Gilly wrote:
Excuse me, you made a generalization based on ignorance at a very young age, and have stuck with it ever since, it was wrong of me to tell you to wake up,,,, you need to grow up.

Gilly wrote:
Just who is this oversized .gif insult directed at gilly?

hey man, there's worse insults that you can fap to.

Guevarista wrote:
Do you have difficulty reading, or just comprehending?

For a kick off, I've seen no convincing evidence to date that contradicts the assumption I made early on.

And as stated once or twice, I've been reading up on some political issues for the last few years - not this actually needs justifying to you, but you're the one who's erroneously saying "...and stuck with it ever since".

Do you think it's somehow clever to pour contempt on people for admitting the're not that clued up on something, so have started reading up on it in recent years?

I certainly don't see how explaining the position I was coming from would warrant a personal sleight.

Seems like a typically prepubescent attempt to boost your own ego, to me.

Yes. it's wrong, ignorant and arrogant of you to tell anybody to 'Wake up'.

Just as it's wrong of me to tell you that you need to wind your neck in. But, wind your neck in FFS!
Guevarista wrote:
Work it out, genius.

Gilly wrote:
hmm what i mean is, how did a company get to be so big if they are so bad? its the company selling the seeds, but the farmers buy the seeds right? is there really only 1 kind of wheat to buy, or 1 kind of tomato seeds? are they forced to buy that stuff?
since we've been able to modify crops to be bigger stronger and faster, we were going to, and it takes a big mean company to throw billions of dollars and scientists at it.

so in conclusion, why is it not the farmers to blame who go out and plant and grow and harvest and sell this stuff. if they didnt buy the products there wouldnt be any monsanto?
are their seeds so cheap its stupid to buy others?

i dont like walmarts either, they sell cheap shit and force others out of business, but then if i need some trash bags and clothes line at 4am, i can get it. purely because its available. and its not other business faults who don't have the demand to stay open 24hrs, or the inventory to sell me things at razor thin profits. its my fault for going when its convenient and wanting to save money. i dont look at the big picture.

so is it all our faults?? we just shouldn't buy monsanto gm foods?
its expensive to buy organic crap.
are we being forced through laziness convenience and monopolies to buy that.
i just dont know.
i tell you this, if there was no money in it, it wouldnt be done.

and also, i know less than gilly about politics.

and apparently economics
science
math
history
books
religion
people
trivia
animals
shiny things
circles
alphabet

I rea A LOT on the Monsanto stuff. But it was a few months ago, and a lot changes quickly, so I don't claim to be up to date on it (or have a photographic memory).

The point about farmers jumping on it initially is a fair one. It stands to reason they'd only have bought into it if it made good business sense financially. The problem though is that when it's transpired that there are so many problems, and potential problems a lot of them want out. There were (as I said, I've not read up on it for months) over 300 court cases pending against Monsanto from those who'd invested in their stock, so that surely says something about the products.

A few years back, there were 1000's of Indian farmers drinking the pesticide to top themselves, after getting into enormous debt by taking out loans for the seeds, and the crops then failing. They were duped too, because they weren't told up front that they needed to buy expensive (Monsanto branded, naturally) pesticides - one of the benefits was supposed to be the inbuilt pesticide. Then crops failed, because they weren't advised that they needed extra water to thrive. This, in a place that's notoriously short of water.

It's fair to say too that there's a history of poverty in those regions that precedes the introduction of Monsanto stuff, which makes it more difficult to judge accurately the company's culpability, but to me, it looked as their lack of knowledge was taken advantage of & they were used as guinea pigs.

You could say they're looking after their interests, but they've repeatedly behaved unethically, - and even been prosecuted successfully for doing so more than once.

Their intentions at the outset may have been good, but I've no faith in them as things stand now.

You're right - people need to be able to purchase food within their budget, but not if they're being kept in the dark about the harmful effects, I wouldn't have thought.

*Edit* Shiny things are my speciality Batou.

Guevarista wrote: This is just a repeat of your last post. You can say something over and over again, but it doesn't make it so, if you can't back it up with any evidence.

According to you quoting from the Monsanto website is a credible source, whereas quoting Business Insider, Market Oracle, BBC, Zero Hedge and Business Standard, as I have, is "posting a list of independent, non regulated internet articles". This is a pretty spurious argument.

