Slashdot Mirror

Bingo. Alternative media is flourishing because the MSM has utterly fucking failed. True investigative journalism is dead.

Canada has a law which makes it illegal to broadcast false or misleading news. Seems to work pretty well. Sadly, this is unlikely to ever happen in the States, because MUH FREEDOMS OF SPEECH!

Freedom of speech has limits. Just like you can't yell "fire!" in a crowded theatre, you shouldn't be able to label yourself "news" if you knowingly lie. Just my opinion of course.

Instead of spending millions lobbying why don't the unions start worker-owned companies? Because they can't cease making demands of "capitalists" anymore than a flea can jump off a plump dog

Who says they don't?

In short, if he says he does so, I consider it highly probable he does.

I consider it way more probable that he isn't aware of how much Monsanto food he eats, and simply thinks it is very little. His other related comment was to just not buy food with the GMO label on it to avoid Monsanto food.

A) Not all Monsanto seed is GMO. I knew they had a large distribution of non-GMO seed, but I didn't realize until now that ALSO a large percentage of the organic produce in supermarkets is grown from Monsanto seed: http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/a-month-without-monsanto

B) GMO labels aren't used in the US. I'm assuming that he isn't in america, and has little knowledge of american grocers, since there are no labelling laws in any state. Since the discussion is about Worst Company in America, and specifically Monsanto's influence in American food, I had assumed he was in country. It might be easier to avoid Monsanto in other countries. I don't think its actually possible in the US unless you grow almost all your own food. It requires a huge lifestyle change, and dedication to that mission, and the attitude of "I just don't buy their products" isn't a realistic way of avoiding them.

This is like saying that fewer people drown in the desert than in the ocean. The roadway system in the Netherlands is completely different than the one in the US, and that's why there are no helmet laws. If the majority of people in the US travelled by bike, it'd be safer to travel by bike in the US as well.

Roads that are crammed with unfocussed, inattentive drivers doing 40MPH in a Hummer are not the same as roads in the Netherlands where bike traffic outstretches that of cars 2:1.

Add to that the fact that the vast majority of Dutch cities have bike lanes, and you might as well be comparing the safety of Iraqi roads in areas with large insurgent populations with those of Main st Anytown USA.

In the US, where cycling is SIGNIFICANTLY less popular, you're looking at ~1,000 deaths a year, 90%+ of them with people without helmets.

There's a farmer in Virginia who claims his permaculture techniques could sequester all the CO2 emitted by humans since the industrial revolution in less than 10 years. His name is Joel Salatin and the technique he invented is called mob-stocking herbivorous solar conversion lignified carbon sequestration fertilization. In the 50 years the Salatins have been farming this way, they've added 8 inches of topsoil to their land (this is how the carbon is sequestered). Salatin is featured in Michael Pollan's book, "The Omnivore's Dilemma." Pollan gives a brief introduction to the farm in this video among others.

Speaking of farmland, there's a farmer in Virginia who claims his permaculture techniques could sequester all the CO2 emitted by humans since the industrial revolution in less than 10 years. His name is Joel Salatin and the technique he invented is called mob-stocking herbivorous solar conversion lignified carbon sequestration fertilization. In the 50 years the Salatins have been farming this way, they've added 8 inches of topsoil to their land (this is how the carbon is sequestered). Salatin is featured in Michael Pollan's book, "The Omnivore's Dilemma." Pollan gives a brief introduction to the farm in this video among others.

This goes beyond simple net neutrality.

The article also says Pittsburgh has also recognized the rights of nature. (Not natural rights, but the rights of the flora and fauna.)

http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/drafting-natures-constitution

That's really quite amazing that an industrial city like Pittsburgh would adopt such a radical provision, which could be good or bad depending on your view.

I wonder what the rights of nature would mean in practice. After all, Bambi can't file a lawsuit on her own.

Actually, that's no longer the case. Remember the tainted pet food with bad Chinese wheat gluten from a couple of years ago?

Since corporations are inherently more powerful than individuals, and utterly amoral on top of that, they need to be kept in tight leash.

