Don't local and small-cap farmers depend more on that selective breeding? It's undeniable that Whole Foods and home-grown vs. the hotel is more than a subtle difference in taste, but you're undertaking the same processes "naturally" that Monsanto's shitheads are enhancing biochemically. You're still right though, there is good quality to be found in the states as well. However, I've personally noticed the difference significantly where I've been, that's all I'm saying.
I have a cousin that has a small farm. He grows heirloom variety vegetables that have nothing to do with monsanto and in no way are being bred for shape, size etc. It's old-school farming. He earns his living selling to restaurants and at farmers markets. I'd wager his vegetables taste as good as any. They're wonderful.but you're undertaking the same processes "naturally" that Monsanto's shitheads are enhancing biochemically.
Please elaborate.
I mean, your cousin will select the best veggies to sell, and the most marketable veggies' seeds to re-grow. Eventually, the rounder skin and other surface-appealing traits will dominate, and there is no way to tell if the DNA of those increasingly-nicer-looking veggies result in a taste worse than a misshapen one. Monsanto is in the same business as your cousin, even if your cousin is not so serious and business-focused, and is just doing it for pleasure and fun. They both still want the best-looking (marketable) fruits, unless your cousin explicitly selects the seeds of the best-tasting fruits in his crop, as opposed to the best-looking ones. Monsanto, instead of waiting for them to grow and pick out the best ones, creates the "best" ones artificially. Their end objective is the same.
Monsanto, instead of waiting for them to grow and pick out the best ones, creates the "best" ones artificially. Their end objective is the same.
The end objective is FAR from the same and the difference can be summed up in the definition of the word "best." There is a large movement of farmers in the US intent on growing the best tasting fruits/veggies without the aid of artificial means/processes. This exists and it's growing. In fact, the idea of small batch, high quality seems to be catching on in many aspects, not just food. I'm encouraged by it.
Yes, this is still on my point. Technically Monsanto isn't aiming to decrease the quality of taste in food, they're sacrificing it for marketability. A farmer trying to increase profit but not yield GMOs will naturally select the exact same traits for their crops, that Monsanto will genetically modify for its clients. In this I believe they have the same definition of best. Now, a farmer who disregards increasing profit potential will take a slower "noble" route of naturally selecting the best tasting crops, as you said. It is the product of counter-culture which exploded ironically (again, counter-culture) into what is now indistinguishable from the mass market-- see Whole Foods-- that allows those farmers to still make enough money to stay competitive in the market, because Whole Foods may explicitly ask for those delicious ol' heirlooms. Without places like Whole Foods, a farmer would have to potentially decrease taste in the process of increasing marketable eye-appeal just like Monsanto would, even if the local farmer's means were not genetic modification. I don't think we're on opposite ends of the table, I'm just shit at explaining things.There is a large movement of farmers in the US intent on growing the best tasting fruits/veggies without the aid of artificial means/processes.
Now, a farmer who disregards increasing profit potential will take a slower "noble" route of naturally selecting the best tasting crops, as you said
Wrong. You are assuming that this noble endeavor is sacrificing profitability. These farmers are able to command more money per ounce for their products than conventional fruits/vegs
Ok, I'll take that. But how so? Isn't Monsanto swimming in cash by selling tasteless fruit that packages well, grows big and looks nice? edit: oh wait I got you. This is true. Hm, I got some thinkin' to do.
My cousin has a smaller niche he sells to. Hotels, restaurant chains and grocery chains buy in large bulk and generally don't give a shit about flavor and will nickel and dime their suppliers to get the most affordable, not highest quality, goods. We're talking about semi's full of pallets of tomato's vs a pick up truck with a bushel of them. The bushel has a higher margin but the pallet has more volume. I'm sure you get it, right? Basic supply/demand.
Yes I do understand, I didn't read your last reply carefully. My mistake was forgetting to account for the higher price of local farmers for their product. Thanks for your patience :D
To me, this whole issue highlights the necessity for artisan markets across all kinds of products. It's only through the demand for high-quality (non-GMO) crops that keeps those heirloom varietals in meaningful production, which preserves biodiversity.
I've been seeing a ton of artisan markets starting to pop up. This past week alone I went to three farmers markets in three different towns, ranging from 15 vendors to upwards of 60. I find the smaller ones are more likely to have great fruits and vegetables, but the larger ones will have a better selection of grass fed meats, small batch cheese producers, and other things I'm likely to buy. tng mentioned paying a premium for it, but I for one am happy to pay that premium. Especially after talking to the folks that show up and try to sell meat out of ice chests and the bread they baked a few hours earlier.
I'm with you 100% Part of this notion of equality we talk about so much in modern dialogue should include a greater respect for 'the least of us.' A farmer, a true artisan, a master of their craft who cares about producing a quality product for consumers in a sustainable way, should be elevated in respect in a similar manner to how we elevate people who don't actually produce anything (High finance, executive types etc)