Home | Community | Message Board

Magic Mushrooms Zamnesia
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8388666 -

Quote:
Yet again, you have not addressed the central topic or advocated a solution to it (if you even believe one should be worked out).



And you continue to demonstrate your inability to grasp fundamental principles. I have in fact addressed the issue. You, on the other hand, have not. You've introduced irrelevancy after irrelevancy, going further afield with every post.

Once again, here's the topic that you introduced, in your very first post in this thread --

Quote:
I have no idea how some people justify cultivating large amounts of soy (which is also a driving force behind the destruction of the Amazonian rainforest) for export to chicken factories in Europe, while millions in that nation (Brazil) go hungry, instead of growing grains for to meet the nutritional needs of impoverished people living there.



Because my response completely flummoxed you, you've now spent a dozen posts dodging that response... even going so far as ramble on about McCain and a hundred years in Iraq rather than directly address the very direct and simple question I raised:

How can you justify the morality of forcefully compelling someone to grow on his own land anything other than what he wishes to grow?

The fact of the matter is that soy is grown on a large number of Brazilian farms rather than grains because it makes more sense to grow soy than grains on those farms.

Quote:
I did not say that wealthy landowners/large corporate interests were the only ones producing soy, but in a land where roughly 3% own approximately 65% of suitable farmland, they do constitute the majority.



So small family farms in Brazil are allowed to grow soy, but bigger ones are not? Please give us a justification for that. As an aside, what percentage of farmland in Brazil is used to grow soy as opposed to maize or wheat or rice?

Quote:
Where he doesn't own land, this doesn't necessarily help him.



Correct. What's your point? Wait... let me guess... because he works on a farm, he's the rightful owner of that farm. Standard Commie crap.

Quote:
If doesn't matter what the landless farmer grows, he gets paid what his superiors feel like paying him, which not surprisingly, is next-to-nothing.



So the problem isn't that Brazilian farmers are growing soy for export, it's that agricultural workers are paid shitty wages. How does switching a farm over from soy production to wheat production address that problem?

Quote:
This is the primary cause behind cultivation of drug crops, as all but the most oblivious policymakers & analysts know.



Ummm, no, Comrade. Farmers grow drug crops because the drugs generate the highest possible return per acre for the land in question. This is the identical principle behind a farmer growing soy as opposed to rice. Do yourself a favor and pick up a textbook on basic economic principles before making your next post.

Quote:
At least with wheat cultivation he could buy it for himself & his family locally if it were available & affordable.



Get your story straight. A post or two ago you were whining that the Brazilian farmers can't grow wheat because the American government subsidizes its own wheat farmers to the point where it makes more sense for Brazilians to buy American wheat than homegrown. The reason Brazilian farmers don't grow wheat is that their customer base can buy cheaper American wheat in Brazilian grocery stores. By definition this means the wheat is available and affordable.

Quote:
Instead, as it is, he has to rely on a corrupt & self-serving government/ruling business class to see to it that his food needs are met...



Translated from Commie-speak to English: "Brazilian businesses import wheat and sell it at a profit. This allows the business owners to make a living, and provides the agricultural worker with wheat for a smaller percentage of his paycheck than any Brazilian farm possibly could."

Quote:
Though plenty of wheat is produced globally, they can't afford it due to no fault of their own.



Again, your problem is not with what Brazilian farmers choose to grow on their own farms, but with the wages Brazilian agricultural workers receive. Two completely different issues, as anyone who has the capacity to think in principles can readily grasp.

Quote:
Before colonialism these places, despite their faults, were self-sufficient in grain production, because they understood that not only was self-sufficiency in grain production in the (obvious) best interest of their society, but also that without it they were not truly free & were instead dependent upon a foreign power's will as to whether or not they would have enough of the most basic item for human survival; food (second counting water, I guess).



Not even close. They were self-sufficient in grain "production" because they had no other choice. Five hundred years ago there were no giant cargo ships capable of crossing the Atlantic with thousands of tons of grain from Europe at an affordable price. Besides, as any anthropologist can tell you, these jungle tribesmen ate next to no grains at all. The vast majority of their carbohydrates came not from seeds but from starchy roots and tubers.

The fact of the matter is that there are certain areas on this planet which are better suited for grain production than others. As it happens, the best farmland for wheat is found not in swampy tropical marshes, but on relatively cold and arid prairies. No farm in Brazil is ever going to be any good at growing wheat. It's like trying to grow oranges in Toronto.

