The government's ugly foutage

Current Economy and Sustainable Development-compatible? GDP growth (at all costs), economic development, inflation ... How concillier the current economy with the environment and sustainable development.
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9774
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2638

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by sicetaitsimple » 09/09/19, 21:09

GuyGadebois wrote: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!


And for the rest you are totally autonomous?
You make your bread, your pasta, your pizza dough with wheat that you have grown and ground?
Your milk, your cheeses, with your cow and / or your sheep?
Your meat, only personal production nourished with your own plant productions?
Your pinard, only Guygadebois AOC?
In vegetables, of course autonomous throughout the year?
........

We can certainly say a lot of things about the CAP, but "your 117 €", you get back a good part of it compared to what you would pay if it did not exist.
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by GuyGadebois » 09/09/19, 21:13

sicetaitsimple wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote: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!


And for the rest you are totally autonomous?
You make your bread, your pasta, your pizza dough with wheat that you have grown and ground?
Your milk, your cheeses, with your cow and / or your sheep?
Your meat, only personal production nourished with your own plant productions?
Your pinard, only Guygadebois AOC?
In vegetables, of course autonomous throughout the year?
........

We can certainly say a lot of things about the CAP, but "your 117 €", you get back a good part of it compared to what you would pay if it did not exist.

I mainly buy local. The bread is made with organic "short circuit" flour, the meat the same, the cheeses the same, the vegetables itou and my most distant wine comes from Vaucluse. As I said, "there are plenty of examples". Sorry for not having provided Monsignor with an exhaustive list. Do you want to know which ass paper I'm torching myself with? Because you, you talk, you break, you smash, but we know nothing about your way of life.
1 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9774
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2638

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by sicetaitsimple » 09/09/19, 21:23

GuyGadebois wrote:I buy mostly local.


All right, but that's not the subject you put on the table. Your local producers, organic or not, they also benefit from the CAP.
Last edited by sicetaitsimple the 09 / 09 / 19, 21: 37, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by GuyGadebois » 09/09/19, 21:37

sicetaitsimple wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:I buy mostly local.


All right, but that's not the subject. Your local producers, organic or not, they also benefit from the CAP.

AH AH AH AH!!! Yeah, what to buy rolling paper and tobacco pouch, a little study of the distribution system. Come on, let me go. : roll: Otherwise, it is FULL on the subject ALSO.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by izentrop » 09/09/19, 23:42

Policy of small steps in favor of the rurals which populate the allotments taken on the agricultural grounds. An extra hit on the back of 5% of the population that feeds the remaining 95%. Yeah it's always easier to hit minorities.

These ten meters are sacrificed for them who will no longer be able to fight against the predators of their cultures, who will be able to take advantage of them to reconquer the sanitized space ... while we know it well in science that 99.9% of pesticides are produced by the living to ensure its survival.
"There are substances which are carcinogenic to rodents in the following foods: apricot, pineapple, dill, anise, eggplant, banana, basil, broccoli, cocoa, coffee, cinnamon, carrot, caraway, mushrooms, cabbage, Brussels sprouts , cauliflower, kale, collard greens, celery, cherry, endive, tarragon, fennel, raspberries, cloves, guava, sesame seeds, currants, grapefruit juice, orange juice, lettuce, lentils, mango, melon, honey, mustard, nutmeg, turnip, parsnip, peach, parsley, pear, peas, black pepper, apple, potato, plum, radish, horseradish, grape, rosemary, tea, comfrey tea, tomato. It is therefore likely that almost all fruits and vegetables in the supermarket contain natural plant pesticides which are carcinogenic to rodents.The levels of these rodent carcinogens in the aforementioned plants are generally thousands of times higher than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides. "

Why not impose on developers of subdivisions located on the edge of cultivated fields a "no mans land" of 10 m. They will be able to promote homes without pesticides. : Mrgreen: : Wink:
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by GuyGadebois » 10/09/19, 10:26

In addition: He (Ames) notes that the mass of calcined materials, cooking residues absorbed every day by Americans, which it is shown to be carcinogenic for rodent populations, amounts to about 2 mg. In comparison, the residues of the 200 main synthetic pesticides best known only represent 0,09 mg per person per day.
Finally, Ames notes that the amount of carcinogenic natural compounds for rodents present in a single cup of coffee is equivalent in mass to the amount of synthetic pesticides absorbed by an American consumer for one year.

These natural pesticides are therefore not toxic to humans who have been ingesting them for thousands of years, unlike new molecules, some of which are endocrine disruptors even at infinitesimal doses ... You know what doses they exposed rodents for them to develop cancers?
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by izentrop » 10/09/19, 13:51

GuyGadebois wrote:
Ames finds that the amount of carcinogenic natural compounds for rodents, present in a single cup of coffee is equivalent in mass to the amount of synthetic pesticides absorbed by an American consumer for one year.
These natural pesticides are therefore not toxic to humans who have been ingesting them for thousands of years, unlike new molecules, some of which are endocrine disruptors even at infinitesimal doses ... You know what doses they exposed rodents for them to develop cancers?
You use the same bias as Janic. : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by GuyGadebois » 10/09/19, 14:30

izentrop wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:
Ames finds that the amount of carcinogenic natural compounds for rodents, present in a single cup of coffee is equivalent in mass to the amount of synthetic pesticides absorbed by an American consumer for one year.
These natural pesticides are therefore not toxic to humans who have been ingesting them for thousands of years, unlike new molecules, some of which are endocrine disruptors even at infinitesimal doses ... You know what doses they exposed rodents for them to develop cancers?
You use the same bias as Janic. : Mrgreen:

I make findings. No more. Tolerance to poisons is a fact. You spend your time gorging yourself with your double-blind tests and there, you take as reference a blank generalist text to illustrate your directed beliefs. Not very honest, all that.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
ENERC
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 725
Registration: 06/02/17, 15:25
x 255

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by ENERC » 12/09/19, 18:39

The resistance is organized:

Wednesday:
Val-de-Marne: the president of the department takes a decree to ban glyphosate

https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/environ ... 1568182032

And today:
Paris, Lille, Nantes, Grenoble and Clermont-Ferrand ban pesticides on their territory

https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/ ... _3244.html
0 x
User avatar
Grelinette
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2007
Registration: 27/08/08, 15:42
Location: Provence
x 272

Re: The government's ugly foutage




by Grelinette » 12/09/19, 21:57

ENERC wrote:The resistance is organized: ...

It's more than resistance, it's a message to the government that says "Stop taking us for fools, and be consistent"with the alarming official reports of the world organizations that are the WHO (World Health Organization) and the UN.

Announce a measure which measures (it is the case to say it) 5 or 10 m when we speak of products spread over hundreds and thousands of hectares, and insist as did the Minister of Agriculture on alleged "scientific recommendations"to justify these safety distances to the population, it's ridiculous and it pushes the credibility of politicians even further into the abyss of mistrust and their submission to lobbies.

To be credible, it would be enough for politicians to use a large glass of glyphosate and swallow it in front of us ... dry ass!
Chiche Mr Minister of Agriculture? ... Image

https://img.lemde.fr/2019/09/06/0/0/2079/1429/688/0/60/0/966df17_jFrA8HC2pF0S7TWxfWjL_Ak3.jpg
0 x
Project of the horse-drawn-hybrid - The project econology
"The search for progress does not exclude the love of tradition"

Back to "Economy and finance, sustainability, growth, GDP, ecological tax systems"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 124 guests