Trump administration prepares to start a trade war with the rest of the world

[Mormolyce]

I'm sure this will be about as successful as making the market want coal again, or putting goddamn steam catapults on aircraft carriers.

Maybe next we could bring back beepers. Technology is cyclical!

- - - Updated - - -

Or do people think this evolved naturally?



Or this?


There is nothing natural about any of these.

I'm not on any particular side on the GMO debate, but neither of those are the result of "genetic modification". That's selective breeding.

That would be more like if people were saying we should stop eating these:



And go back to these:

[Thepersona]

Which one of those has the scorpion and puffer fish venom spliced into their genes? GMO products have to be evaluated on a case by case basis, you can no more claim they are universally safe than you can claim they're universally dangerous.

GMO's are safe
you know what the problem is? bad business practices, which are not related with the GMO-ness of a plant

Mandatory video:

[Mittens]

Good news for a change of pace.

[Skroe]

I'm sure this will be about as successful as making the market want coal again, or putting goddamn steam catapults on aircraft carriers.

Maybe next we could bring back beepers. Technology is cyclical!

- - - Updated - - -



I'm not on any particular side on the GMO debate, but neither of those are the result of "genetic modification". That's selective breeding.

That would be more like if people were saying we should stop eating these:



And go back to these:

That's entirely my point. Whether we use "selective breeding" or genetic modification, human beings are utilizing various means to bring about something that is, in a sense, unnatural (in a descriptive, rather than perjorative sense). The tool is certainly different, but the end point is not: something that would not otherwise exist, does, because of human intervention.

It is an emotional and a selective decision to draw the line at genetic modification in a lab, versus unnaturally selecting certain breeds and/or cross breeding them for desirable traits.

There are about 1.5 billion cows in the world, almost all of them meant for human consumption in one form or another. By comparison the largest single migration of large mammals on earth takes place when a mere 2 million wildebeests migrate across the southern Serengetti. Those 1.5 billion cows are kept alive by selecting certain crops to feed them (often corn), impacting water sources to feed the crops, so on and so forth.

What would the natural populations of cows on earth be? A few million maybe like other large mammals pre-human civilization? So just by selectively breeding something to eat over centuries (or millennia), and on an industrial scale in the last 100 years or so?

Consider
http://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2017/04/...always-at-risk

Once upon a time, our hungry ancestors would eat hundreds of different kinds of plants and animals in a single week. Today, with huge scale global agriculture and super-dominant food crops, 80 percent of calories consumed by humans come from just twelve species. We expect consistency, and we get it. Familiar foods, year-round.

Human beings hundreds and thousands of years ago ate whatever they could find. They gave them an incredibly diverse diet. Today, we cultivate on an industrial scale to such a degree that we've greatly homogenized our food sources. This has on the one hand, depleted that diversity, but on the other hand it has enabled more people to live lives with better nutrition and less hunger than any point in recorded history. But that happened because human beings are doing something emphatically unnatural in cultivating those 12 species.

In other words, my feeling on GMOs come down to this: the boat on human intervention into the natural order of how species live sailed a very, very long time ago. GMOs are little different than what we've already done. We've chosen traits through breeding. GMOs allows for more of that, doing the same thing.

[Mormolyce]

That's entirely my point. Whether we use "selective breeding" or genetic modification, human beings are utilizing various means to bring about something that is, in a sense, unnatural (in a descriptive, rather than perjorative sense). The tool is certainly different, but the end point is not: something that would not otherwise exist, does, because of human intervention.

You can argue that, I'm just saying it's fundamentally different.

[Draco-Onis]

I repeat myself they are free to take the US to court for whatever policy they are having an issue with, I have no problem with that. As for the former, I don't see how one-sided trade relations are better than more balanced relations.

The US does have a trade deficit with the EU but they more than make up for it with foreign direct investment. Aside from that trade is more nuanced than just trade deficit and imbalances. This rather Trump type of analysis of trade is rather idiotic for something that is far more complex and has a wide range of consequences.

[Damajin]

I remain unconvinced that GMO crops are harmless. Pretty sure they thought that about DDT, Trans-fat, and high fructose corn syrup. So seriously, spare me the "science" of unscientific studies funded by groups with profit motives.

Roundup ready, patented, and making you sicker every day!

