Published on August 1, 2009 By Artysim In Blogging

Who's your favorite evil corporation? You know, that company that is so slimy, so insipid, you actually love to hate them? We've all got at least one.

Sit back and think about it for a minute. Is it a utility provider? How about an insurance company? (those are real easy to hate) the possibilities are varied and endless.

What kills me is there's a lot of truly nasty companies out there that are also very profitable, have great P.R and 90% of folks either don't know or have completely forgotten about their past crimes. 

Today, I'd like to focus on one evil corporation and give you fine folks here a little refresher on all the things they've done over the years. Today, we shine the spotlight on (drumroll please).......

Monsanto!

For anyone not familiar, this company is an absolute giant in the agriculture business. You know roundup? They make that. They came up with Bovine Growth Hormone, that wonderful substance that makes cows produce 20% more milk. They make lot's of stuff, as they've been around for quite some time. They also helped make Agent Orange in Vietnam. Do you know what PCB's are? Polychlorinated Bi-phenyls. They used to make that too, and for decades they knew how toxic it was and lied through their teeth about it.

Now, if you're one of those naysayers that believe that human activity can't have any adverse affect on the planet, go out and google "PCB" This stuff is extremely toxic and it sticks around a looooong time. In fact, in just the last century PCB's have been spread across the entire planet through wind and water circulation and they're here to stay. In humans PCB's can cause all kinds of nastyness from organ failure to cancer to (in the case of a pregnant woman being exposed) children born with extremely diminished mental abilities. In the case of animals and fish, well it usually just kills them outright if the dosage is large enough. Not the kind of chemicals you want in the creek your children will play in, right?

Monsanto bought the company that started making PCB's in the 1930's and shortly thereafter they knew full well just how dangerous and deadly this stuff was. Did they stop making it? Nope. Did they tell anyone about their findings? Nope. Profits were just too damned good! In fact, in Anniston, Alabama Monsanto dumped this stuff completely unfiltered into the local water tables for 40 years all the while telling people that their operations were safe and that nothing was out of sorts. They also did this in Sauget, Illinois for decades.

The results speak for themselves- residents in both communities had much higher rates of all kinds of health problems than anywhere else in the country. Included in the category of "strange health problems" also includes children, teenagers and young adults mysteriously passing away from all kinds of ailments not normally seen in people their age.

Anyways, it's a long, sad story. If you're interested, get the goods on it here: http://www.chemicalindustryarchives.org/dirtysecrets/anniston/1.asp

And this is just one example. What's important to remember, is that this company knew full well that what they were doing was killing people and ruining lives. And they kept on doing it, and vehemently denying it, right up until the government finally stepped in in the 70's and banned production of PCB's.

What was the catalyst for the government to do so? In 1966 a Swedish chemist sounded the alarm bell, while Monsanto publicly stated that his findings were flawed. They lied through their teeth in an attempt to continue making their profits, even though they had known for decades.

So, that's all in the past right?

-wrong!!!- Monsanto is still up to all kinds of dirty tricks today.

If you'll remember Roundup used to be marketed as "biodegradable" but now it no longer says that on the container. Why? Because they lied about that too. While they pumped out cute commercials of Rex the family dog digging up a roundup-sprayed plant to get at the bone he buried underneath (implying that the herbicide degrades to a completely benign state shortly after spraying) independent tests verified that in some cases more than 30 days after spraying over 98% of the chemical was still in it's original form. Biodegradable my ass!

Now Monstanto's healthy profits depended on Roundup because it's one of their biggest money-makers, so anytime anyone publicly question's it's effects the Monsanto spin-team screams bloody murder and pulls out all of their scientific studies (all done by scientists on their payroll, just like all the studies they produced in the 60's to show that PCB's weren't harmful) to show that Roundup is harmless.

But lot's of tests have been done over the years by scientists not on Monsanto's payroll and like much of the products out there, once you get past the smoke and mirrors of the advertisements and media-spin, there's a very simple truth.

