[OnPoint]

If that comes to pass, your plan will be a loser, and you will have to cough up money to pay off the loan and interest, or go into bankruptcy.

Well, not exactly. The loan will be in a bank account. I will have been paying interest all along. Nothing new to cough up, just return the principal.

[OnPoint]

I recently watched “The Future of Food” (Deborah Koons Garcia, 2004) via Netflix online.

It presented arguments I had not heard before. I previously viewed anti-GM food activists as Luddites. After all, we’ve been genetically modifying plants & animals for centuries, we just have better tools now. Right? Wrong.

The end goal does appear to be cornering the food market.

The power play here is that Monsanto & others have acheived patents on their life forms. This apparently is new territory. Then their seeds intermingle with family farm stocks (“oopsie”) and Monsanto goes after the farmers for patent royalties. The law seems upside down here. Seems to me the farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for alduterating their royalty free seed stock.

I better understand now the increased Internet advertising for “heirloom” seed collections.

Seems another example of big corporations bending legislators to make laws that are good for them and bad for everybody else. The film does raise the issue down the road that will come up: Suppose they are able to create replacement body parts (kidneys, whatever) with patented technology. They place the kidney inside you. Do they now own you? A part of you? Must you pay royalties for your remaining days of life?

[OnPoint]

I recently watched “The Future of Food” (Deborah Koons Garcia, 2004) via Netflix online.

It presented arguments I had not heard before. I previously viewed anti-GM food activists as Luddites. After all, we’ve been genetically modifying plants & animals for centuries, we just have better tools now. Right? Wrong.

The end goal does appear to be cornering the food market.

The power play here is that Monsanto & others have acheived patents on their life forms. This apparently is new territory. Then their seeds intermingle with family farm stocks (“oopsie”) and Monsanto goes after the farmers for patent royalties. The law seems upside down here. Seems to me the farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for alduterating their royalty free seed stock.

I better understand now the increased Internet advertising for “heirloom” seed collections.

Seems another example of big corporations bending legislators to make laws that are good for them and bad for everybody else. The film does raise the issue down the road that will come up: Suppose they are able to create replacement body parts (kidneys, whatever) with patented technology. They place the kidney inside you. Do they now own you? A part of you? Must you pay royalties for your remaining days of life?

[OnPoint]

I recently watched “The Future of Food” (Deborah Koons Garcia, 2004) via Netflix online.

It presented arguments I had not heard before. I previously viewed anti-GM food activists as Luddites. After all, we’ve been genetically modifying plants & animals for centuries, we just have better tools now. Right? Wrong.

The end goal does appear to be cornering the food market.

The power play here is that Monsanto & others have acheived patents on their life forms. This apparently is new territory. Then their seeds intermingle with family farm stocks (“oopsie”) and Monsanto goes after the farmers for patent royalties. The law seems upside down here. Seems to me the farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for alduterating their royalty free seed stock.

I better understand now the increased Internet advertising for “heirloom” seed collections.

Seems another example of big corporations bending legislators to make laws that are good for them and bad for everybody else. The film does raise the issue down the road that will come up: Suppose they are able to create replacement body parts (kidneys, whatever) with patented technology. They place the kidney inside you. Do they now own you? A part of you? Must you pay royalties for your remaining days of life?

[OnPoint]

I recently watched “The Future of Food” (Deborah Koons Garcia, 2004) via Netflix online.

It presented arguments I had not heard before. I previously viewed anti-GM food activists as Luddites. After all, we’ve been genetically modifying plants & animals for centuries, we just have better tools now. Right? Wrong.

The end goal does appear to be cornering the food market.

The power play here is that Monsanto & others have acheived patents on their life forms. This apparently is new territory. Then their seeds intermingle with family farm stocks (“oopsie”) and Monsanto goes after the farmers for patent royalties. The law seems upside down here. Seems to me the farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for alduterating their royalty free seed stock.

I better understand now the increased Internet advertising for “heirloom” seed collections.

Seems another example of big corporations bending legislators to make laws that are good for them and bad for everybody else. The film does raise the issue down the road that will come up: Suppose they are able to create replacement body parts (kidneys, whatever) with patented technology. They place the kidney inside you. Do they now own you? A part of you? Must you pay royalties for your remaining days of life?

[OnPoint]

I recently watched “The Future of Food” (Deborah Koons Garcia, 2004) via Netflix online.

It presented arguments I had not heard before. I previously viewed anti-GM food activists as Luddites. After all, we’ve been genetically modifying plants & animals for centuries, we just have better tools now. Right? Wrong.

The end goal does appear to be cornering the food market.

The power play here is that Monsanto & others have acheived patents on their life forms. This apparently is new territory. Then their seeds intermingle with family farm stocks (“oopsie”) and Monsanto goes after the farmers for patent royalties. The law seems upside down here. Seems to me the farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for alduterating their royalty free seed stock.

I better understand now the increased Internet advertising for “heirloom” seed collections.

Seems another example of big corporations bending legislators to make laws that are good for them and bad for everybody else. The film does raise the issue down the road that will come up: Suppose they are able to create replacement body parts (kidneys, whatever) with patented technology. They place the kidney inside you. Do they now own you? A part of you? Must you pay royalties for your remaining days of life?

[OnPoint]

“All I want in life is an unfair advantage.”

– Hank Greenberg

He’s always been transparent about it…

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/08/08/8267642/index.htm

[OnPoint]

“All I want in life is an unfair advantage.”

