Comment: I think that's a very good argument

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: so the solution is more government? (see in situ)

I think that's a very good argument

The government, in this case, has granted legal ownership of the organisms, through the patent office. The companies claim that the organisms are unique enough to create ownership, yet claim they are 'substantially equivalent' in order to avoid existing regulations. That's disgusting. They get out ahead of the law, upend the purpose of the agencies, and create a monopoly in perpetuity (future generations of organisms).

Aside from the 3-card monte of the biotechs, American agriculture is a government game. There's no more regulated industry than farming. It's not a free market. The farm bill largely controls profit and loss year to year. Is that a fair statement?

Farmer Joel Salatin rails about this. Have you read his book, Everything I want to do is illegal?

We can't let criminality go unanswered. I agree with your thinking: If the government obeyed the law to the degree that Ron Paul was satisfied we had constitutional government, the problems would look much different. To accept a multinational wave of corruption, with the libertarian argument, "I should be able to do what I want as a farmer," seems like a horrible capitulation. It's the same problem I face as a shopper, and why I now shop close to the farm. If you're growing GM, I wouldn't buy from you, though you were my neighbor.

Because of the criminality my choices are sharply limited. Guess what? My health is better! I'm supporting local businesses, and the food tastes better!