The reason why Roundup works so well is that it's made of up some really toxic, really nasty shit. That's why it's so incredibly effective.

It also kills all kinds of insects and even earthworms in some cases, that are beneficial to the ecosystem.

It drastically interrupts nitrogen fixation of the soil by killing the bacteria responsible for doing that- this is a BAD thing. 

It's incredibly toxic to humans- drinking about 3/4 of a cup will kill an average joe in a short time. And keep in mind that this is NOT biodegradable stuff, as some tests have found it takes up to 140 days or more for 50% decomposition. Residues of the toxins responsible for the magic of roundup have been found on carrots, lettuce and barley more than a year after they were sprayed. Yummy!

Now, I don't know about you, but if there's a product out there that can easily kill a human through ingestion and we're spraying this stuff on the crops we're going to eat (Monsanto's also produced genetically tailored plants that resist roundup) isn't there something just a little fishy about that?

This ties into the next point- Monsanto has another huge moneymaker, genetically modified crops. Now they might be truly evil, but they are also truly genius. One has to give credit where it is due, and these folks are on the cutting-edge of genetic research. They mix and match genes, taking DNA from hardy bacteria and mixing it into plant cells to make them more resistant. They've succeeded in creating "terminator" seeds that allow for only one crop harvest and then the farmer has to go and buy new seeds the following year (talk about messing with nature to ensure profits)

The beauty of it is that using their genetically modified organisms requires signing an End-User agreement that legally denies you from finding out the truth about their product.

Wha?

That's right, not a typo. If you're a farmer and you buy Monsanto seed, you sign a legal document that says that you will not, under any circumstances, allow their product to be tested by any nerdy-scientist folk. What does this accomplish? It means that the only official scientific studies carried out on Monsanto's new products can only be carried out by scientists on the company payroll. Independent scientists, cannot legally obtain a sample of the product and publish the results of their testing.

Oh sure, the EPA and the FDA are also in the picture, but government has NEVER gotten in bed with industry in the past have they? Surely not!

Of course, technically speaking an independent scientist could probably obtain some seeds very easily. But as soon as he'd publish his results, Monsanto, who has VERY deep pockets, would be taking him to court since he either

a) didn't legally obtain their product or

violated the end user agreement if he did buy their product

Ingenius isn't it? So why would a company do such a thing? Naturally the argument has always been that they are simply protecting their competitive interests, just like Coca-Cola supposedly has a recipe that only 2 people on the whole planet know. Just like KFC has a super-secret blend of 11 herbs and spices (newsflash people- it's just black pepper and breading!) and so forth.

Always keep in mind the source. This is a company that has been caught red-handed lying through it's teeth several times over the years. The kind of lies that kill people and ruin entire ecosystems on a near-permanent basis.

Our PCB's are perfectly safe! They helped us win the war you know! (was their line for decades)

Roundup is biodegradable and perfectly harmless! Spray once in your backyard and your kids can romp around with Rex the puppy the next day! (Was the cheery message they conveyed)

Now the new lie is:

Our line of genetically modified seeds are paving the way for a greener, sustainable future! (Just don't ever seriously question how we've done it or any possible repercussions Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain)

As the old saying goes:

"Fool me once, shame on you.... fool me twice.... well... we can't get fooled again!"

-George Bush Jr.

So in closing, who's your evil corporation of the day?


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Aug 05, 2009

I don't know about the tabacco industry, but enron and banking meltdowns are all because of bad regulations and laws, not because of "self regulating markets".. city bank TRIED to NOT sign people on toxic and explotative mortgages, they were sued for their trouble (by acorn, with barak obama as lead laywer) in 2002.

You want an example? Ever heard of karl marx? he said that the abuses of the industrialists will bring an inevitable revolution. Only reason he was wrong is because the industrialists were people with human morality. This is why in the united states you had the richest most powerful owners of land, farms, slaves, and industry come together and make the constitution.