Probably the single biggest reason corporations are so powerful is because they give stockholders limited liability. However, in general, Libertarians would end that limited liability. Personally I probably wouldn't so far as to totally eliminate it, because of the limit on liability a corporation can take more risks than individuals can. This is why corporations were granted charters to begin with. The first two charters granted to corporations were given to the Honourable East India Company in 1600 and the Dutch East India Company in 1602. Both were shipping companies facilitating trade between Great Britain and the Netherlands and India respectively. Shipping was a financially risky business, ships could be attacked by pirates or be sunk by bad weather. If a shop was lost the ship owner was financially liable, for both the cargo and for the lives of the crew. No matter how wealthy an owner was they could lose everything, even their home. So charters were granted to corporations to limit the liability of stockholders, the most a stockholder could lose was the money they invested in the corporation. With this limit more people were willing to invest in shipping which boosted trade and benefited a lot of people.

However what is overlooked today was that a corporation had to serve the common, or public, good. If a corporation did not do so it could have it's corporate charter Revoked.

While this sound fine on the surface, it would make investing an unacceptably high risk activity for anyone who can't watch the company full-time.

Actually it shouldn't take that much tyme or effort, no more than people should take anyway. Stockholders should hold the corporation accountable. They need to read any and all proxies they get and make sure they understand them. They can support shareholder resolutions. They need to be Activist Shareholders. If that's too much work, then they can invest in Socially responsible investing, SRI, mutual funds. Anyway, those who are active in their investments and oppose something the corporation does that causes harm or supports responsible and sustainable activities shouldn't lose their limited liability. Also corporate executives should be held responsible as well. Other than the captain not one person was held responsible the Exxon Valdez nor was anyone held accountable for the Union Carbide Bhopal disaster.

The core libertarian principle of removing government control would allow powerful entities to get away with whatever they want, because with government power gone, who's going to stop them ?

Government control is not the same as the control a court can wield. I have not heard of one Libertarian who wants a weak justice system. Actually I bet many would prefer to make it easier for people to sue corporations. Then if it is found it is not serving the public good then it's charter can be revoked.

Libertarianism would lead to the return of feudalism, which was, after all, rule by those who owned the land and could thus afford to hire armies to enforce their will,

I suggest you research the economics of slavery. The economics of slavery was unsustainable. It cost more to hire and keep an army than it costs to pay freemen a living wage. It was Libertarians, then called Liberals as in

I fail to see the consumer advantage on this kind of thing

http://www.yesmagazine.org/29globalhope/grossman.h tm

They have to.

And it's a good thing.

Look, I'ma War President [smirk]. Since 9/11, we realized we can't sit around waiting for things to happen. We need to act now. Al Queda operatives are trying to destroy America. Saddam was a dangerous evil dictator. By hurting big business, the terrorists will win. Democrats want to let the terrorists win, tax corporations and put "Queer Eye" reruns on C-Span. These are things we know.

Now, I don't know about you, but that last election? Where people say I didn't win [lip curl], even though the U.S. Supreme Court had run out the clock to make sure I did [grin]? Well, I felt bad when I heard those poor old, octogenarian Jews in Palm Beach County get all confused over the Butterfly ballots.

Now, with those electric voting machines? We can just flip a switch and turn those confused votes into the proper votes. We don't have time to wait around for the machines to be modified to keep paper records. At least not until after the re-election [smirk].

I have been assured by all the electric voting systems companies, all great supporters of the Republican Party, that their machines are in perfect working order and don't need audits or a paper trail to mess things up. Don't let the terrorists win!

Major Doug Rokke's opinion....

Doug Rokke has a PhD in health physics and was originally trained as a forensic scientist. When the Gulf War started, he was assigned to prepare soldiers to respond to nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare, and sent to the Gulf. What he experienced has made him a passionate voice for peace, traveling the country to speak out. The following interview was conducted by the director of the Traprock Peace Center, Sunny Miller, supplemented with questions from YES! editors....


The War Against Ourselves