The government's ugly foutage

[GuyGadebois]

Agriculture has been phagocyted by industrialists, confiscated from small farmers who do not benefit from wholesale subsidies, who can not fight the dumping of crappy products at their level. That's why some got rich, that's why the rural exodus was made and that in our campaigns, only courageous farmers and / or organic farmers manage to get by at the cost of a huge job, without receiving any gratitude from the rulers. This system is rotten since the 50 years, aggravated by the relocation, perennial thanks to the unfair competition.

[Remundo]

As much as 5 or 10m that is ridiculous. But 150m is not nothing. Without even talking about the impact on farms (organic and non-organic use "pesticides"), the consequences on other parameters can be significant. For example this would put a hell of a box in the PLUs of towns and villages in rural areas.

Absolutely Perseus, and that's why the government is focusing a debate on 5 to 10 m to avoid thinking about what would be too much trouble ...

it is not only during the spraying, once the product spread, it continues to spread in the air, even when the tractor has returned home ...

So the real subject: if they are dangerous, should some products be banned? With the consequences too: lower yields, more expensive food ...

I will tell you an anecdote that happened to me a long time ago, I was a teenager and I was riding a bike. I crossed at one time a rudimentary path along a field that had been pulverized (it smelled a little chemistry, but I do not know with what), the ground was braking and I pedaled breathing full lungs, at the exit the field, the throat and the eyes stung me, I felt bad with vertigo, suddenly, I stopped, and I lost consciousness a few moments, I woke up after a few minutes, lying with the mountain bike between legs, without understanding what had happened to me. Instinctively, I moved away from the field to get some fresh air, and I recovered.

In hindsight, I think I had inhaled too much a substance that had temporarily drugged me.

[Remundo]

Agriculture has been phagocyted by industrialists, confiscated from small farmers who do not benefit from wholesale subsidies, who can not fight the dumping of crappy products at their level. That's why some got rich, that's why the rural exodus was made and that in our campaigns, only courageous farmers and / or organic farmers manage to get by at the cost of a huge job, without receiving any gratitude from the rulers. This system is rotten since the 50 years, aggravated by the relocation, perennial thanks to the unfair competition.

and that's not over with Macron, and CETA / Mercosur ...

[GuyGadebois]

more expensive food ...

False the price displayed is not the one we pay. Industrial food costs 117 euros / year / inhabitant (2010 figure) that we buy or not. That's the magic of the PAC!
Ex: Chickens (disgusting) exported to Dakar that ruin local initiatives, I never buy, yet I pay for. Tomatoes con (almost 40% go to the trash), ditto, I buy none, yet I pay. Examples like that, there are plenty!

[Did67]

We still have trouble understanding and believing farmers who say mordicus with some provocation, that there is no danger with pesticides, while some of them make the headlines of the world media with their declared diseases and the poisoning trials at the pesticide manufacturers!

French agriculture is a very very well organized system, where some speak on behalf of others, in the majority syndicalism.

And as a good soldier, they will defend the system as it is until death! They benefit more than others ...

In any system, thuriféraires force us to ask the question: they really believe? I personally think that one can be indoctrinated to the point of losing all discernment. See Stalinism, Maoism, or all brave soldiers of all religions (from creationists to jihadists). Against all evidence, they believe in their bullshit. Why not such a farmer?

Whoever goes outside pays for it: difficulties in accessing credit, aid, legal protection. In short, he is marginalized. In debt, he enters suffering. Especially that he will not have any right-hand.

Even if today, the alternatives are more apparent. Some chambers of agriculture have a majority of "opposition" to the dominant unionism ...

In short, these spokespersons speak as the commissioner of such car brand that says they do not pollute, that the systems are not faked. Or as the spokesperson of such brand of drugs that until the judgment, will say that there was no known problem with such of their drugs.

Agriculture is "heavy industry". Once that is understood, the rest is straightforward.

[GuyGadebois]

In any system, thuriféraires force us to ask the question: they really believe? I personally think that one can be indoctrinated to the point of losing all discernment. See Stalinism, Maoism, or all brave soldiers of all religions (from creationists to jihadists). Against all evidence, they believe in their bullshit. Why not such a farmer?

Because unlike Maoism, Stalinism, Nazism (a forgetting, no doubt) and various fascisms (religious or political), a farmer does not have a gun on the temple to make choices.

[Janic]

Because unlike Maoism, Stalinism, Nazism (a forgetting, no doubt) and various fascisms (religious or political), a farmer does not have a gun on the temple to make choices.

in the existing system: does he have a choice?

[GuyGadebois]

Because unlike Maoism, Stalinism, Nazism (a forgetting, no doubt) and various fascisms (religious or political), a farmer does not have a gun on the temple to make choices.

in the existing system: does he have a choice?

It seems to me that he has more than under the schemes mentioned ... When we try to make money (full!) and we do not care about shit, we can only blame ourselves.

[Janic]

in the existing system: does he have a choice?

It seems to me that he has more than under the schemes mentioned ...

in terms of agriculture, I think the schemes in question were not totalitarian.

When we try to make money (full!) and we do not care about shit, we can only blame ourselves.

This is especially true for large farms.

[GuyGadebois]

in the existing system: does he have a choice?

It seems to me that he has more than under the schemes mentioned ...

in terms of agriculture, I think the schemes in question were not totalitarian. <<< that was not the question, you did not understand.

When we try to make money (full!) and we do not care about shit, we can only blame ourselves.

This is especially true for large farms.<<< that's what we're talking about.