This is why ford had such success, why google is having such success... people vote with their dollar and go with companies they beleive in, they boycot companies that they hate.

Speaking of for profit roads... I always use the TOLLWAYS because the regular socialized roads are shit.

635 - clogged, several accidents at once, slow and ineffective construction, bad design resulting in more accidents, roads in state of disrepair

George bush turnpike / dallas north tollway - fast, I pay money, rarely accidents due to proper design, no stupid hov lane wasting precious concrete. nice looking road and view

market regulated roads are vastly superior to the shitty government regulated ones.

Of course regulation CAN be good, it can also be BAD. it depends on the implementation. the reason why business tend to do a better job is because of competition, failed business models and management go bankrupt, good ones replace them. A bad government plan cannot be dislodged and will be subsidized by taxpayers after it should have failed.

on Aug 05, 2009

Only reason he was wrong is because the industrialists were people with human morality.

 

Sorry, I just don't buy the idea of a moral corporation, it's like saying there's such thing as a peaceful militant. Bottom line, corporations are out for their own interests - profit. Time and again there's been cases where companies have screwed anyone and anything to get what they want. Railroads, mail carriers, etc.  Then again, this is just my take on it. To each their own sure, but just don't screw me over. I don't take kindly to it.

 

Be well, ~Alderic

on Aug 05, 2009

Ordoliberalism is a school of liberalism that emphasises the need for the state to ensure that the free market produces results close to its theoretical potential (see allocative efficiency). The theory was developed by German economists and legal scholars such as Walter Eucken, Franz Böhm, Hans Grossmann-Doerth and Leonhard Miksch from about 1930-1950. Alexander Rüstow and Wilhelm Röpke (who spent the Nazi period in exile in Turkey) and Friedrich Hayek are associated with this theory. Ordoliberal ideals (with modifications) drove the creation of the post-World War II German social market economy and its attendant Wirtschaftswunder. The term was coined 1950 by Hero Moeller referring to the academic journal ORDO. The term is used in German language as synonym for the term neoliberalism or as concretization to label the neoliberalism of the Freiburg School.

Ordoliberal theory holds that the state must create a proper legal environment for the economy and maintain a healthy level of competition through measures that adhere to market principles.[1] The concern is that, if the state does not take active measures to foster competition, firms with monopoly (or oligopoly) power will emerge, which will not only subvert the advantages offered by the market economy, but also possibly undermine good government, since strong economic power can be transformed into political power. Quoting Stephen Padgett: "A central tenet of ordo-liberalism is a clearly defined division of labor in economic management, with specific responsibilities assigned to particular institutions. Monetary policy should be the responsibility of a central bank committed to monetary stability and low inflation, and insulated from political pressure by independent status. Fiscal policy—balancing tax revenue against government expenditure—is the domain of the government, whilst macro-economic policy is the preserve of employers and trade unions." The state should form an economical order instead of directing economical processes.

This is what a regulated economy is about, and its not being forced to follow some government plan. You got the wrong impression of what regulation is about here, or at least that's what I get out of your posts.

on Aug 05, 2009

Yep.  Capitalist corporations: the Worst Businesses in the World, aside from all the other types of businesses.  To paraphrase WC (not Fields).

on Aug 06, 2009

Sorry, I just don't buy the idea of a moral corporation

A corporation cannot be moral or immoral, it is just a paper entity. THE PERSONS Who own and work in it can be moral or immoral.

on Aug 06, 2009

but enron and banking meltdowns are all because of bad regulations and laws, not because of "self regulating markets"..

ha ha ha ha ha aaaaahh ha ha ha ha haaa!!!!!

Poorly enforced and vaguely defined regulations -enabled- Enron and the Banks to do what they did, which was lie, cheat and steal their way to nice fat profits. If the folks behind the wheel of the SEC and congress had actually done their jobs and remained as an impartial third party (traffic cop) as opposed to a prostitute for lobbyists, the United States would definitely -not- be in the economic pickle it is now.

