Bill Gates says "enivronmentalists" are threatening his hunger fix (patented GMOs = $$$)

[Hannah Bell]

The fight to end hunger is being hurt by environmentalists who insist that genetically modified crops cannot be used in Africa, Bill Gates, the billionaire founder of software giant Microsoft, said on Thursday.

Gates said GMO crops, fertilizer and chemicals are important tools -- although not the only tools -- to help small farms in Africa boost production.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/10/15/us-food-security-gates-idUSTRE59E58120091015


For anyone who isn't up to speed on the "charitable" works of the Gates Foundation, it's one of the biggest promoters of GMOs in the world. Gates has Monsanto personnel on his foundation staff & has partnered with Monsanto in a variety of ways, e.g. endowing a research institute. He buys local scientists, funds research & test fields, etc. The majority of his funding to "agriculture" in the 3rd world goes to this category.

"The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)" mentioned in the article, far from being some independent body, is basically a Gates creation.

Gates is all about patents & intellectual property in agriculture & medicine.

[tabatha]

1. Bill Gates, Africa is not yours.

It belongs to Africans. Get the hell out.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KansasVoter]

3. Please prove gates has owned any plant patents! Now! And profited from them!

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[immoderate]

126. He doesn't have to own them to profit from them. His partners own them.

Consider also the nature of "charitable" foundations. It can be used to institutionalize personal fortunes, so that generations of offspring are guaranteed a life of idle luxury.

Jefferson suggested that fortunes that large should be divided among the people.

--imm

[Rex]

4. Well if anyone knows how to steal someone elses idea.

That would be Bill.

[KansasVoter]

11. What did he steal?

[girl gone mad]

29. Are you working PR for him?

Try QDOS, to start.

[KansasVoter]

59. LOL....yes paying $50,000 for it is stealing.

[girl gone mad]

72. uh.. he sold it before even acquiring the rights to it.

then bought it under false premises (he lied his ass off).

Overrated, overpaid scam artist/huckster.

Sell crazy somewhere else.

[KansasVoter]

78. Wow, the guy he bought it from was thrilled! Read more about it! And..

And MS made many changes before giving it to IBM!
And Tim Paterson went to work for Microsoft in 1981!!

[Rex]

132. Really pathetic ain't it?

I bet it makes Billy cry every night to his wife.

[Rex]

131. Read up on his history a little bit and you won't sound so clueless

to everyone around here. Your cheerleading of Bill Gates is amazing but ultimately sad. Learn a little, then get back with us. Thanks.

[leftstreet]

5. Fight to end hunger MY ASS

God he makes me sick!

The last time I felt any amusement toward him was when I was living in Seattle and he'd pop up in the news because he'd been pie'd in the face! :thumbsup:

[MedicalAdmin]

102. Gates: doing for charity, food, and education what he did for OS's.

If he's for it, there's a scam involved IMHO.

Everything he touches turns into a profit opportunity and someone gets screwed.

[Lucian]

6. Gates is an idiot.

And the fact that he wants to take over our schools and food production scares the hell out of me.

[loudsue]

7. I bought an Apple computer yesterday...my first...because of Bill Gates' new politics

He's such a fucking globalist/corporatist asshole. Genetically modified food crops are fucking with people's bodies...not to mention mother nature's. There's a really good reason people in the USA are getting sicker by the month.

[TheWraith]

36. Do you have any scientific evidence to back that claim?

That Americans are getting sicker, and that GMO food is responsible? Because there's so far been NO evidence to support that claim.

[Webster Green]

45. Evidence..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/will-genetically-modified_b_145320.html

[loudsue]

64. Thank you, Webster Green!

I can never find the articles that support my posts. Not everyone on here is good at researching. I wish we had a forum for the research challenged. :hi:

[Webster Green]

46. dupe

wtf

[fascisthunter]

94. lol...ooops

I guess there is

[dionysus]

123. don't you get it? bill gates is rich. therefore he is evil. the end.

:sarcasm:

[eShirl]

42. a regular computer with Linux instead of Windows is another alternative

[hobbit709]

61. And a hell of a lot cheaper.

[madokie]

91. Yes because of his politics I made the switch to linux

and have not and I mean have not been happier with a computer ever.
Yea my first computer came with DOS 3.1 and best I remember I paid close to 200 bucks for that operating system. Then it was DOS 5 then win98 then win 98se then xp but no more money will he get from me.
strew him and his lying ass horse he rode in on.

[KansasVoter]

10. Lol....jealous much?

[Lucian]

12. Oh yes...

I'm jealous of a guy who wants to ruin our country by making it easier for kids to get dumber AND to put food in our bodies that will kill us off at an early age.

Yes, I'm jealous. :eyes:

That is the dumbest response I have ever read on this website. Just when I don't think someone here can say anything dumber, boom, you accomplished that.

[KansasVoter]

14. Yes, your detailed response of proof gates ruined the country is genius! LOL

[Lucian]

17. Apparently you've never heard the phrase...

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

You should heed that phrase's advice.

