- 30 Apr 2007
- 1,173
- 84
http://www.infowars.com/billions-of...-under-current-codex-alimentarius-guidelines/
Nutritional degradation for the purpose of reducing population?
Let's take JUST the facts and forget any New World Order stuff just for a moment.
The bottom line is that these days food is a product, it's profitable.
At cheap restaurants they water down the soda to save/make money.
Increasing monopoly and market share (Monsantos) is precisely what oil companies and companies like Microsoft and Apple have done.
Why would food be any different?
Perhaps we just assume food will always be there. Food is always, has always been there, it's food, they can't possibly take it away from us. It's an unspoiled relatively safe product, it's different from oil, vehicles, etc.
Is that safe, cozy assumption going to stop major companies from tightening their grip on things?
It hasn't stopped them from screwing with water, and they're about to screw with food from the looks of things. Governments in Canada and the US have already attempted to pass legislation that would bring simple Vitamins under federal regulation and outlaw their free sale.
So my topic is posted in this manner:
Companies may be treating food as a consumer good and they feel they have a right to alter its composition, quality, and change the availability of choices just like any other product. Do you agree with this?
Do you feel this is different from all the other BS stuff big corporations do, would you draw a line here? Or, continue to let free market do what it needs?
Nutritional degradation for the purpose of reducing population?
Let's take JUST the facts and forget any New World Order stuff just for a moment.
The bottom line is that these days food is a product, it's profitable.
At cheap restaurants they water down the soda to save/make money.
Increasing monopoly and market share (Monsantos) is precisely what oil companies and companies like Microsoft and Apple have done.
Why would food be any different?
Perhaps we just assume food will always be there. Food is always, has always been there, it's food, they can't possibly take it away from us. It's an unspoiled relatively safe product, it's different from oil, vehicles, etc.
Is that safe, cozy assumption going to stop major companies from tightening their grip on things?
It hasn't stopped them from screwing with water, and they're about to screw with food from the looks of things. Governments in Canada and the US have already attempted to pass legislation that would bring simple Vitamins under federal regulation and outlaw their free sale.
So my topic is posted in this manner:
Companies may be treating food as a consumer good and they feel they have a right to alter its composition, quality, and change the availability of choices just like any other product. Do you agree with this?
Do you feel this is different from all the other BS stuff big corporations do, would you draw a line here? Or, continue to let free market do what it needs?