The problem is that the regulations were insufficient and not properly enforced, and these companies only were able to get away with what they did because they lobbied extensively on the premise of "self-regulating markets". At the end of the day, these companies are responsible for their criminal actions, not the system of regulations.

At the end of the day, allowing a market to completely regulate itself on the honour system is like allowing a fox to guard a henhouse.

Speaking of for profit roads... I always use the TOLLWAYS because the regular socialized roads are shit.

I'm glad you bring up the subject of toll-roads. While some toll roads are brand new constructions, guess where the majority of toll roads have come from? The public purse!

Here's how it works. Majority of interstate highway system was built in the 50's under Eisenhower, all on the public dime (your tax dollars at work) Over the years, as various state and municipal governments have run into trouble, predatory companies have come calling offering to pay a big chunk of cash for a section of highway. Gov. sells this needing quick money, then private company takes over and starts charging tolls on a road that was built with public money.

Soooo, what does this mean?

Public money and resources go to build a public resource. Then, private company comes in and buys that public resource from the gov, then charges the very people who paid for it in the first place, more money just to use it.

It's the same principal as if you paid to build a house, then you run into trouble and sell it to someone and then become a renter in the house you built. It's the ultimate transfer of money and resources from public to private hands. There's a concept behind this:

Privatize the profits, publicize the losses. Under this system, you, the taxpayer performs most of the heavy lifting and pays the initial costs to create the actual asset. Then, a third party saunters in and takes ownership of that asset through a deal, then recoups the cost of their investment and much, much more through recurring "usage" fees. What work has this third party done? Very little. They perform a bit of maintenance as required but all the hard work was done on the public purse years ago, but now a private party profits from it.

Yes, there are cases in which a brand spanking new toll road is built and maintained right from the start by a private company, but even in this case there's all kinds of back-room shenanigans and wrangling with local governments for subsidies, taxation wavers, land-use rights blah blah blah.

on Aug 06, 2009

A corporation cannot be moral or immoral, it is just a paper entity. THE PERSONS Who own and work in it can be moral or immoral.

And this is the problem. A corporation is technically a legal person and has all the same rights. This should NOT be the case. It's the ultimate get out of jail free card for all kinds of crimes and negligent behaviour. From a legal standpoint, I would be okay if a corporation were classed as a "provisional person" meaning that their rights and freedoms would not be the same as an actual living, breathing person. If you have a system in which accountability is lacking, it WILL be abused.

on Aug 06, 2009

A corporation cannot be moral or immoral, it is just a paper entity. THE PERSONS Who own and work in it can be moral or immoral.

 

What he said:

And this is the problem. A corporation is technically a legal person and has all the same rights. This should NOT be the case. It's the ultimate get out of jail free card for all kinds of crimes and negligent behaviour. From a legal standpoint, I would be okay if a corporation were classed as a "provisional person" meaning that their rights and freedoms would not be the same as an actual living, breathing person. If you have a system in which accountability is lacking, it WILL be abused.

 

Well said.

on Aug 06, 2009

Not well said at all, if that was the case I could open a "coproration" to sell cocaine to highschoolers tommorow... however we DO have a problem with giving out "punative penalties" to a corp instead of putting people in prison, that is due to GOVERNMENT greed (they want the money from the fine more than they want justice). For example, japan, korea, europe and soon the USA are all putting massive punative damages fines on intel for "price fixing"... The EU fined them the highest punative fine on any single corporation ever (in history)... The crime in question was commited more than 10 years ago, by a CEO who has left with MASSIVE bonuses from the crime he committed, he is not to be persecuted. the victim was supposedly AMD, they will not see a cent from it. The Board of directors mostly changed, and the people in higher rungs have had a chance to shuffle about...

If they cared about the so called "crime" they would have fined the people who comitted it... as it stands, it just encourages CEOs to do that, they get their bonus today, and 10 years down the road when they are at a different company a government will fine the corporation. Oh, and don't forget it makes intel post a loss, which harms everyone with a 401K plan because those are the people who own stock long term.

