# FarMore Technologies seed treatment



## MJC417 (Jul 26, 2008)

Anyone familiar with Farmore Technology seed treatment? Seems like it would'nt be pollinator friendly.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Nope, not me.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Acebird said:


> Nope, not me.


Seriously?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Ace, when someone posts a question like this, netiquette says "no's don't respond, just those that are familiar. Otherwise we'll end up with 45 pages of "not me."


----------



## cdevier (Jul 17, 2010)

The company has a lot of info at Seed Dynamics.com
I don't think that this method of insect control should be as bad for bees as a normal spraying operation.
cdevier


----------



## MJC417 (Jul 26, 2008)

Thanks cdevier. The reason I asked is I don't understand how you can coat a pumpkin seed to make the plant toxic to chewing insects, and keep the nectar it produces safe for pollinators.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

By the time the plant is capable of producing flowers, whatever coating existed on the seed is most likely dissipated and diluted into the soil. Secondly, a contact pesticide, such as a seed coating will most likely not be effective as a systemic pesticide, such as would be present in pollen.


----------



## Bodo (Mar 11, 2008)

Which seed treatment are you referring to? They seem to have many products..


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

The active ingredient of the insecticide portion of these seed treatments, as far as I know, is thiamethoxam. Thiamethoxam is a neonicotinoid. These are intended as systemic insecticides as the plants start to grow. With the small amounts put on seeds and the length of time from germination to flowering, I think dilution (plant grows, but the amount of insecticide does not increase while plant is growing) and degradation (chemicals like this tend to break down beginning as soon as they are applied) limit the risk to pollinators.

Of course, a number of beekeepers have voiced serious objections to neonicotinoids as an entire class of insecticides.


----------



## beeware10 (Jul 25, 2010)

how is different than the products sold by monsanto?


----------



## MJC417 (Jul 26, 2008)

Bodo said:


> Which seed treatment are you referring to? They seem to have many products..


 The product is D1400 seed treatment. It kills striped cucumber beetles and maybe some other insects. I'm quessing you have to trust that it dilutes before the plant flowers.
http://www.harrisseeds.com/Storefront/HarrisPopupTopic.aspx?t=DeptPumpkinPGFarmore


----------



## psfred (Jul 16, 2011)

The problem with neo-nics is that they are VERY persistent in the soil and accumulate in plants. Not much problem the first time they are used, unless they are used as a soil drench to make the whole plant toxic. However, continued use, especially if not done correctly (pretty much the same old "if some is good more must be better" thing), the levels in the plants go up, and some plants concentrate the stuff in pollen and nectar. When you consider that they are used in the hundreds of millions of pounds in the US, it's a real concern.

You may have noticed the lack of the normal population of very large grasshoppers in the Midwest this summer -- typically, they are present in pretty large numbers, enough that they are visible as squashed remains on the roads. Not this year, there is enough neo-nic around now to poison the juveniles on corn and wheat. Great for grasshopper control, but what else are we killing?

Neo-nics are, so far as I can tell, chlorinated versions of toxic alkaloids related to nicotine. We should have learned from the old chlorinated stuff in the 40's and 50's like DDT that chlorinated compounds are a HUGE problem. Neo-nics essentailly do not degrade at all in soils, whatever the plants don't pick up stays there for next year unless washed out, in which case they devastate water insects. Not very toxic to animals, but extremely toxic to insects. Repeated planting of treated seed, particularly when that seed is over-treated to extend the active protectin period (more must be better, eh?) results in significant accumulation in the soil. 

I suspect they will be removed from the market for crop use before long, the side effects are getting to be a real problem, and it appears they were NOT correctly evaluated prior to approval. I'd have thought we would apply some common sense and require chemicals used on cropland to degrade completely to avoid the concentration effect, but no one seems to have thought about that. There do not seem to be any long term studies done to evaluate concentration effects, nor any attempt to determine cummulative environmental effects over the now known to be decades or centuries long persistence -- they sorta got grandfathered in as crop chemicals. Highly likely that at least label changes are on the way, if not removal from the market. I know there has been quite a bit of concern in Europe, and some have been banned there, I think.

I believe they have been "unlabeled" for use on almonds because the concentrations in the pollen and nectar were becoming high enough to kill the required pollinator (no bees, no almonds). And, even though they are not highly toxic to people, I personally don't want to eat them. Won't eat trichlorosucrose (Splenda), either.

Peter


----------



## Tia (Nov 19, 2003)

Kieck said:


> The active ingredient of the insecticide portion of these seed treatments, as far as I know, is thiamethoxam. Thiamethoxam is a neonicotinoid. These are intended as systemic insecticides as the plants start to grow. With the small amounts put on seeds and the length of time from germination to flowering, I think dilution (plant grows, but the amount of insecticide does not increase while plant is growing) and degradation (chemicals like this tend to break down beginning as soon as they are applied) limit the risk to pollinators.
> 
> Of course, a number of beekeepers have voiced serious objections to neonicotinoids as an entire class of insecticides.


 I'm one of them!


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

> You may have noticed the lack of the normal population of very large grasshoppers in the Midwest this summer -- typically, they are present in pretty large numbers, enough that they are visible as squashed remains on the roads. -psfred


Maybe in your area. The western Great Plains saw huge numbers of grasshoppers in the summer of 2011. More than have appeared in a number of years. Grasshoppers are less affected by neonicotinoids than are some other insects.



