KaiBear said:FLBear5630 said:KaiBear said:FLBear5630 said:KaiBear said:cowboycwr said:KaiBear said:cowboycwr said:KaiBear said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:boognish_bear said:KaiBear said:boognish_bear said:KaiBear said:boognish_bear said:
This is disappointing. RFK been taking Ls this week.NEW: In major reversal, Trump administration “retreats” on plan to ban artificial colors in food & significantly loosens FDA labeling requirements.
— Dominic Michael Tripi (@DMichaelTripi) February 21, 2026
No doubt lobbyists have been dumping millions of $$$$$ against Kennedy's efforts.
Yep...that was my first thought
My daughter follows Kennedys efforts almost daily…, then sets new rules on what my wife and I can feed her children.
At first I thought it was a bit extreme…..but after making my own investigations…..realize Kennedy is right far more often than wrong.
So maybe that will be Kennedy's real legacy .
In that he got almost everyone far more concerned about exactly what they are consuming.
RFK seems like kind of a kook on some things...but I think he's definitely on the right track with trying to put pressure on companies getting rid of many of the additives they use.
Yet, now he is for Roundup.
outlawing Roundup from ag would crater the ag industry. So much of the industry is predicated on its use....equipment, seed varieties, tillage practices, etc.....
Not saying we could not adjust to a Roundup-free world. Saying that there would need to be a years-long transition plan to keep food prices from soaring due to short supply.
Devil of a choice
Either poison ourselves from the overuse of herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides……..
or return to the days of massive starvation throughout Asia and Africa.
My vote would be to feed our planet's billions.
Not that hard of a choice. Let them starve instead of poisoning ourselves.
I should not be getting poisoned for some people in Asia and Africa. If they haven't figured out how to farm sustainably on their land after thousands of years that is not my fault. I should not be poisoned for them.
So yeah not a difficult choice at all.
Certainly respect your right to your opinion.
However tens of millions have died of starvation as late as the 1960's.
And the world's population is even larger now.
In addition farm acreage is down.
So we either continue to increase our food production per acre or face severe famines. ( in grad school I minored in plant pathology…..without our huge success in manipulating plant genetics we would be in a world of hurt right now )
Without herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides……food production per acre would immediately plummet.
So it is easy to say let em starve …..because none of us have ever been impacted by food shortages…..so far.
( BTW there were massive famines in Europe as late as the 1930's…..several million starved to death. )
Blah blah blah
So we poison ourselves because other countries haven't learned how to farm.
Got it.
I never said don't use herbicide, pesticide, or fungicides. Just don't use ones that poison us.
There have been famines in the late 20th century and 21st century. But that still doesn't mean we should poison ourselves to feed people too stupid to learn how to farm.
There are plenty of things we can use for those 3 things that don't poison us. That is all we need. No poison.
Stop poisoning us. It IS that simple. PERIOD.
Nothing is THAT simple. It is all about evaluating risks vs gains. Other countries 'know how to farm'. However insect infestations develope....resistance spins in ever quicker cycles.....blights come out of nowhere.....soils require cost effective fertilizers...
Without high productivity PER ACRE.....another series of famines is inevitable.
On my own operation we certainly used chemicals. ( although never growth hormone on our cattle ) There are few viable options in mono cultures.
People have to eat and food has to be affordable.
In addition we have to address feeding 7.5 billion people on an ever decreasing amount of farm ground.
Somehow we have to find a balance....but even some of our current chemicals are losing their effectiveness..
Other than continued manipulation of plant genetics......can't see any risk free solutions.
It is a transition, not cold turkey. I agree with need a balance. Deregulating is not the answer, history has shown we cannot trust the Private Sector to do the right thing...
The private sector is the only reason we are not starving or dead. Govenment is loaded with mediocre individuals who couldn't cut it in a competitive environment.
Chemical companies are not 'evil'. They are constantly attempting to produce safer pesticides and herbicides that are staying ahead of resistent issues. Farmers and ranchers are trying to stay solvent in a incredably challenging world.
Once again, who is disagreeing with you?
The only change I would make to your statement is that "Government AND Private Sector is loaded with mediocre people." Mediocracy is not a Government only issue, I have seen more than my share of private sector and development idiots. Actually, most of the Developers I know of are farmers that couldn't make it, so they cashed in the family legacy. Scratch the dirt off a farmer, you get a developer.
If they find out something is poison, don't use it on our food and in our water. Not a high bar.
No one intentionally poisons the food supply.
It's very bad for business. Bad for their families….bad for themselves. Most products are tested both privately and through university extension services before they are ever released for sale.
Almost every single advance in agriculture, medicine and technology originated in the private sector.
Government employees are little more than parasites who didn't have the guts to work without a safety net.
So they kill time until they get their pensions.
Every single one who came on my place hated their job and hated those who succeeded in their own farm or business.
Give me a break. Who do you think paid for those advances? The Government, they were done with US research dollars. You really think there is a difference between the private and public sector? Where do you think the public dollars go? It is a grift, as a developer you know this.
Developers? How much Government subsidies and credits do they get? Who pays for the roads to and from the developments? The needed signals. Schools for the kids. If really lucky an interchange? How much do developers pony up of development costs? I did the traffic studies, rezonings and cut the deals on entitlements, developers are among the worst at the trough. What percent of Developer profits are from tax subsidies, rezonings and land use amendments (approved at the public hearing earlier on the same agenda), sale of stormwater credits or impact fee credits? Approval of permits? Bet there was more than one lunch bought and golf game played, wink, wink.
There is no separation between private and government. It is the same and the same people, moving in and out of Government. Making the contacts to get the next big project. If you are big time, you are playing at the State level.
Geez, you think there is a difference...