[KansasVoter]

18. Please provide proof that "gates is ruining the country" or you look stupid!

[Lucian]

20. I think a simple google search would help you out.

Usually when I have no idea what someone's talking about here, I google it. It doesn't take a 148 IQ to figure that out.

Huh.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fascisthunter]

95. jealous? Is that what you got out of that post?

poor poor thing

[Lithos]

8. Bill Gates still hasn't learned one fact.

Yes, he is smart, but he still doesn't understand that it wasn't Engineering or Scientific acumen which got him to where he is, but extreme luck and vicious business chops in a new industry whose type of record growth is not likely to occur in any near future. Solving hunger is not a business problem which suffers from an extremely short term outlook, but rather involves looking at larger issues including cultural, educational and political concerns.

L-

[leftstreet]

9. That's an excellent point

I've read many interviews with him and I swear he actually has come to believe his bidness success with Microsoft was NOT unique and owing to specific circumstances...but instead his very own midas touch.

He seems more OUT of touch all the time

[fishwax]

15. good points

:thumbsup:

[MrModerate]

33. I think he gets it. I also think (having read any number of statements from his foundation) . . .

That the staff of the foundation get it too. That's how they behave, anyway, as evidenced by their current programs in Africa.

Which you can approve or disapprove as you see fit, but which don't seem to be suffering from next-quarter mentality. What's different in Gates' efforts is that he has the focus and wherewithal to keep moving forward on multiple, complementary fronts simultaneously rather than focusing on a single issue or location and inevitably getting next to nothing done (which has characterized African relief as long as the concept's been around).

Is he an enthusiast for scientific and business-plan oriented solutions to social problems? Sure. So what?

[Hannah Bell]

34. "complementary" = gmo medicine, gmo agriculture, marketization, political bribery.

[MrModerate]

37. I get your passion. Got facts? n/t

[Hannah Bell]

38. yes. many more than my attackers. got anything besides snark?

i posted an article & some facts. try debating them instead of attacking *me.*

[MrModerate]

40. OK then! Respond to my post above where I commented on your conspiracy fixation.

And maybe stop telling people "fuck you." Just a thought.

[Hannah Bell]

41. um, i didn't post "fuck you". that was another person. i also have no clue what post

about a "conspiracy fixation" you're referring to.

but if you made such a post, it deserves that sort of response.

because it is an attack on the person rather than a debate of the facts.

gates made the statement in the op because of recent setbacks to his conquest of africa. as all wingers do, he blames "environmentalists" when his "free-market" economic assaults are thwarted.

[MrModerate]

43. I guess it was out of line for me to interpret your "fuck your tinfoil" comment as "fuck you."

How could I have possibly committed such a gaffe?

With regard to conspiracy fixations, let's look at your original post.

Your title: Bill Gates says "enivronmentalists" are threatening his hunger fix (patented GMOs = $$$)

Actually, as you quoted later, Gates meant real environmentalists, not the crypto-environmentalists that your headline suggests. He also said such opinions were a wedge that could split the movement in two. Meaning environmentalists on both sides of the issue. What words were *you* trying to put in Gates' mouth?

Gates went on to say: 1) environmentalists reject GMOs in Africa; 2) GMOs, fertilizer, and chemicals are important tools to help small farms boost production; and 3) that they're not the only tools.

Pretty straightforward. It's what he believes. Hard to ascribe a hidden agenda to unless you have some facts. (Got facts?)

You go on to accuse Gates of phony charitable works, because he approves of GMOs and works with a leading researcher -- Monsanto -- to foster their development. According to you, Gates also apparently supports slavery because he "buys scientists" (your words) along with such chattels as test fields. He also is funding something like agriculture (but not actually agriculture, according to your quote marks) in the third world -- again pursuing the technology he favors. You also suggest that because Gates has partially funded the NGO called AGRA, their opinion is not worthy of notice.

And then you fall off the edge: "Gates is all about patents & intellectual property in agriculture & medicine."

Where the hell does that come from? Because Gates is working with Monsanto (Aha! a conspiracy), all he's about is patents and intellectual property? Says who? You have no independent credibility to make such a statement and have offered no evidence.

OK, maybe calling it a "fixation" was a bit much.

How about "an unsupported conspiracy theory?" Is that better?

[Hannah Bell]

47. yes, it was out of line for you to interpret it that way.

i asked you to link me to the post where you called me a conspiracy theorist. you didn't.

as for your new post:

>>What words were *you* trying to put in Gates' mouth?

I put no words in Gates' mouth. I posted an article from a reputable source.


>>Hard to ascribe a hidden agenda to unless you have some facts. (Got facts?)

Yes, I have many facts. I have posted many facts about Gates & his foundation here at DU. No matter how well-sourced, facts don't matter to some people. You are one of them.


I will comment on just one fact, as a full response would require more work than i'm prepared to do at 1 am, and it is clear that evidence doesn't matter to anyone whose first response is "tinfoil".

1. AGRA is not just "partially funded" by Gates. AGRA is an astroturf org SET UP by Gates & the Rockefeller Foundation in 2006. It is similar to the many ed deform astoturf orgs he's set up in the US to push his education agenda.