Quote:
I have addressed this issue comprehensively, backed by statistics & presenting the realities of agriculture in Brazil (which are not unlike, in many cases virtually identical, those in other nations).



No, you haven't. You've gone off into the weeds in half a dozen different directions, but you still haven't addressed even my first question, much less my three follow ups.

Quote:
The limited framework from which those questions are presented make presuppositions that are not backed by history or present reality, & are intend to play upon the ignorance of First World consumers who know very little (& admittedly often don't care) about issues of unjust land distribution in places where they import exotic crops from.



This is just whiney bullshit. There's nothing wrong with those questions or their "framework". The reason you won't answer them is that you know doing so blows your position right out of the water. They are not trick questions. They are simple, direct, and straight to the point. They make no presuppositions whatsoever.

Now, if you choose to continue to dodge them, so be it. The readers of this thread can draw their own conclusions from your refusal to answer them. But if you are going to answer them, answer them. Don't start some tangential longwinded essay on cacao production in the Ivory Coast, then claim this disquisition somehow counts as an answer. Please answer them at the beginning of your post. If you want to digress into another lament about colonial injustice and capitalist imperialism, do so at the end of the post, please.

To save you the work of scrolling back, here they are again --

1) what must Bob do in order to obtain a farm that is rightfully his?

2) who is the rightful owner of the farm Bob (and the Brazilian Land Registry Office) currently believes is his?

3) what should be done if Bob's farm is seized from Bob and given to the "rightful" owner from question 2), and the rightful owner decides to continue growing soy and continue selling it to the highest bidder?




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Phred]
    #8412488 -

---

Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/15/21 08:10 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8412781 -

Quote:
Where have you yet offered a solution in any of your posts?



A solution to what?

I note once again your inability to answer any of my questions - all of which bear directly on the issue you raised in your very first post in the thread. Here they are again --

1) what must Bob do in order to obtain a farm that is rightfully his?

2) who is the rightful owner of the farm Bob (and the Brazilian Land Registry Office) currently believes is his?

3) what should be done if Bob's farm is seized from Bob and given to the "rightful" owner from question 2), and the rightful owner decides to continue growing soy and continue selling it to the highest bidder?

If you choose not to answer them, I suggest you just stay out of the thread entirely to save yourself further embarrassment.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Phred]
    #8415948 -

---

Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/15/21 08:12 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8416005 -

Are you really trying to base part of your argument on the notion that private ownership of land and goods is equivalent to private ownership of people?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8416015 -

---

Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/15/21 08:13 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8416459 -

Quote:
The title of thread...



The title of the thread requires no solution. The author claims the people addressing the "global food crisis" work for profitable companies. You somehow see this as a problem. No one else does.

Quote:
... & the fact that there are about 15 million undernourished people in Brazil.



This has nothing to do with the original post or its title. This has to do with your interjecting yourself and your assertions into the thread. The original poster said nothing about Brazil.

Quote:
Let's say we are in the Antebellum South having a town hall meeting about slavery.

1. What must Jim do in order to obtain a farm that is rightfully his according to all relevant legal documents?



Inherit a farm from its rightful owner, or buy a farm from its rightful owner, or (I assume... don't know the details of Brazil's Homestead Act from centuries ago) homestead a farm out in as-yet unclaimed jungle land. Or win one in a poker game or receive one as a gift.

Quote:
2. What right do you have to take away Jim's slaves, which he bought at a legal slave auction & now legally owns?



Slaves are not farms.

Quote:
3. Why should Jim's farm & possessions be redistributed among his slaves & they be made private owners of an amount of land that allows them to be economically self-sufficient?



Why should Jim's farm and possessions be redistributed to anyone? I don't know. I can't think of a reason to redistribute his stuff. What's your reason for redistributing it?

Quote:
To answer the questions presented (in the most minimal way that is acceptable to any humanist)...



FINALLY!

Quote:
1. He must see to it that the workers (& their families) have access to adequate amounts of nutritional food & clean water, the availability of affordable housing & healthcare, & educational opportunities for their children (& thus they have an opportunity to be something other than an impoverished & landless peasant)... & that all who have been rendered landless (or are otherwise unemployed) as a result of the current system have access to employment & thus the aforementioned things. This is not Bob's sole obligation, but must be done working in collaboration with all business & the government & legal system which presently serves his profit interests over those of the impoverished majority.



As I suspected, sheer mindless kneejerk parroting of standard Commie drivel -- no one has the right to anything until everybody has everything.

