Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
1–10 of 197 posts
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#2Really ? Every person in the US knows why. Reason, Campaign Contributions, or as what is known in all other Countries as Bribes.
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#3SPOILER ALERT: the answer is 'lobbying'. That is, the free, democratic, and fully legal, bribery of government legislators and elected officials by profit-driven corporate bodies.
I, for one, was not surprised.
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#4If you show a map of the use of the weedkiller, at least also show a map of the prevalence of the disease.
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#5I’m a biochemist, and it drives me nuts how much the public worries about glyphosate but not really any other herbicides. Glyphosate may not be perfect but I’d worry more about almost any other type of herbicide, most of which are absolutely nasty.
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#6SPOILER ALERT: the answer is 'lobbying'. That is, the free, democratic, and fully legal, bribery of government legislators and elected officials by profit-driven corporate bodies. I, for one, was not surprised.
Is $1-2M/year all it takes? If so, that's a pretty great ROI.
https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/clients/summary...
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#7SPOILER ALERT: the answer is 'lobbying'. That is, the free, democratic, and fully legal, bribery of government legislators and elected officials by profit-driven corporate bodies. I, for one, was not surprised.
> lobbying'. That is, the free, democratic, and fully legal, bribery of government legislators and elected officials by profit-driven corporate bodies.
That’s not really the definition of lobbying though. We should try to avoid hyperboles. Additionally, bribery is not legal and that’s not even remotely the form that the vast majority of lobbying takes today.
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#8I’m a biochemist, and it drives me nuts how much the public worries about glyphosate but not really any other herbicides. Glyphosate may not be perfect but I’d worry more about almost any other type of herbicide, most of which are absolutely nasty.
Glyphosate isn't mentioned in TFA. Thoughts on paraquat?
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#9I'm more worried about the GMO "roundup ready" seeds they sell, and the crops that result.
Those contain alterations that (I hypothesize) are partially responsible for increased allergies in the US population.
Re: Why does the US allow a controversial weedkiller banned across the world?
#10SPOILER ALERT: the answer is 'lobbying'. That is, the free, democratic, and fully legal, bribery of government legislators and elected officials by profit-driven corporate bodies. I, for one, was not surprised.
> lobbying'. That is, the free, democratic, and fully legal, bribery of government legislators and elected officials by profit-driven corporate bodies. That’s not really the definition of lobbying though. We should try to avoid hyperboles. Additionally, bribery is not legal and that’s not even remotely the form that the vast majority of lobbying takes today.
Of course it’s bribery. Everyone involved knows it’s bribery. The money is given with expectation of reward. If the bribing entity didn’t expect a direct reward, they wouldn’t give the money.
Now, everyone tries to hide behind levels of abstraction — “It’s just lobbying!” — but those are just fig leaves and reasonable people should see through them. E.g., “Exxon gave the money to my campaign committee, and I’m not involved with the finance end; my vote in favor of Exxon was just a coincidence.” That’s pure bullshit and everyone knows it.
So yes it’s bribery. Calling it something else is disingenuous.