There is a long history of similar orgs set up by rich people to push similar agendas.

Gates money has bought or bought up scientists, research institutes, media outlets for ag reporting, local politicians, & so forth.

Despite all the happy talk about "consulting farmers," the foundation's work is top-down and favors large-scale marketized agriculture and biotech to the near-exclusion of any other approach. Gates' money is so overwhelming that it dwarfs the ag budgets of many of the countries he works in. A profoundly non-democratic approach to public policy choices. I call it bribery; you can call it whatever you like. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

And the fact remains: poverty & hunger in Africa, as in the world, has nothing to do with farmers' "poor harvests". The earlier Green Revolution did not diminish hunger or poverty. But it did expand capital's bottom line & increase the concentration of agriculture into fewer hands.

All these criticisms have been made in mainstream media by legitimate actors. They are not my invention, and they are supported by hard facts.

So fuck your tinfoil.

[MrModerate]

52. For what it's worth, I've pasted in the link below.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=306015&mesg_id=306441

Perhaps it'll be clear to you that it's insignificant, in that I addressed the major flaws in your original post (as I see them) in the previous post.

In looking at your overall argument, I think somewhere you've lost the distinction between "aspersions," which you're very quick to throw around (at me *and* Gates) and "facts," of which your post is painfully bare.

I think you're also getting trapped in the same fallacy that leads people to believe in sympathetic magic. Because something is like something else doesn't mean it is identical to something else.

Your having posted "many facts" about Gates here on DU is meaningless (and suspect) if you are unwilling to post any to support the snarling accusations you hurl here. Evidence is only meaningful if displayed. You have declined to do so.

You've also scattered simple falsehoods throughout your posts which seriously erodes your not-very-robust credibility.

It's evident that you loathe Gates as a person, but I'd leave the politics of resentment to the Teabaggers -- it comes more naturally to them.

[Hannah Bell]

57. You introduced your comments with tinfoil & conspiracy theorist.

You end them with "politics of resentment".

You don't merit a serious reply.

There were no falsehoods in my post.

Nor were there "snarling accusations".

I have posted another OP on gates in gd.

You may read it if you like.

It is here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=306744&mesg_id=306744

There are some facts in it.

None of which will make a bit of difference to you.

[MrModerate]

71. I don't think I'll retract my tinfoil/conspiracy/resentment theme, since it captures your essence.

Let's look at the post you (after prodding) finally provided in support of the OP in this thread. You’ve carefully documented the unremarkable truth that philanthropy is a group exercise and those engaged in philanthropy constitute a community with links to each other. Forgive me if I’m not blown away by this revelation.

Sensible people recognize that an association of like-minded individuals is not necessarily a conspiracy. However, in your mind, if you get three rich people together, it’s a sure thing they’re conspiring to screw the poor. That sort of thinking is OK for the type of Trotskyite comic books they hand out in front of Suzzallo Library, but not for serious consideration by grownups.

By referring to environmentalists as “environmentalists,” i.e., something other than real environmentalists, you were unequivocally putting words in Gates’ mouth. As someone else has said, “double quotes have consequences.” Now you and I know you were just being snotty – in your world, no such thing as truth is allowed to issue from Gates’ mouth, and so his “charitable” works are not really charitable and his vision of “agriculture” is something else entirely. What precisely you mean there is obscure.

The very concept of philanthropy seems to strike you as some grand conspiracy of wicked people, when in fact it’s how human beings arrange themselves and their assets to deal with challenges. Shockingly, there are even “impact investors” who hope to do well while doing good. Sorry if that appalls you, but you’re in the minority on that one.

A few other, rather broad inaccuracies in your posts:

• AGRA is, in fact, only partially funded by Gates – and the Rockefeller Foundation. It also has other donors. And yes, it is similar to just about every other NGO ever set up by anybody to do anything.

• You still seem to think scientists are for sale, when the fact is that almost all science outside of universities and the military is by grants or employment sourced by businesses and NGOs.

• “The earlier Green Revolution did not diminish hunger or poverty.” Flatly untrue. It had many effects, a lot of which were negative, but it sure as hell diminished hunger around the world. It was also 40 years ago. We’ve learned a bit since then.

• Poverty and hunger in Africa have everything to do with poor harvests. The fact that there is plenty of food in the world and it’s not efficiently distributed – which I’m happy to acknowledge – is not meaningful to the person who’s starving to death. I suspect we agree that the only way food security is to be gained for African people is for them to grow it themselves, and not rely on trillions of tons of food being shipped in (by aircraft and occasioning huge expenditure of fossil fuels, no doubt), which is what the “there’s plenty of food in the world” concept implies.

Is Gates an angel or a devil? Naaah. He’s a guy who made the world’s biggest pile of money, realized that with his money came power, and began to look around for ways to address intractable social issues worldwide. Are there questions about how he made his money? Sure. Are there questions about how he wants to spend it now? You bet. But it is not useful to ascribe baroque motives to what he’s about just because you disagree with his approach. He is by all reports sincere in what he’s after and he’s applying the same sort of business plan mentality to the problems that he applied successfully to Microsoft. Will it work? Maybe. There’s no question that just about everything else has failed.