As it stands, I consume zero grains. Oh, EU and Asia don't want our shit either? So if the consumer isn't there, isn't that just tough titty?

Also Trump continues to be the most backward embarrassment. He wants to lead in agriculture when we could have led in renewable energies instead?

Honestly, it's just too stupid. If you can't see that there is a pointed attempt to decimate the U.S. economy and convert it to third world labor level, then I just don't know.

This is what I think as well. Fuck GMOs, fuck the corporations pushing them and fuck the government for attempting to railroad the rest of the world into buying them.

[Deleted]

The European consumer does not want American Crops or Meats. Do you know why the EU is so tough on American meat, dairy imports? American Slaughterhouses, Milkeries are not up to EU standards.

Yet you want the European consumer to trust you with Fruits, Vegtables that have been modified with Scorpion DNA? Maybe you should work on making the European consumer feel safe eating American food products before trying to sell tomacco.

[Mittens]

The US does have a trade deficit with the EU but they more than make up for it with foreign direct investment. Aside from that trade is more nuanced than just trade deficit and imbalances. This rather Trump type of analysis of trade is rather idiotic for something that is far more complex and has a wide range of consequences.

This really has nothing to do with what I said. So let me rephrase it. Why are you ok with protectionism when not justified?

- - - Updated - - -

The European consumer does not want American Crops or Meats. Do you know why the EU is so tough on American meat, dairy imports? American Slaughterhouses, Milkeries are not up to EU standards.

Yet you want the European consumer to trust you with Fruits, Vegtables that have been modified with Scorpion DNA? Maybe you should work on making the European consumer feel safe eating American food products before trying to sell tomacco.

If Europeans really don't want US vegetables and/or fruits then they won't buy it and it will fail. This marvellous system is called the market system.

[Deleted]

If Europeans really don't want US vegetables and/or fruits then they won't buy it and it will fail. This marvellous system is called the market system.

No European country wants to open a political apocalypse (going against the farmers and the population) for something that has zero market.

[Mittens]

No European country wants to open a political apocalypse (going against the farmers and the population) for something that has zero market.

If the USTR follows through and wins the cases then they will have to and then we can see if there truly is no demand for such products.

[Deleted]

If the USTR follows through and wins the cases then they will have to and then we can see if there truly is no demand for such products.

They still can't force every and each EU country to change their own laws.

[Mittens]

They still can't force every and each EU country to change their own laws.

You can take Europe as a whole to the WTO. Some will probably escape this, but it only takes one nation to refute the idea that there is no demand for such products.

[Mayhem]

Why wont other countries use our patented food that only we can legally supply?!

No, no, no, it's about Europeans being stupid and ignoring the increased yeild (while they're already producing way more than is needed) and the benefits of super-pesticides in the air and ground!

[Deleted]

Of course, that would take a tremendous amount of resources but the only part I'm contesting is that there is no demand for GMOs in Europe. It only takes one country to disprove that.

Won't happen. The EU Commission had a plan which would give member states the power to ban the use of genetically modified food ingredients, it was voted down by the European Parliament by 579 of the 751 MEPs.

Again, no one wants to start a political apocalypse. We already have problem of overproducing the established quotas.

[Mayhem]

As always these topics are actually two different debates, while one side argues against people who think GMOs are bad for humans while another side argues that giving 4 world wide producers of seeds and pesticides even more power is certainly not the brightest of ideas.

[Mittens]

Won't happen. The EU Commission had a plan which would give member states the power to ban the use of genetically modified food ingredients, it was voted down by the European Parliament by 579 of the 751 MEPs.

Again, no one wants to start a political apocalypse. We already have problem of overproducing the established quotas.

They are forced to agree on a solution. And don't fret dude, the case will probably take 5 years and if the USTR wins then it will take at at least another 5 to implement the agreed solution.

[JohnBrown1917]

Awww those cute americans, trying to force other parts of the world to do what they want.

[Deleted]

They are forced to agree on a solution. And don't fret dude, the case will probably take 5 years and if the USTR wins then it will take at at least another 5 to implement the agreed solution.

Not sure if serious or joking.

[Mittens]

Not sure if serious or joking.

What an insightful comment.

- - - Updated - - -

Awww those cute americans, trying to force other parts of the world to do what they want.

When it comes to trade disputes every nation does this. You take the country to the WTO or whatever court us responsible for it and then force them to change their policies.