every action has it's consequences, and i'm thinking that your way will have just as many problems and consequences as what we have now, only, we'll know a whole lot less about it, and have even less of a chance or choice in the matter, after things have come to pass; and perhaps we'd even put ourselves in a worse position, with people even angrier.

i mean, if i get you correctly, you're saying people will just start their own agriculture farming and rely less on funds and do it for free... but then where do we draw the line? with so many people, there'll be those who want more, and those who can settle for less, and with people who want more having nothing to be able to get more of, they'll not be very happy and take it out on those who have less, and/or think of those who have less as inferior; and thus the gain of what more (that we already have NOW) will be necessary, will be attributed to the gain of humanity as a whole (and those who think different will be called lesser than's), so you'd just see a contortion of what is happening already anyway.

zappaisgod said:

Should Monsanto not be allowed to manufacture and sell a product its customers find economically useful just because they make some money?  Maybe you should reconsider your purchase of a cell phone and computer since those companies are making a lot more money than Monsanto.  And then there is the entire entertainment industry which is for the most part frivolous bullshit but also generates far more income than Monsanto.

---