25 Nov 11
Originally posted by FMFActually the extensive poverty is of much greater concern.
The approach to, and capacity to provide, mental health services in most developing countries - or countries with extensive poverty - is a serious cause for concern.
In this case, the question is whether or not Monsanto is creating greater poverty, or alleviating it and whether or not the government is protecting their citizens from unscrupulous organizations.
I don't know all the facts in this case but I find somewhat suspect an article that tries to lay all the blame on Monsanto when there are clearly a lot of factors involved.
And what about the loan sharks? Nobody has mentioned them yet. Who loaned these farmers money that they couldn't hope to pay back?
25 Nov 11
Originally posted by twhiteheadhow else are we to account for nearly 200,000 deaths due to suicide?
Actually the extensive poverty is of much greater concern.
In this case, the question is whether or not Monsanto is creating greater poverty, or alleviating it and whether or not the government is protecting their citizens from unscrupulous organizations.
I don't know all the facts in this case but I find somewhat suspect an article that tries to l ...[text shortened]... dy has mentioned them yet. Who loaned these farmers money that they couldn't hope to pay back?
25 Nov 11
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadthe question is whether or not Monsanto is creating greater poverty - your words,
How else than what?
my question: if Monsanto is not creating greater poverty then why is there 200,000
deaths due to suicide, it cab hardly be expected that these people are killing
themselves because of the affluence and sense of well being that Monsanto are
creating, can it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMany things I have found out about Monsanto have been despicable, robbie. I'm not a fan of the corporation or its vision.
if Monsanto is not creating greater poverty then why is there 200,000
deaths due to suicide, it cab hardly be expected that these people are killing
themselves because of the affluence and sense of well being that Monsanto are
creating, can it.
However, the article says 200,000 Indian "farmers" have committed suicide since 1997.
Well, there are about 1,200,000,000 people in India.
About 72% of that population lives in rural areas or settlements, many of them earning their living directly from "farming".
About 7,700,000 Indians die every year. So, in the 14 years since 1997, approximately 110,000,000 Indians have died, three quarters of whom - more or less - have been probably "farmers" or in "farmer families" or rural/agriculture dependent in some way.
So farmer suicides have made up about 0.18% - a small fraction of one hundredth - of all deaths in the time period your article discusses.
Aside from economic difficulties that Monsanto has caused, many of these suicides will have been connected with mental disorders, substance abuse, domestic violence, problems with gambling, medical conditions etc., just like they are in all countries around the world.
I think it's worth bearing these things in mind - the proportion of what these stats mean - while pondering this issue raised.
25 Nov 11
Originally posted by FMFThumbs up thingy.
Many things I have found out about Monsanto have been despicable, robbie. I'm not a fan of the corporation or its vision.
However, the article says 200,000 Indian "farmers" have committed suicide since 1997.
Well, there are about 1,200,000,000 people in India.
About 72% of that population lives in rural areas or settlements, many of them earning their ...[text shortened]... in mind - the proportion of what these stats mean - while pondering this issue raised.
25 Nov 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMaybe its because of McDonald's. How would I know? Assuming that Monsanto is to blame without making a case for it just makes it look like you have a personal grudge which has nothing to do with the poor farmers.
the question is whether or not Monsanto is creating greater poverty - your words,
my question: if Monsanto is not creating greater poverty then why is there 200,000
deaths due to suicide, it cab hardly be expected that these people are killing
themselves because of the affluence and sense of well being that Monsanto are
creating, can it.
The article suggested that the main cause of the poor harvest was a drought. How do we know whether or not there would have been 300,000 suicides if they weren't using Monsanto seed? Its not a foregone conclusion that monsanto is directly to blame for the suicides.
25 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFthat is fine FMF, but its hardly relevant, suicide is suicide and is a matter of concern, whatever the reason. You may find this report interesting,
Many things I have found out about Monsanto have been despicable, robbie. I'm not a fan of the corporation or its vision.
However, the article says 200,000 Indian "farmers" have committed suicide since 1997.
Well, there are about 1,200,000,000 people in India.
About 72% of that population lives in rural areas or settlements, many of them earning their in mind - the proportion of what these stats mean - while pondering this issue raised.
http://www.uclm.es/Actividades/repositorio/pdf/doc_3721_4587.pdf
25 Nov 11
Originally posted by twhiteheadHow would I know?
Maybe its because of McDonald's. How would I know? Assuming that Monsanto is to blame without making a case for it just makes it look like you have a personal grudge which has nothing to do with the poor farmers.
The article suggested that the main cause of the poor harvest was a drought. How do we know whether or not there would have been 300,000 suic ...[text shortened]... santo seed? Its not a foregone conclusion that monsanto is directly to blame for the suicides.
perhaps doing some research might be a good place to start!
http://www.uclm.es/Actividades/repositorio/pdf/doc_3721_4587.pdf
26 Nov 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe extent of the problem you raised in the OP is "hardly relevant"? I was under the impression that the alleged extent of the problem cited in the OP was the very reason for you posting it and that it was pointedly not a case of "whatever the reason", but was - according to you - a case of 'Monsanto is the reason'. What makes you think I don't think "suicide [...] is a matter of concern"?
that is fine FMF, but its hardly relevant, suicide is suicide and is a matter of concern, whatever the reason. You may find this report interesting,
26 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFDid you actually read the article or just skim it? I quote:
Many things I have found out about Monsanto have been despicable, robbie. I'm not a fan of the corporation or its vision.
However, the article says 200,000 Indian "farmers" have committed suicide since 1997.
Well, there are about 1,200,000,000 people in India.
About 72% of that population lives in rural areas or settlements, many of them earning their in mind - the proportion of what these stats mean - while pondering this issue raised.
There, he has a floor-to-ceiling chart illustrating the numbers of suicides his organization has confirmed in this area of Vidarbha from 2001 to 2008. The years and numbers are in Sanskrit, and Tiwari begins to read each aloud. “In 2001, 52 suicides,” he says, then rattles off the numbers in machine-gun procession, each number representing the suicides of the following year: “104, 148, 447, 445, 1,448, 1,246, 1,267.”
Surely the article presents a least a correlation between suicides by cotton farmers and the introduction of Bollegard in 2002, which it claims was heavily promoted by the Indian government for Monsanto's benefit. Your post is a bit disingenuous in the face of these facts.
26 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadHow did the article "not make a case for it"? It showed a correlation and gave reasons to believe that there was a causal link. Again:
Maybe its because of McDonald's. How would I know? Assuming that Monsanto is to blame without making a case for it just makes it look like you have a personal grudge which has nothing to do with the poor farmers.
The article suggested that the main cause of the poor harvest was a drought. How do we know whether or not there would have been 300,000 suic santo seed? Its not a foregone conclusion that monsanto is directly to blame for the suicides.
Now, only a few years after the introduction of genetically modified seeds, Bt cotton has become so universal, and so much more profitable for the seed companies that license Monsanto’s technology, it’s the only type of seed available to farmers at stores. Consequently, every year as Indians await the monsoon rains, farmers line up to sign loan paperwork. In less than a decade, cotton seed in India went from a negligible cost to one requiring a bank loan.
This was after it pointed out that the Monsanto created hybrid seed was both more expensive and more vulnerable to drought than the seed that had been used prior.
26 Nov 11
Originally posted by no1marauderMy post was about the extent of the problem and was in no way intended as a denial of the culpability of Monsanto. I have no reason to doubt the actions and operations of the corporation are linked to the portion of the suicides that are caused by people losing their livelihoods and not being able to face becoming an economic burden to others.
Your post is a bit disingenuous in the face of these facts.