A flaw in your approach to this subject is the unfortunate bee in your bonnet (perhaps – based on your posting history – a whole hive) over GMOs. Lots of very serious people don’t agree with the anti-GMO camp. Like the preponderance of agricultural scientists, for example. Additionally, in most of your arguments you rely on association = collusion, which is a conspiracy theory approach to reality that really doesn’t get anyone anywhere.

And which earns you today’s Tin Foil Hat Award. Wear it in good health.

[Hannah Bell]

73. lol. it speaks to your claim about "other donors" to agra.

here are the donors:

http://www.agra-alliance.org/section/links/donorpartners

yes, billionaires *do* constitute a networked "community of interest".

you ask us to believe that their interest = our interest.


i give you today's "corporate billionaire apologist" award.

[MrModerate]

84. Actually, all I'm asking you to do is to provide some evidence beyond guilt by association.

Probably a lost cause, however.

Solid, thoughtful response to my post, by the way. Kudos.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[semillama]

130. Great post. Kudos! n/t

[sendero]

86. All one has to do..

... is observe how Gates has behaved for 30 years to have NO TRUST IN HIM WHATSOEVER. He is SLIME.

[MrModerate]

98. Yeah, well, whatever. A very compelling argument you've put forth here. n/t

[Scruffy1]

62. Norman Borlaug and the green revolution.

I remember receiving an alumni mag some years back with a feature interview with Norman Borlaug who won the noble prize for his work in plant genetics which was termed the "Green Revolution" Although he was about ninety at the time he was still doing research in Mexico. What struck me was that he stated that in spite of increased yields there was still as much hunger as ever because of the increased population. I might not completely buy the world overpopulation story (he was talking about Mexico) but it does make it clear that technology alone won't end poverty. Currently the world produces enough food to feed the population so in my view it is a problem of distribution of wealth. I can drive by elevators full of stored grain in the Midwest while people starve in Africa.
Even raising production probably wouldn't help much because the dispossessed of the earth have zero money.

[Maat]

13. Hmmm .... look what I found.

GATES FOUNDATION INVESTS IN MONSANTO
Both will profit at expense of small-scale African farmers

http://www.seattleglobaljustice.org/2010/08/for-immediate-release-gates-foundation-invests-in-monsanto/

A foundation is a nice way in which to control a whole lot of money, and control even more through foundation investment ... all tax-free.

And, what are the odds that his foundation bought shares in Monsanto and he didn't?

[KansasVoter]

16. LOL, yes, that group has no agenda! Gullible much?

[leftstreet]

21. What bothers you about SGJ?

:shrug:

[KansasVoter]

23. They are not a news source! Agenda based and biased!

[Hannah Bell]

25. the same thing that bothers him about anyone who criticizes gates. that poster

is on the scene at any & all ops that mention gates.

[Hannah Bell]

32. pick a source you like better. there are plenty. even the seattle paper.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=%22gates+foundation%22+monsanto&aq=f&aqi=g2g-m2g-o1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=cd4bd38bf506aaa7

[Foo Fighter]

50. Unlike Gates and Monsanto who have no agenda?

Seems to me the poster you were replying to is not the gullible one.

[Hannah Bell]

58. No. The richest people in the world have no agenda. They are selfless philanthropists

who just want the best for everyone.

That's how they got all the money.

By being selfless.

Only people who criticise them have an agenda.

Only people who criticise power have an agenda.

Only people who criticise power are selfish, resentful, crazy, jealous.

[Scruffy1]

63. After buying overpriced MS books

for my sons computer classes I definitely not a Gates fan. $200 for a dam paperback? What a fucking pirate. Linux anyone.

[tinrobot]

31. Boom. There it is. Follow the money.

[fascisthunter]

96. Not Surpised

the greedy kermit the frog prick.

[xchrom]

19. Gates - leave Africa - and us alone. Nt

[burrowowl]

26. Bill Gates is an

A$$.

[cbc5g]

27. Gates is into eugenics and forced vaccination

err sterilization


GMO is absolutely dangerous to the environment and our bodies. And no one knows the future externalities of using it. When you mess with mother nature bad things HAPPEN.

Oh yeah

And


Monsanto is incredibly Evil...they personify evil.

[cali]

39. bullshit he's into eugenics.

I'm against GMOs and I detest Monsanto. I think Gates is short sighted, but Eugenics? Good fucking grief.

[dionysus]

124. does DU ever cease to surprise? bill gates is worse than hitler to people here.

[zalinda]

28. What Gates is doing will end badly for Africa's people.

There are a number of articles on why this is bad.

"The replacement of biodiverse cropping systems evolved by women with monocultures of Bt cotton leads to a decline in food production. This undermines women’s food sovereignty and erodes food security, which in women’s hands is women’s empowerment. Further, it destroys women’s work relating to agricultural production and post-harvest food processing. Interestingly women’s work in relation to food sovereignty has been defined as ‘femimanual’ work.