Anyone can read for themselves what is happening here:

www.businessinsider.com/hungary-is-in-tr...o-and-the-imf-2012-9

www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article36408.html

www.trueactivist.com/hungary-destroys-al...nto-gmo-corn-fields/

www.marcussamuelsson.com/news/monsanto-b...take-serious-actions

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19514325

www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-06/hungar...-minister-orban.html

www.zerohedge.com/news/hungary-rebels-ag...lines-aid-conditions

www.business-standard.com/india/news/hun...e-for-deal/185728/on

There are many, many, many more articles confirming this, if you wish to seek them out. It's hard work, though, you'll have to look it up on Google instead of going to the Monsanto website.

It is possible that Hungary will accept some further IMF 'bailout' in the future - which would not be a good thing - but it is not inevitable. As I asked you previously, if you believe that it is inevitable, could you please explain in economic terms why it is inevitable.

Finally, you also failed to give an account of Nestor Kirchner, the IMF and Argentina. I will test you on the significance of this if you can tell me what happened there.

While you're at it, what happened in Iceland? Why is this of relevance to the Hungary situation?

batou wrote: If you watch the film "Food Inc" it deals with this, and it is dealt with in more depth in the film "The World According to Monsanto".

cheers gilly & wubs, i ll check it out that show later on today so i can understand it a bit better.

Guevarista wrote:
Any point you may have had was lost at this moment.

wake_up_bomb wrote: Not really, they aren't regulated, even tv is regulated, as I said twice already, Monsanto have offices and Seed Outlets in Hungary, I even gave you a link to call them up and ask them whether they still operate in Hungary, yes, it would appear the article is misleading, Monsanto haven't been thrown out of Hungary, despite the headlines.
How are you going to learn whether Monsanto have actually been "thrown out of Hungary" from random internet articles that use that headline? In the absence of being in Hungary, or having a Hungarian telephone directory, I went to Monsanto's website to see whether they operate still in Hungary, answer is yes they do.
Of course it's not inevitable, nothing is inevitable, it's highly likely considering the person in charge of Hungary says they need and want an IMF bailout and are currently renegotiating terms, it's practically inevitable Hungary will have a bailout.
What the hell has that got to do with anything, hmm?
Stop skirting the issues, as I said, from what basis do you infer that i am "pro-imf"?

When you answer my questions, which you haven't even tried to do in your response, I will answer yours.

Gilly wrote: so you still hold the generalization "all politicians are liars" is true, since it's not been contradicted?Well why were you were complaining about me giving you some more reading material?

have you worked out yet that neither the IMF or Monsanto have been "Thrown out of Hungary"?

I think you've imagined that I was complaining about you giving me new reading material. Kindly prove me wrong by copy and pasting it below. Thank you.

Gilly wrote: sorry I just don't get your attitude in post #9?

batou wrote:
Abs can help you out with that one.

Really?

Hex had posted ,,,
"Right course of action! Way to go Hun­gary, I wish oth­ers will fol­low their example".
...which was clearly in response to the threads opening post.

Then you responded to him with...
"By elect­ing a neo-​nazi far right gov­ern­ment that per­se­cutes it’s own cit­i­zens?
Or just the kick­ing out Mon­santo part?"
...which, to prompt your memory, was your first post in the thread, as opposed to it being a follow-up to a previously presented case for the OP being inaccurate. It also seemed unnecesarily belicose.

Hence, I replied in #9...
"Surely peo­ple can choose to com­ment on the Mon­santo thing with­out being obliged to com­ment on the whole polit­i­cal make-​up of the coun­try?"

I see no ambiguity myself.

So, where's the quote of me complaining about the reading material?

As I said, with the rolleyes in post #9 i didn't get your attitude, especially considering my post wasn't addressed to yourself?

When I explained to you some of the context in which this is occurring you said you are blissfully ignorant and all politicians are liars in post #12, sorry for saying, "go back to sleep" but I just see a lot of empty sloganizing about the EU, UN or corps like Monsanto.

But you're not sorry about the "petal"?

Guevarista wrote:
I suggest you check you've understood the situation properly before steaming in with insults. Apology accepted though.

And for a longer, less precarious existence, you might want to refrain from telling women who are old enough to be your mum to 'grow up'.

batou wrote:
Did those two films answer your questions Batou?