Tell me, Vladimir... what if the only workers on Bob's farm are Bob and the members of his immediate family? Does the Komissariat allow Bob to keep his farm? Does the Komissariat allow Bob to grow soy on it? Does the Komissariat allow Bob to sell his soy to whomever he chooses?

Quote:
3. Bob would still be the owner of a comparatively large amount of land (which he may actually have to work some of himself... god forbid members of the oligarchy get a little soil on their delicate hands). The first lands seized would be land that is fertile but not being used because the owner finds it more profitable to not grow anything on it in a given season or for consecutive years. The second part was already addressed above.



No, Comrade. My question assumes the owner (Bob or the new owner) is the rightful owner of the farm. He's jumped through all the hoops the Komissariat has placed in his path (for an exhaustive list, see your list in your "answer" to my question 1) in order to become the proud and rightful owner of his farm. The ownership question has been settled, remember? So why is part of his farm being seized from him now?

What does the Komissariat do if the rightful owner (Bob) grows soy on his rightfully owned farm, with the assistance of his rightfully-compensated employees (who now all have food and water and jobs and health care and housing and education and clothes and toothbrushes and bicycles and so do all their family members) and sells it to someone who will ship it to European chicken farmers?



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8416472 -

Quote:
Landless peasants live in a condition of de facto slavery.



No they don't. I own no land, yet I am not a slave.

Quote:
Edit: I don't have time to elaborate right now...



Don't bother. Your insane assertion is indefensible on the face of it. The vast majority of humans alive today are landless. It is impossible to rationally support the pretense that the vast majority of humans alive today are de facto slaves.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Phred]
    #8417890 -

---

Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/15/21 08:16 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8418425 -

Quote:
Ok, now that we all know (as I suspected all along) that you have zero concern solving the problem* of malnutrition & starvation under neoliberalism, there is no point to continue.



Look, Comrade, the original useless article posted in the opening post came from possibly the most Leftie site on the internet, Common Dreams. The article was originally published in Britain's Leftie newspaper, The Independent. The only UK paper I can think of even more to the left than The Independent is The Guardian, but to all intents and purposes one's as bad as the other. The article is itself an incoherent heap of gibberish, which is why I presume your own first post ignored it. Even you recognized it for the trash it was. After all, they couldn't even support their own premise. Let's do a quick dissection of this piece of dreck, shall we?

First, note the title --

Quote:
Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis
Speculators blamed for driving up price of basic foods as 100 million face severe hunger



-- particularly the part I boldfaced... we'll come back to that.

Here's the first paragraph --
Quote:
Giant agribusinesses are enjoying soaring earnings and profits out of the world food crisis which is driving millions of people towards starvation, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. And speculation is helping to drive the prices of basic foodstuffs out of the reach of the hungry.



So, businesses dealing in an area where demand is high (like the oil business) are making money. Why this is a bad thing is unexplained. But again we see the (as yet unsupported) claim that part of the increase in the price of foodstuffs is due to speculation. Remember this claim as we progress. Next paragraph --

Quote:
The prices of wheat, corn and rice have soared over the past year driving the world’s poor - who already spend about 80 per cent of their income on food - into hunger and destitution.



So far, so good. Price of grain rising, poor hardest hit. Why is the price of grains rising? We shall find out, hopefully. Next paragraph --

Quote:
The World Bank says that 100 million more people are facing severe hunger. Yet some of the world’s richest food companies are making record profits. Monsanto last month reported that its net income for the three months up to the end of February this year had more than doubled over the same period in 2007, from $543m (£275m) to $1.12bn. Its profits increased from $1.44bn to $2.22bn.



100 million more are facing hunger? 100 million more than when? Last year? Ten years ago? It's a mystery the reporter seems unable to answer, but let's move on to the numbers. Am I the only one who sees a problem here? Look at those numbers again, folks...





































Yep. Somehow, Monsanto managed to post a profit higher than its income. Twice. First it managed to generate 1.44 billion profit from an income of just 543 million. Then it managed to generate a profit of 2.22 billion from an income of 1.12 billion. Monsanto has managed to do the impossible. Literally. Twice now. What a management team! I kick myself in the ass for not having bought Monsanto stock.

Next paragraph --

Quote:
Cargill’s net earnings soared by 86 per cent from $553m to $1.030bn over the same three months. And Archer Daniels Midland, one of the world’s largest agricultural processors of soy, corn and wheat, increased its net earnings by 42 per cent in the first three months of this year from $363m to $517m. The operating profit of its grains merchandising and handling operations jumped 16-fold from $21m to $341m.