The growing of food is the most important source of livelihood for the majority of the world’s people, especially women. It is also the most fundamental economic right. Women were the world’s original food producers, and they continue to be central to food-production systems in the Third World in terms of the work they do in the food chain."

https://secure.resurgence.org/magazine/article3297-who-will-feed-the-world.html


"The key to ending hunger is sustaining Africa’s food biodiversity, not reducing it to industrial monoculture. Currently, food for African consumption comes from about 2,000 different plants, while the U.S. food base derives mainly from 12 plants. Any further narrowing of the food base makes us all vulnerable because it increases crop susceptibility to pathogens, reduces the variety of nutrients needed for human health, and minimizes the parent genetic material available for future breeding."

http://www.stwr.org/africa/africa-green-revolution-or-rainbow-evolution.html

zalinda

[MrModerate]

35. The first article hearkens back, nostalgically, to a method of food production . . .

More suitable to the bronze age than to the 21st century and which demonstrably doesn't work. You can talk all you want about women's empowerment as the "seed keepers" and "seed breeders," but all that is pretty irrelevant if you're dead at age 30 from malunutrition-exacerbated disease. Let's all kumbayah to the grave, shall we?

The second article spends much of its time criticizing the "green revolution" of 40 years ago, as if modern efforts are identical and there has been no growth of knowledge since then. The current work acknowledges biodiversity and is considering hundreds of enhanced varieties of farmable species.

The article also implies that life as a subsistance farmer is superior to one in which farming is a genuine livelihood rather than a desperate stuggle to avoid famine. Thanks but no thanks. It's romantic -- and lethal -- to cling to systems that keep a whole continent in penury and continuous risk of starvation, disease, and social unrest deriving from scarcity.

[zalinda]

68. And the biggest problem is that you have to buy

seeds EACH year, which means only the rich will have the seeds to grow. And what if the crop fails? What if there isn't enough water? Do plants come first or people? People like Gates can only think of the bottom line. I've dealt with Microsoft before, and they play hard ball. Africa is not the US. It has more villages than cities. A village depending on a crop that could fail would be devastating to the village. The seed keepers rely on 2,000 different plants to sustain them, not just 12 GMO crops.

I recently read about villages going back to the seed keeper method and they are thriving. They are growing enough that they can trade with other villages, or even sell their extra. I would have posted that article, if I could find it again.

zalinda

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

44. Yay, more western whites telling Africa it can starve for THEIR principles

Subsistence agriculture doesn't work so great when 400,000,000 people are living in cities and not on the land. The urban population of Africa is set to double in the next twenty years, traditional agriculture that western whites are so romantic about preserving isn't going to feed nearly a billion city dwellers.

[Hannah Bell]

49. more straw from the master. there is enough food produced to feed those 400,000,000.

unfortunately, they don't have enough money to buy it.

so cargill and adm sell it to the us government, which distributes it below cost as "aid," further undercutting local farmers, who go bankrupt and move to the city to join the slumdwellers.

cargill & adm get their cheap land.

win-win all around.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

53. You are as well informed about Africa as you are about Detroit

Africa imports THIRTY BILLION dollars worth of food every year, agricultural trade within Africa is trivial owing to poor transportation infrastructure that keeps what little output there is intensely local and Zimbabwe ceasing all agricultural output. Africa also suffers for extremely labor intensive agricultural practices at a time when people, especially young people are leaving the land in droves. Much is left in the fields to rot because there is nobody to harvest it.

[Hannah Bell]

56. There's such poor transportion -- yet somehow that imported food moves.

1) If the problem is roads, & transportation, why doesn't gates build roads instead of gmos?

2) How will gmos make african agricultural products easier to transport?

3) If the problem is farmers leaving the land, why is that?

4) how did those farmers manage to feed themselves before the helpful westerners came? since there were no roads & all?

5) Please link the source for your import figure for all of africa.

6) Please link the source for food exports within and from africa.

7) Please link me to the source that says zimbabwe has ceased all agricultural output.

8) please link me to the source that says much of the food produced in africa rots in the fields, because african farmers are leaving the land in droves to go live in the slums of the cities.

thanks.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

74. Their called "airplanes"

Much of the imported food is delivered to market by air cargo, this works okay in large cities with modern airports - but you can't exactly land an Airbus A300F on a dirt path.

Highways are being developed in Africa, The Trans-Africa Highway System for this very purpose - extensively financed by the United Nations and other international donors. Modern agricultural practices make for highly productive farms and great economies of scale. For food to be transported it first has to exist.

African farmers are leaving the land the same reason American, Chinese and European farmers are leaving the land. They don't want to be farmers and better opportunities exist in the cities.

They fed themselves because much of the population was employed in subsistence agriculture, since the urban explosion in Africa this system has broken. Some regions managed until governments thought it wise to destroy commercial agriculture.

The United Nations is a wealth of information of Africa: http://www.uneca.org/eca_resources/Press_Releases/2010_pressreleases/pressrelease1110.html

As for Zimbabwe, am I to assume you have never heard of Robert Mugabe?

And please list, which African cities you have either visited or lived in, in most African countries rural poverty is much higher than urban poverty, which is why people are going to the cities!