– Hank Greenberg

He’s always been transparent about it…

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/08/08/8267642/index.htm

[OnPoint]

“All I want in life is an unfair advantage.”

– Hank Greenberg

He’s always been transparent about it…

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/08/08/8267642/index.htm

[OnPoint]

“All I want in life is an unfair advantage.”

– Hank Greenberg

He’s always been transparent about it…

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/08/08/8267642/index.htm

[OnPoint]

“All I want in life is an unfair advantage.”

– Hank Greenberg

He’s always been transparent about it…

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/08/08/8267642/index.htm

[OnPoint]

Great article, thanks for that. Nice tone. From the article:

“The math seems pretty simple. But apparently it’s too rigorous for many Republican politicians.

…Some politicians are in denial. Some are demagoguing. Some are just ducking. Scared.

The scared are rather pathetic. …they cower before conservative bloggers, radio talk entertainers and activists of a declining party.

It’s Republican dogma…” blah blah blah…

So let me get this straight: We’re in this mess because of conservative Republicans? Riigghht… Unbelievable. Gee, I can’t imagine why the LA Times and others like it have seen their circulations drop by a number roughly equivalent to half the electorate.

These Democrats are like obnoxious college professors with a gambling problem. Pedantic, condescending, oh and btw their lives are a total mess and “could you help out with a few bucks, you stupid little person. Pretty please, I’ll be good? Hey thanks for the cash. You Nazi!”

This situation is like a divorce that builds over time. One day, the breadwinner spouse, after years of coldness and verbal abuse, borne for the sake of the children or religious commitment etc, meets someone who treats them kindly, examines their life and decides screw this, I’m walking.

I’m happily situated as an employee right now. But if I start my own company or find a better opportunity, I’m outta here. I expect my ilk are legion.

[OnPoint]

Great article, thanks for that. Nice tone. From the article:

“The math seems pretty simple. But apparently it’s too rigorous for many Republican politicians.

…Some politicians are in denial. Some are demagoguing. Some are just ducking. Scared.

The scared are rather pathetic. …they cower before conservative bloggers, radio talk entertainers and activists of a declining party.

It’s Republican dogma…” blah blah blah…

So let me get this straight: We’re in this mess because of conservative Republicans? Riigghht… Unbelievable. Gee, I can’t imagine why the LA Times and others like it have seen their circulations drop by a number roughly equivalent to half the electorate.

These Democrats are like obnoxious college professors with a gambling problem. Pedantic, condescending, oh and btw their lives are a total mess and “could you help out with a few bucks, you stupid little person. Pretty please, I’ll be good? Hey thanks for the cash. You Nazi!”

This situation is like a divorce that builds over time. One day, the breadwinner spouse, after years of coldness and verbal abuse, borne for the sake of the children or religious commitment etc, meets someone who treats them kindly, examines their life and decides screw this, I’m walking.

I’m happily situated as an employee right now. But if I start my own company or find a better opportunity, I’m outta here. I expect my ilk are legion.

[OnPoint]

Great article, thanks for that. Nice tone. From the article:

“The math seems pretty simple. But apparently it’s too rigorous for many Republican politicians.

…Some politicians are in denial. Some are demagoguing. Some are just ducking. Scared.

The scared are rather pathetic. …they cower before conservative bloggers, radio talk entertainers and activists of a declining party.

It’s Republican dogma…” blah blah blah…

So let me get this straight: We’re in this mess because of conservative Republicans? Riigghht… Unbelievable. Gee, I can’t imagine why the LA Times and others like it have seen their circulations drop by a number roughly equivalent to half the electorate.

These Democrats are like obnoxious college professors with a gambling problem. Pedantic, condescending, oh and btw their lives are a total mess and “could you help out with a few bucks, you stupid little person. Pretty please, I’ll be good? Hey thanks for the cash. You Nazi!”

This situation is like a divorce that builds over time. One day, the breadwinner spouse, after years of coldness and verbal abuse, borne for the sake of the children or religious commitment etc, meets someone who treats them kindly, examines their life and decides screw this, I’m walking.

I’m happily situated as an employee right now. But if I start my own company or find a better opportunity, I’m outta here. I expect my ilk are legion.

[OnPoint]

Great article, thanks for that. Nice tone. From the article:

“The math seems pretty simple. But apparently it’s too rigorous for many Republican politicians.

…Some politicians are in denial. Some are demagoguing. Some are just ducking. Scared.

The scared are rather pathetic. …they cower before conservative bloggers, radio talk entertainers and activists of a declining party.

It’s Republican dogma…” blah blah blah…

So let me get this straight: We’re in this mess because of conservative Republicans? Riigghht… Unbelievable. Gee, I can’t imagine why the LA Times and others like it have seen their circulations drop by a number roughly equivalent to half the electorate.

These Democrats are like obnoxious college professors with a gambling problem. Pedantic, condescending, oh and btw their lives are a total mess and “could you help out with a few bucks, you stupid little person. Pretty please, I’ll be good? Hey thanks for the cash. You Nazi!”

This situation is like a divorce that builds over time. One day, the breadwinner spouse, after years of coldness and verbal abuse, borne for the sake of the children or religious commitment etc, meets someone who treats them kindly, examines their life and decides screw this, I’m walking.

I’m happily situated as an employee right now. But if I start my own company or find a better opportunity, I’m outta here. I expect my ilk are legion.

[Author]

Posts