I am no longer certain this reporter should be trusted when it comes to numbers, but let's assume for the sake of argument that these numbers are accurate. How are these numbers indicative of anything nefarious? Or even of "speculation"?

Quote:
Similarly, the Mosaic Company, one of the world’s largest fertiliser companies, saw its income for the three months ending 29 February rise more than 12-fold, from $42.2m to $520.8m, on the back of a shortage of fertiliser. The prices of some kinds of fertiliser have more than tripled over the past year as demand has outstripped supply. As a result, plans to increase harvests in developing countries have been hit hard.



I realize the concept of supply and demand is foreign to Lefties, but come on, folks! Nothing nefarious - or even mysterious - going on here.

Quote:
Benedict Southworth, director of the World Development Movement, called the escalating earnings and profits “immoral” late last week. He said that the benefits of the food price increases were being kept by the big companies, and were not finding their way down to farmers in the developing world.



Immoral. Uh huh. The Leftie credo is that you are only allowed to profit from providing stuff people don't actually need. Make money from oil? Food? Medical services? You're a greedy bastard. Make money from selling teddy bears and romance novels? You're golden.

Quote:
The soaring prices of food and fertilisers mainly come from increased demand. This has partly been caused by the boom in biofuels, which require vast amounts of grain, but even more by increasing appetites for meat, especially in India and China; producing 1lb of beef in a feedlot, for example, takes 7lbs of grain.

World food stocks at record lows, export bans and a drought in Australia have contributed to the crisis, but experts are also fingering food speculation. Professor Bob Watson - chief scientist at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, who led the giant International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development - last week identified it as a factor.



Aha! In addition to all these main factors -- including government interference (biofuel subsidies, export bans) we finally get to hear from "experts" that food speculation might also be a minor factor. So what is the first expert this yutz of a reporter trots out? Not an economist or a market analyst or a forensic accountant, but a scientist in some government agricultural department! Okay... let's see what he has to say. Just how much of the increase is due to speculation? Next paragraph --

Quote:
Index-fund investment in grain and meat has increased almost fivefold to over $47bn in the past year, concludes AgResource Co, a Chicago-based research firm. And the official US Commodity Futures Trading Commission held special hearings in Washington two weeks ago to examine how much speculators were helping to push up food prices.



Okay, now we have not just Professor Watson who will tell us how much of a factor speculation is when it comes to rising grain costs, we have the official US Commodity Futures Trading Commission. They held special hearings. Let's see what the special hearings discovered --

Quote:
Cargill says that its results “reflect the cumulative effect of having invested more than $18bn in fixed and working capital over the past seven years to expand our physical facilities, service capabilities, and knowledge around the world”.



Yes, yes, Cargill... we know your income and earnings have risen. SHut up and let us hear what Professor Watson and the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission discovered.

Quote:
The revelations are bound to increase outrage over multinational companies following last week’s disclosure that Shell and BP between them recorded profits of £14bn in the first three months of the year - or £3m an hour - on the back of rising oil prices. Shell promptly attracted even greater condemnation by announcing that it was pulling out of plans to build the world’s biggest wind farm off the Kent coast.



The revelations? What revelations? I see no revelations from Professor Watson or from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Final paragraph --

Quote:
World leaders are to meet next month at a special summit on the food crisis, and it will be high on the agenda of the G8 summit of the world’s richest countries in Hokkaido, Japan, in July.



So where's the beef? The title claims it's the fault of greedy speculators that food prices are rising. The first paragraph claims speculation is helping to drive the prices of basic foodstuffs out of the reach of the hungry. Paragraphs nine and ten also claim speculation is involved in rising prices. But nowhere does the author of this piece of shite support his claim. We are to take it on faith.

You see, EP, this is why I didn't bother to address the article - there's nothing to address. It's empty verbiage. The only time the author tries to deal with actual hard facts (income and profits) he fucks it up completely. That's why I didn't get involved in the thread till you made your first post - which had absolutely nothing to do with the topic of the opening post, by the way. Your post at least opened the door to some discussion: you professed yourself unable to grasp how people could justify growing what they chose on farms that were rightfully theirs.

And we took it from there.

You are right there is no point in continuing discussing the article from Common Dreams, since it is a confused piece of gibberish. And you're certainly right there is no point continuing to discuss your Commie "solution" of seizing farmland from whoever chooses to grow stuff you don't feel they should be growing.

