Food, Inc.

[Davaroo]

.... While I left this discussion awhile ago, I am still pondering it's implications. I was wondering what you esteemed folks thought of this notion:

This film starkly portrays the further development of the socialist democratic state in America.

So far the two, State (government) and Big Business have been intertwined throughout this thread. I feel it is is inevitable that people, when working together, will form some sort of union for mutual gain. That we call it a "business" is part of our current culture. It's been called other things in the past.

Some, on the other hand, do not like that at all and wish to see total independence. Still others are somewhere else in the spectrum.

But consider this,while we're batting around definitions and text learning:

"Socialism is not a concrete philosophy of fixed doctrine and program; its branches advocate a degree of social interventionism and economic rationalization...

Social democrats propose selective nationalization of key national industries in mixed economies, with private ownership of property and of profit-making business. Social democrats also promote tax-funded welfare programs and regulation of markets" - - wikipedia

Doesn't this ring strikingly true to our current situation, which the film under discussion denounces? Even our new President said that he believes in government controlling things for the good of the people.
Is it possible, then, that it only affirms what the socio-demographic visionaries of a century ago predicted?




P.S. ...and why is it called "wikipedia,"... why not "netipedia" or maybe, "tronipedia?"

 

[I have WHAT in my yard?]

I have been reading through this and don't want to take it off topic, but people keep talking about the "developing" socialist state without recognizing that this country even more than some others has been far more socialist in the past that it is now.

Look at the mid fifties! Phone and electric were either heavily controlled or out and out government owned. Everything from railroads to mining to - yes agriculture was heavily subsidized and very tightly controlled. Auto manufacturers were told how many of what to make. Salaries across the board were set by the government as wage controls in part created the health insurance debacle we currently have.

We have been far far more socialistic in the past. Health care is the only real severe negative outcome we got from those actions taken after WWII.

 

[Brunty_Farms]

Quote:
We grow wheat, corn and soybeans and we have a cow herd. You send me your pay stubs and I'll share our financial info with you.....

I've never heard of that either. All I know is they dont recieve subsidies for alfalfa. What kind of crops are they talking about in the movie?

I dont want to be intrusive, but since they farm, and they know the regulations, probably they know more about it then the movie. Which I havnt seen, but thats just commen sense.

Mostly soybean crops... particularly Montensano (sp)..... A lot of these farmers farm thousands of acres/hectars. Not a few hundred.
The government has there hold on that land to be made sure it goes to the food industry.

 

[Brunty_Farms]

Quote:
Actually, Joel adapted ideas that were around 100 years ago. Id' say he's more of a "re-innovator."

There is a good article on him in the current issue of TMEN, for those who are interested.

Yeah... your right... I figured somebody would say that when I posted that.

 

[Brunty_Farms]

Quote:
Here's the breakdown in 2007 subsidies, from http://farm.ewg.org/dp_analysis.php

1 Direct Payment - Corn $2,048,116,614
2 Direct Payment - Wheat $1,092,800,323
3 Direct Payment - Upland Cotton $586,187,836
4 Direct Payment - Soybeans $574,640,511
5 Direct Payment - Rice $414,411,200
6 Direct Payment - Sorghum $189,455,101
7 Direct Payment - Barley $76,598,425
8 Direct Payment - Peanuts $67,670,907
9 Direct Payment - Sunflower $12,838,968
10 Direct Payment - Canola $4,811,215
11 Direct Payment - Oats $2,862,886
12 Direct Payment - Flax $800,765
13 Direct Payment - Safflower $447,611
14 Direct Payment - Crambe Seed $137,998
15 Direct Payment - Mustard Seed $116,367
16 Direct Payment - Rapeseed $11,297
17 Direct Payment - Sesame $1,962

When you're looking at more than $5 billion in direct payments in a year for foods that tend to end up in processed junk foods, there's a systemic issue that needs to be questioned. It's not about mandates for farmers, but incentives that end up benefiting the big food corporations. The movie is a broad overview of certain practices specific to industrial food production, so of course there are many exceptions that are not applicable to the subject of the film.

Thank you... Mandate may have been the wrong word to use. Bottom line... the government finds ways to manipulate ways to keep a control on where the food goes. I'm sure though when they were talking about certain farms, they were talking about farms that have thousands of acres that are receiving money from the government. You mean to tell me the government isn't going to have it's say in what to plant when all that money is involved? Come on.. can't be that naive....

If your producing grain and barely making your production cost than the government looks right over you like your an ant.. it's sad but it's true. They are after the farmers that have 20,000 acres planted in just corn... see where I'm getting at?

 

[Buster52]

Quote:
Ah! But chickens are omnivores and can live their entire lives on grain and protein. Cattle can't. They are ruminants and only eat grain when it is forced on them.

And the reason cattle are only kept in a grain fed operation for a limited time is because their stomachs would explode if they are fed corn longer than a few months. As it is the poor things are riddled with ulcers by the time they are slaughtered, anyway.

A cow's stomachs aren't built for corn. They are built for grass.

I will take your word that in your area not all cattle are sent to CAFOs at a young age. All I can go by is what I read and what the company president said at a particular CAFO in Colorado in the film *King Corn. According to the fella, in order for farmers to make a profit, they have to send them there. It is actually cheaper to feed cattle on corn than it is to feed them on their natural diet of grass.

Because corn is heavily subsidized by the government and therefore cheap.

*Another great one, by the way. If folks enjoyed Food, Inc., they will probably like this one as well.

 

[Wifezilla]

If you grow something else outside of your "crop base history", you don't receive the subsidy

If you grow something else on land you get subsidies for...that makes sense. What DOESN'T make sense is the punitive system that not only removes the subsidy but fines you the value of the other crop. It squashes the farmer's ability to respond to consumer demand.​

 

[Buster52]

Quote:
Nope. My involvement with agribusiness is limited to that of a concerned and somewhat informed consumer. I did grow up on and worked in various dairy farms for a good part of my youth, though, so I'm not a total novice to farm life and business practices. I do know a bit about cattle and pigs.

I am actually a librarian by trade...

Which means I have ready access to an awful lot of information most folks don't even know exists.

And my question to you is, do you only know about and have opinions on things with which you have direct involvement?

In any case, you have pretty much confirmed what I have read about the link between government and agribusiness, so even if I am poorly informed about the industry, I was at least right about that.

And you can call me Buster. All my friends do.

 

[Buster52]

Quote:
I think he's dead.

 

[citrusdreams]

Quote:
Ah! But chickens are omnivores and can live their entire lives on grain and protein. Cattle can't. They are ruminants and only eat grain when it is forced on them.

And the reason cattle are only kept in a grain fed operation for a limited time is because their stomachs would explode if they are fed corn longer than a few months. As it is the poor things are riddled with ulcers by the time they are slaughtered, anyway.

A cow's stomachs aren't built for corn. They are built for grass.

I will take your word that in your area not all cattle are sent to CAFOs at a young age. All I can go by is what I read and what the company president said at a particular CAFO in Colorado in the film *King Corn. According to the fella, in order for farmers to make a profit, they have to send them there. It is actually cheaper to feed cattle on corn than it is to feed them on their natural diet of grass.

Because corn is heavily subsidized by the government and therefore cheap.

*Another great one, by the way. If folks enjoyed Food, Inc., they will probably like this one as well.

My cows are on pasture and free choice hay at all times, grain is not forced upon them. But they will take it in a heartbeat, they love it. And even though they are built for grass, they can have too much of it, such as with grass bloat. It's always nice to offer a variety of foods to your animals. Grain can make a nice supplement to hay and grass.