[Hannah Bell]

76. here are my questions paired with your answers.

1) If the problem is roads, & transportation, why doesn't gates build roads instead of gmos?

- Highways are being developed in Africa, The Trans-Africa Highway System for this very purpose - extensively financed by the United Nations and other international donors. Modern agricultural practices make for highly productive farms and great economies of scale.

Response: You didn't answer my question. I will also note that the Trans-Africa Hwy is not the only road in Africa, e.g.: http://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-51356.1824.html

I will also note that somehow minerals, oil, and the goods produced on transnational plantations seem to move despite the purported absence of roads.


2) How will gmos make african agricultural products easier to transport?

?

Response: You didn't answer my question. The answer is self-evident.


3) If the problem is farmers leaving the land, why is that?

African farmers are leaving the land the same reason American, Chinese and European farmers are leaving the land. They don't want to be farmers and better opportunities exist in the cities.

- Response:

Around 60 percent of African workers are employed by the agricultural sector, with about three-fifths of African farmers being subsistence farmers. Subsistence farms provide a source of food and a relatively small income for the family, but generally fail to produce enough to make re-investment possible. Larger farms tend to grow cash crops such as coffee, cotton, cocoa, and rubber. These farms, normally operated by large corporations, cover tens of square kilometres and employ large numbers of labourers.

The situation whereby African nations export crops to the West while millions on the continent starve has been blamed on developed countries including Japan, the European Union and the United States. These countries protect their own agricultural sectors with high import tariffs and offer subsidies to their farmers, which many contend leads the overproduction of such commodities as grain, cotton and milk. The result of this is that the global price of such products is continually reduced until Africans are unable to compete, except for cash crops that do not grow easily in a northern climate.<14>

Because of these market forces, in Africa excess capacity is devoted to growing crops for export. Thus, when civil unrest or a bad harvest occurs, there is often very little food saved and many starve. Ironically, excess foodstuffs grown in developed nations are regularly destroyed, as it is not economically viable to transport it across the oceans to a market poor in capital. Although cash crops can expand a nation's wealth, there is often a risk that focusing on them rather than staples will lead to food shortages and hunger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Africa.


4) how did those farmers manage to feed themselves before the helpful westerners came? since there were no roads & all?

- They fed themselves because much of the population was employed in subsistence agriculture, since the urban explosion in Africa this system has broken. Some regions managed until governments thought it wise to destroy commercial agriculture.

Response: From the link above: "Around 60 percent of African workers are employed by the agricultural sector, with about three-fifths of African farmers being subsistence farmers."


5) Please link the source for your import figure for all of africa.

The United Nations is a wealth of information of Africa: http://www.uneca.org/eca_resources/Press_Releases/2010_...

Response: Since you quoted the number, I expect that you can link me to it directly rather than to a website with tons of data that I have to search through.



6) Please link the source for food exports within and from africa.

The United Nations is a wealth of information of Africa: http://www.uneca.org/eca_resources/Press_Releases/2010_...

Response: Since you are an African expert, I expect you can link me directly to the number I asked for.


7) Please link me to the source that says zimbabwe has ceased all agricultural output.

As for Zimbabwe, am I to assume you have never heard of Robert Mugabe?

Response: You didn't answer my question. Of course I've heard of Mugabe. What I have not heard is that Zimbabwe "ceased all agricultural output".


8) please link me to the source that says much of the food produced in africa rots in the fields, because african farmers are leaving the land in droves to go live in the slums of the cities.

?


Finally, I will note that since you're an africa expert, you should know better than to make such sweeping generalizations about an entire continent.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SpiralHawk]

48. No one wants this genetically mutant crap

-- just the profiteering corporations (R) Gates (R) is in bed with...

[Codeine]

65. That "mutant crap" feeds the planet. nt

[Raine]

51. Yeah just let Africa have genetically mutated crap

use them as guina pigs cause they're so hungry they'll eat anything. Gates wants to pass off crap and look like Lord Bountiful for doing it and still profit financially!!! :mad: :grr:

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

54. crap you have been eating for twenty years

[Raine]

55. probably so *sigh*

which is a good reason not to want to see another place poisoned with it. :-(

[KansasVoter]

60. This shit belongs in the 9/11 forum

[Hannah Bell]

69. funny that the mods haven;t moved it then.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hannah Bell]

70. I'm not "against" GMOs in a blanket fashion either. The question is "how" & "how much".

I'm against billionaires using their wealth to monopolize ag & science & force policy undemocratically, under the guise of philanthropy.

[leftstreet]

89. :spray:

"the lesser priests of Redmond"

:spray: :rofl:

[Starry Messenger]

103. Thank you.

I was proud of it too. :D

[Taitertots]

75. Do GMOs produce higher returns per acre?

Are there people in Africa who are starving for a lack of food?

You must choose to either:
A) Come up with an actionable solution
B) Accept the solution provided by Gates
C) Accept that several million dead Africans are the cost of your environmental ideology

""The technologies will be licensed royalty free to seed distributors so that the new seeds can be sold to African farmers without extra charge," Gates said"

[Hannah Bell]

77. ...