Poorly enforced and vaguely defined regulations -enabled- Enron and the Banks to do what they did, which was lie, cheat and steal their way to nice fat profits

Actually, a bunch of congressmen passed a law to "deregulate" (according to news media, it really MODIFIED an already artificial government controller market called the future commodities market) to allow people with no stake in such a market to trade futures of energy. And it has not been fixed to this day, after multiple administrations on both sides... The oil prices gouging we saw? that was because the worlds LARGES oil company was JP morgan. They buy in 2002 all the oil produced by a well until 2012... they make sure to buy MOST of the oil in the market, then they sell it at more than it is worth... to other "investors", who turn around and sell it for even MORE, who turn around and sell it for even more... It is a pyramid scheme, just like our social security, just like our national debt, and banking, etc. This has become NORMAL and acceptable to a government of fools who beleives that such pyramid schems actually STIMULATE the economy instead of brining RUIN to it.

You know what causes those to collapse? a dose of reality. And with less government regulation on competing with such ponzy schemes, they collapse a lot sooner... but when they have a government mandate and monopoly...

on Aug 07, 2009

Actually, a bunch of congressmen passed a law to "deregulate" (according to news media, it really MODIFIED an already artificial government controller market called the future commodities market) to allow people with no stake in such a market to trade futures of energy. And it has not been fixed to this day, after multiple administrations on both sides...

Thank you, Taltamir. This clearly illustrates your ignorance on this matter. Yes, congress did pass laws to deregulate the industry, and they did a lot more changes than just the modification you mention above.

Why did they do it? Because of extensive lobbying and campaign contributions from the industry itself. In essence, the government, instead of being an impartial third party, got in bed with big bidness and GAVE THEM EXACTLY WHAT THEY ASKED FOR. Congress didn't sit back one day and say "heck, let's pass a bunch of funny ol' laws for no particular reason!" No, they were approached by the industry and told "this is what we want, please do it!" And they did.

So, yes, government is complicit in what  happened with the Enron and banking fiascos in that they were negligent in their duties as traffic cop. HOWEVER, Enron, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, were the ones behind the wheel when the car went off the road. Therefore they are ultimately responsible for their criminal actions.

You know what causes those to collapse? a dose of reality. And with less government regulation on competing with such ponzy schemes, they collapse a lot sooner... but when they have a government mandate and monopoly...

Okay, give me a real-world example in which market deregulation (in which there's no third party traffic cop watching over things) has resulted in the "faster" collapse of ponzi schems thanks to industry self-regulation? It simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Why? because without a traffic cop around to keep an eye on things, the honor system simply doesn't cut it.

I can give you MANY, MANY examples where exactly the opposite has happened. One such example is Chille in the 70's after the democratically elected president was killed in a coup that was supported by the West (that's us!) The new dictatorship completely deregulated the market as per Milton Friedman's Chicaco School of Economics urgings. What happened? A group of investors that came to be know as "the pirhanhas" nearly bankrupted the country with all kinds of predatory and harmful financial practices that were newly allowed with all regulations lifted.

Another such example is the great depression. Many of the laws that were passed in the 30's (namely the Glass-Steagall act) were increasing regulation to ensure that the depression couldn't happen again. And then in the 90's we got rid of most of that regulation all in the name of free markets. And look where we are today because of it!

on Aug 07, 2009

I agree that the repeal of those Glass-Steagall provisions was one of the major errors made by Republicans when they controlled Congress and I blame them, not Clinton, for that piece of the financial meltdown puzzle.

Good summary of the meltdown contributing factors & timeline here.

on Aug 07, 2009

Congress didn't sit back one day and say "heck, let's pass a bunch of funny ol' laws for no particular reason!"

They did it to profit from it obviously. Take a look at the ASSETS owned by congressmen. They are rich business owners, many of them have stake in very specific companies.

2 Pages1 2