See you in the next thread, then.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8419216 -

EntheogenicPeace said:
When the land was taken by theft (through colonialism), & does not serve the needs of the people, then land reform is justified... except, of course, to those profiting from injustice.




like how Mugabee decided to make it illegal to own land in zimbabwe if you were white, putting the new native land owners in a position to starve the remainder of the country


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/594522.stm

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Phred]
    #8420383 -

I myself am a little confused as to how increased fertilizer use has led to less food production. I didn't think it worked that way.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8420643 -

zappaisgod said:
I myself am a little confused as to how increased fertilizer use has led to less food production.



use of chemical fertilizers has reduced the lands ability to
sustain crops, they actually reduce the health of the soil by
allow it crops to draw from both without returning anything to
the soil to improve it's tilth.

around here anhydrous ammonia or ammonium nitrate are commonly
used as fertilizers, this later use allows the continuous
growing of nitrogen dependent crops such as corn without crop
rotation but this type of use leads to poor soil health and the
inability to sustain crops, planting winter cover crops that are
nitrogen fixing such as alfalfa or rye help to build the soil
especially when the silage is turned under in the spring, this
adds carbon to improve tilth. another method to improve soil
health is to rotate nitrogen fixing plants like legumes every
other year


we've learned a lot since the dirty thirties, unfortunately we
arent employing that knowledge, instead we're still abusing the
land

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #8420959 -

Fertilizer is a bad thing?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8421059 -

depends on they type of fertilizer, anything that improves the
tilth of the soil it good, green manures like alfalfa or even
grass clippings are beneficial, animal manures and such are also
of benefit, adding composted materials and burned grasses,
silage and wood also improve the soil through the addition of
potassium, fertilizers like ammonium nitrate arent beneficial
because it allows farmers to rape the ground without adding one
of the most important things, carbon, sure they make the crops
grow but you lose nutrients and top soil and with out those the
crops are going to fail over time

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/06/040614080953.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_carbon

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #8421235 -

I thought fertilizer WAS nutrients. Ahh, we're getting too far afield but you certainly seem to know what you're talking about. I defer to your expertise.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #8421269 -

----

Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/15/21 08:18 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8421533 -

zappaisgod said:
I thought fertilizer WAS nutrients. Ahh, we're getting too far afield but you certainly seem to know what you're talking about. I defer to your expertise.



I hope I know a little something since I'm a farmer and in all
honesty, this is still somewhat on topic as it's part of the
issue with huge profits, starvation and lack of food crops

chemical fertilizers like Anhydrous Ammonia and Ammonium Nitrate
are like beer, it's not really nutrition, just empty calories,
it provides the nitrogen but little else, the plants take all
the other stuff from the soil again without the farmers
replenishing what's been stripped away, there's no sustainability,
it leads to crop failure and during times of drought, soil erosion

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
    #8421583 -

EntheogenicPeace said:
What he did was redistribute the land among himself & his friends & they operated it (horribly) with no desire to even feed the people of Zimbabwe.



so these huge profits can be attributed to governments getting
the wise idea to help it's citizens and 'redistribute' the land
to the uneducated or unskilled... cant blame a company for
cashing in on stupidity of numerous governments and the people,
it would seem that most modern agrarian reform programs result
only in famine for the people it's supposed to help

http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/haiti/misctopic/redistribute/redistribute.htm

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Multinationals Make Billions In Profit Out of Growing Global Food Crisis [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #8421780 -

---

Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/15/21 08:19 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* What is Globalization? Psilocybeingzz 548 3 11/05/03 10:26 AM
by Annapurna1
* Global Warning: Bulletins from a Warmer World
( 1 2 3 all )
Psilygirl 2,716 40 09/21/04 05:47 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Global Trade is...... Psilocybeingzz 1,649 14 01/25/03 04:18 AM
by Evolving
* A look at global warming.
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
luvdemshrooms 14,738 119 02/27/04 03:07 AM
by EchoVortex
* Sweatshops and Globalization
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
ekomstop 8,913 133 09/28/04 08:29 AM
by Tao
* Global Elite-Conspiracy
( 1 2 3 4 all )
TrueBrode 5,865 62 01/17/04 05:53 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Corporate Globalization Fact Sheet Psilocybeingzz 1,013 7 11/07/03 12:30 PM
by z@z.com
* Globalization Serves the World's Poor z@z.com 776 5 11/04/03 11:40 PM
by Evolving

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,385 topic views. 4 members, 27 guests and 29 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.032 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 16 queries.