Around 60 percent of African workers are employed by the agricultural sector, with about three-fifths of African farmers being subsistence farmers. Subsistence farms provide a source of food and a relatively small income for the family, but generally fail to produce enough to make re-investment possible. Larger farms tend to grow cash crops such as coffee, cotton, cocoa, and rubber. These farms, normally operated by large corporations, cover tens of square kilometres and employ large numbers of labourers.

The situation whereby African nations export crops to the West while millions on the continent starve has been blamed on developed countries including Japan, the European Union and the United States. These countries protect their own agricultural sectors with high import tariffs and offer subsidies to their farmers, which many contend leads the overproduction of such commodities as grain, cotton and milk. The result of this is that the global price of such products is continually reduced until Africans are unable to compete, except for cash crops that do not grow easily in a northern climate.<14>

Because of these market forces, in Africa excess capacity is devoted to growing crops for export. Thus, when civil unrest or a bad harvest occurs, there is often very little food saved and many starve. Ironically, excess foodstuffs grown in developed nations are regularly destroyed, as it is not economically viable to transport it across the oceans to a market poor in capital. Although cash crops can expand a nation's wealth, there is often a risk that focusing on them rather than staples will lead to food shortages and hunger.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tdlDO1U02P8J:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Africa+percent+of+african+subsistence+agriculture&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

[Taitertots]

79. Has nothing to do with the benefits Africans would see from GMO crops and Gate's plan

Saying nothing of the costs imposed on Africans by limiting their availability.

Unless you have an actionable plan to restructure all agriculture in Africa than you must accept the costs that will come with opposing this. I wish Africa was different too, but wishing isn't going to stop Africans from dying.

[Hannah Bell]

80. africans aren't going hungry for lack of food production.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

82. then why does hunger persist between local production and 33bn in imports?

http://www.uneca.org/eca_resources/Press_Releases/2010_pressreleases/pressrelease1110.html

Despite Africa’s annual food aid of $3 billion and $33 billion in food imports, about 265 million of the world’s 915 million undernourished people are on the continent, leaving one out of every three African people chronically hungry, the Director of Food Security and Sustainable Development of the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), Josue Dione, said in Abuja today.

Addressing the plenary session of African heads of state at the conference on agribusiness and agro-industry which ended today in the Nigerian capital , on behalf of the Executive Secretary of the ECA, Abdoulie Janneh, Dione said much of the $33 billion Africa spends to import food could be better diverted to domestic production for regional and global trade, thereby contributing to poverty reduction and repositioning Africa in the global economy.

[Taitertots]

83. When you come up with an actionable plan to change the distribution paths for food in Africa

I'll take your complaints about the issue seriously. The objective reality is that increased food production will increase domestic food availability. Without this aid or an actionable plan then Africans will die.

Wanting it to be different isn't going to change the objective realities of the situation.

[Hannah Bell]

88. lol. what a load of crap. the problem is distribution -- & genetic modification will solve it.

wow, that's some logic you got going there.

[Taitertots]

92. More food will increase domestic availability

In spite of the realities of the food distribution system. There is no evidence that 100% of production gains will be diverted out of the country. It is safe to say that increased food production will increase domestic availability. Even the fraction that is sold internationally will benefit Africans, by increasing their exports, bringing money into their country.

Absent any actionable plan, your logic is to do nothing and expect the realities of the food distribution system to change. I'll take marginal benefits over absolutely nothing any day of the week. If you have a reasonable plan to change the food distribution system in Africa, I'd like to hear it.

[Hannah Bell]

109. you guys don't even make sense. first you tell me the problem is there are no roads &

no transport, so the food that *is* grown can't get to market & lies "rotting in the fields".

that's why they have to fly food from overseas into the big cities.

now you tell me if they just produce more of the food that lies "rotting in the fields" it will be an improvement.

you need to coordinate your talking points better.

[Taitertots]

110. You are being intellectually dishonest so I'm not going to continue discussing this with you

Why don't you discuss what I have actually said instead of falsely attributing opinions to me? When you are willing to discuss this in a reasonable manner, we can continue.

"you guys don't even make sense"
Who are "you guys"?

" first you tell me the problem is there are no roads & no transport, so the food that *is* grown can't get to market & lies "rotting in the fields"."
I have said no such thing

"that's why they have to fly food from overseas into the big cities. now you tell me if they just produce more of the food that lies "rotting in the fields" it will be an improvement."
I have said no such thing

"you need to coordinate your talking points better."
Who do you think I'm coordinating with?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

111. we don't make sense?

You are the one who refuses to acknowledge UN data on the subject,

Africa has several problems,

Poor agricultural practices, limited mechanization, crop yields are low relative to the labor invested and the urban shift reduces labor available for these archaic practices. Regions of high agricultural productivity lack transportation links so that agricultural goods can be distributed within Africa, markets are either intensely local or export oriented. Africa also suffers for political policies that discourage even indigenous commercial agriculture.

