a GM farm that has had cross contamination because the seed from your neighbours plot got blown onto yours?  Too bad, you now owe the GM seed producer royalities.

Want to keep seed from last years crop to plant next years crop?  Cant do that.  You need to buy the seed every year from the GM seed company. Trying to produce your own GM seed from their product is a violation of their intellectual property rights.

Seems rather unlikely that they'd be able to enforce these laws in third world countries.

[Neil]

Seems rather unlikely that they'd be able to enforce these laws in third world countries.

They'd just hire gangs to murder farmers that didn't pay them.

[crazy canuck]

One good argument is the intellectual property rights the GM seed producers have and the extent to which they go to enforce it.  Have a farm close to a GM farm that has had cross contamination because the seed from your neighbours plot got blown onto yours?  Too bad, you now owe the GM seed producer royalities.

Want to keep seed from last years crop to plant next years crop?  Cant do that.  You need to buy the seed every year from the GM seed company. Trying to produce your own GM seed from their product is a violation of their intellectual property rights.

Seems rather unlikely that they'd be able to enforce these laws in third world countries.

lol, you missed the point.

[Josquius]

I guess I don't get the anti-GM food arguments.

One good argument is the intellectual property rights the GM seed producers have and the extent to which they go to enforce it.  Have a farm close to a GM farm that has had cross contamination because the seed from your neighbours plot got blown onto yours?  Too bad, you now owe the GM seed producer royalities.

Want to keep seed from last years crop to plant next years crop?  Cant do that.  You need to buy the seed every year from the GM seed company. Trying to produce your own GM seed from their product is a violation of their intellectual property rights.

The net result.  More expensive seed = more expensive product.

Now for the real kick in the nuts.  Because of the way in which the US subsidizes its food market (particularly grains) those poor starving folks cant begin to compete in their markets.  The result is hunger where there should be plenty.

And Yi, that is the kind of price manipulation I think Mongers is talking about.  As discussed in the other thread.  US food policy has had dramatic impacts on the world for a very long time. 

Wow, that does sound really lame.

Somehow though I am doubtful that most of the anti-gm hysteria is down to such well thought out hate the business not the science reasons.

[crazy canuck]

I guess I don't get the anti-GM food arguments.

One good argument is the intellectual property rights the GM seed producers have and the extent to which they go to enforce it.  Have a farm close to a GM farm that has had cross contamination because the seed from your neighbours plot got blown onto yours?  Too bad, you now owe the GM seed producer royalities.

Want to keep seed from last years crop to plant next years crop?  Cant do that.  You need to buy the seed every year from the GM seed company. Trying to produce your own GM seed from their product is a violation of their intellectual property rights.

The net result.  More expensive seed = more expensive product.

Now for the real kick in the nuts.  Because of the way in which the US subsidizes its food market (particularly grains) those poor starving folks cant begin to compete in their markets.  The result is hunger where there should be plenty.

And Yi, that is the kind of price manipulation I think Mongers is talking about.  As discussed in the other thread.  US food policy has had dramatic impacts on the world for a very long time. 

Wow, that does sound really lame.

Somehow though I am doubtful that most of the anti-gm hysteria is down to such well thought out hate the business not the science reasons.

You are probably correct.  I doubt very many people realize the kind of food monopoly that is being created.  Its another good example of misdirect hysteria missing the point.

[Razgovory]

I'd still like some evidence that this has caused, "hunger instead of plenty".

[The Minsky Moment]

Commodities trading doesn't affect the food supply.

Of course it does. Assuming the commodity is not quickly perishable (storage-prepared soybeans are a good example), it's a normal practice to try to strangle the supply by buying low and then not selling on before prices go up. 

In this scenario, what happens to the price when the hoarder resells before the product spoils?

[MadImmortalMan]

Storage isn't free either. That strategy has limited utility.

[The Minsky Moment]

One good argument is the intellectual property rights the GM seed producers have and the extent to which they go to enforce it.  Have a farm close to a GM farm that has had cross contamination because the seed from your neighbours plot got blown onto yours?  Too bad, you now owe the GM seed producer royalities.

From the Bowman v. Monsanto oral argument:

JUSTICE KAGAN: So that -- you know, seeds can be blown onto a farmer's farm by wind, and all of a sudden you have Roundup seeds there and the farmer is infringing . . .So it seems as though -- like pretty much everybody is an infringer at this point, aren't they?
MR. WAXMAN: Certainly not . . . with soybeans, the problem of blowing seed is not an issue for soybeans. Soybeans don't -- I mean, it would take Hurricane Sandy to blow a soybean into some other farmer's field. And soybeans, in any event, are -- you know, have perfect flowers; that is, they contain both the pollen and the stamen, so that they -- which is the reason that they breed free and true, unlike, for example, corn.
The point that there may be many farmers with respect to other crops like alfalfa that may have some inadvertent Roundup Ready alfalfa in their fields may be true, although it's -- it is not well documented. There would be inadvertent infringement if the farmer was cultivating a patented crop, but there would be no enforcement of that.
The farmer wouldn't know, Monsanto wouldn't know, and in any event, the damages would be zero because you would ask what the reasonable royalty would be, and if the farmer doesn't want Roundup Ready technology and isn't using Roundup Ready technology to save costs and increase productivity, the -- the royalty value would be zero.

I've heard this windblown seed argument made before - but are there any actual cases where penalties were imposed on such a person?

[Viking]

I don't get how the windblown argument for royalties works here. In effect the GM windblown crops are weeds. Even if all parties knew I don't see how the farmer is liable for royalties. It's like Netflix demanding you pay for the movie your neighbor watched because the volume was so loud you couldn't not hear it and the screen was so big you couldn't not see it.