[Hannah Bell]

112. you didn't link me to the data i asked for. you linked me to the un website.

i asked for all-africa figures on imports & exports.

imports = meaningless w/o the export number.

but nevermind, i'm gathering my own data, as you can't be bothered.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

114. I linked you to a UN report from March of last year, clearly you didn't read it

If you clicked the link you would have seen all you desired.

[Hannah Bell]

116. i read it. it didn't contain the info i asked for on exports.

one side of the equation is meaningless.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

117. 4th paragraph,

Stating that Africa did not do better at the global level, Dione said the continent’s share in world agricultural trade declined from 15 percent in the 1960s to 5.4 percent in the 1980s and 3.2 percent in 2006, while intra-Africa trade represents barely 10 percent of Africa’s total agriculture trade/

[Hannah Bell]

119. that isn't what i asked for. i want the dollar figures, same figures used for imports.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

120. South African exports skew those numbers into unrepresentative nonsense

For a true number you need to calculate on a county by country basis excluding South Africa.

In 2006 the United States imported $60 billion dollars of goods from Africa, however only $360 million of that was agricultural goods and an extreme majority of that is South African. But even with the South African skew it is still less than 1% of US trade with Africa and the US has fewer trade barriers to African agricultural exports than most places.

http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/July/20070718103759ndyblehs0.8658716.html

Africa has been fading fast as an exporter of food since the 1970's as colonial controlled farming interests were broken up in much of the continent, in more modern times some regimes, such as Robert Mugabe turned their to assaulting indigenous commercial farmers too.

[Hannah Bell]

121. "you need to calculate on a county by country basis" = my point entirely.

and since all you have to offer is one factoid about imports, as i said before, the discussion is absurd.

don't worry; i'm putting together an analysis of the picture in a random african country.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

125. how much academic effort should one expend?

The circumstances of African agriculture are not in mainstream dispute,

[Hannah Bell]

127. oh, but they are.

[harun]

100. They produce higher profits for Monsanto and more money to Congress Critters.

[Taitertots]

101. So what?

Are you going to oppose something certain to make the lives of Africans better because you are afraid that someone might make some money?

[harun]

107. Farming doesn't need GMO or Chemical Fertilizers.

Why would you think they are certain to make the lives of African's better?

Higher CO2 in the atmosphere will create higher crop yields too. If that makes African's lives better why don't we just outlaw electric motors and run everything on oil so we create more CO2 for them?

When did DU get so dumb.

[Taitertots]

108. "need" or not, it dramatically increases crop yields

Dramatically increased crop yields are certain to make the lives of Africans better.

"Higher CO2"
Straw man non-sense. Why don't you actually discuss the issue instead of needless obfuscation?

[harun]

113. I don't believe it increases crop yields but if it does it doesn't mean it is a good thing.

For example you can pump up your crops with tons of say Nitrogen, it may increase yield but it also might damage the microbes in the soil, it also might increase the likelihood of disease. A plant that grows faster than normal, just like a human, may pay a price in immune system strength for all the energy going to growth.

It isn't as simple as, oh they have more food this saves the world.

So what happens if they all grow GMO crops and disease wipes out their staple foods in a couple years. Is Mansanto and wizards like yourself, who are pushing GMO, going to flip the bill for importing enough food to Africa to make up the difference? So no one suffers?

[Prometheus Bound]

104. Dumbest M-C quiz ever!

[glinda]

129. After that the land goes bad.

[Honeycombe8]

85. The article doesn't identify WHO is preventing him from doing that.

He just mentions a vague "environmentalists" .... "who have an ideological view of the environment."

We can use them here in America, can't we? So....who is preventing them from being used in Africa?

[Hannah Bell]

87. here's some background:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=306744&mesg_id=306744

[fascisthunter]

99. Yeah... it's the environmentalists fault... dishonest worm

[amborin]

105. K&R

[RandomThoughts]

106. I heard Monsanto was a monopoly.

And used monopoly methods, so he should insist they break up into many smaller companies if he was to work with them.

He could also pay the beer and travel money that is due. Pretty sure he has more then he needs or earned.

[Kaleva]

115. Not sure about who can possibly stop Gates from selling GMOs in Africa.

Gates does talk about the danger of the movement splitting in two and both sides fighting against each other rather then remaining united to fight a singular problem.

"Bill Gates says ideology threatens hunger fix"

"This global effort to help small farmers is endangered by an ideological wedge that threatens to split the movement in two," Gates said in his first address on agriculture made during the annual World Food Prize forum.

"Some people insist on an ideal vision of the environment," Gates said. "They have tried to restrict the spread of biotechnology into sub-Saharan Africa without regard to how much hunger and poverty might be reduced by it."

And he isn't referring to environmentalists as a whole. Only to some.

[MilesColtrane]

118. K & R

[blindpig]

122. 'small farmers'....

yeah, right.

That stuff is made to order for capitalist agriculture, no room for the little guy in that type of production.

[glinda]

128. Just heard him on NPR talking about making plants that deliver drugs and vaccines! UGGGH!

totally avoided that until the last two sentences of his interview. What an ass. He is dangerous. Ignorant of nature and of destruction. All he is is a manager and businessman.
So now it is Pharma involved also.