> The problem with neo-nics is that they are VERY persistent in the soil and accumulate in plants. -psfred


The only place I hear or read things like this is one forums like this. If this is true, then all subsequent crops planted into those soils would be protected by the previous applications of neonicotinoids in fields, and no additional applications would be needed. From a practical standpoint, that doesn't seem to be the case. Aphids are among the most susceptible insects to neonicotinoids (these chemicals are especially effective against sucking insects, and neonicotinoids do have systemic action in plants). Neonicotinoids are applied as seed treatments to soybean seeds. Ever looked for soybean aphids in a soybean field in August? Based on the assumptions that these insecticides accumulate in plants, persist in soils for extended periods of time, and show little degradation over time, aphids should either not survive on soybeans, or should show good resistance to neonicotinoids at this point. Soybean aphids thrive in soybeans yet, and applications of neonicotinoids are highly effective against aphids for a period of up to a few weeks after application.

The same works in corn. Go look for aphids in corn in August. And again in wheat. And a number of truck farm crops.



> I suspect they will be removed from the market for crop use before long, the side effects are getting to be a real problem, and it appears they were NOT correctly evaluated prior to approval. -psfred


Interesting. Many European countries temporarily suspended use of neonicotinoid seed treatments a few years ago because of potential problems for pollinators. Those suspensions have, to the best of my knowledge, mostly been lifted at this point. Further evaluations in Europe could not support the continued suspensions of use.



> I know there has been quite a bit of concern in Europe, and some have been banned there, I think. -psfred


Were. A few uses still are, just as they are here. And some countries may have stricter regulations than others.

Just as a refresher on chemical classes, chlorinated hydrocarbons were among the first insecticides. The chlorinated hydrocarbon class was largely replaced by organophosphates, which were replaced by carbamates, which were replaced by synthetic pyrethroids, which are being replaced by neonicotinoids. All need to be used judiciously, and all require handling and application according to the labels on the specific products. Some of each of the classes are still available on the market, but humans have generally moved to lower non-target toxicity in switching from one class to the next on this list.

It might be worth mentioning that I used one of the neonicotinoids as a soil drench on some potted hibiscus that were infested with whiteflies last summer. Ants were busy visiting the flowers before, during and after the application of the neonicotinoid. Numbers of ants on the flowers increase throughout the season. The neonicotinoid did a fine job of controlling the whiteflies, but did not seem to cause any problem to the ants.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

The bottom line is no chemical treatment of any kind will eliminate any insect of any kind over the long run. As in antibiotics they should be used sparingly to control a disaster or the wipe out of a crop not to increase yield beyond natural levels because the long term effects of trying to do so leads to a disaster. We have to stop this sterilization nonsense.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Question to Ace......How was the Cotton boll weevil eradicated? And the screw worm??? TED


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

psfred said:


> …You may have noticed the lack of the normal population of very large grasshoppers in the Midwest this summer -- typically, they are present in pretty large numbers, enough that they are visible as squashed remains on the roads. Not this year…





Kieck said:


> Maybe in your area. The western Great Plains saw huge numbers of grasshoppers in the summer of 2011. More than have appeared in a number of years...


It is my impression that the grass hopper population rises or falls in response to rain. A dry year results in a boom in grass hopper populations while a wet one will result in a population bust. The long grass prairie areas Illinois Indiana etc got a lot of rain this past spring and summer. The medium or short grass prairie (Western Great Plains) Texas to the Dakotas is locked in what will soon be a two year long drought. I believe that the difference in grass hopper populations between these two areas can be explained by this long known but still little understood natural phenomenon.


----------



## lazy shooter (Jun 3, 2011)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> Question to Ace......How was the Cotton boll weevil eradicated? And the screw worm??? TED


The screw worm was eradicated by sterilizing the host flies with radiation. The flies were then dropped from air planes into the environment. The flies mated with other flies in their natural environment, but no off-spring was produced. It would be like sterilizing drone bees and placing them in the environment. Over a period of time all the flies were extinct. I was on a ranch when we had screw worms, and the eradication of screw worms was a blessing to ranchers.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> Question to Ace......How was the Cotton boll weevil eradicated? And the screw worm??? TED


I don't know, were they eradicated or just removed from a certain area?


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

, I greive for the drought stricken but I don't believe the dry area anything like covers the whole short grass prairie. Most of the area I grew up in was not planted this year because it didn't stop raining til July! Was a lot of cold wet weather accross much more. We must be careful of painting with the broad brush and unfortunately we can't believe much of the news because of the Climate change agenda. But what I have been reading about the neonicinoids scares the bejesus out of me if it is true and not propaganda. The Luddites are in full howl these days and what is reliable data is hard to decern from the masses of alarmism and wild eyed fearmongering. Which of your neighbors do you want to see starve without ag chemicals?


----------



## lazy shooter (Jun 3, 2011)

"The Luddites are in full howl these days and what is reliable data is hard to decern from the masses of alarmism and wild eyed fearmongering. Which of your neighbors do you want to see starve without ag chemicals?"

The above quote by Vance G. is spot on target. Man came, man saw, man altered and now it is very complicated.


----------



## psfred (Jul 16, 2011)

Read the EPA pesticide registration documents on neo-nicitinoids.

There is quite a bit of concern INSIDE the EPA that these compounds may have not been properly evaluated before being registered for widespread use as seed treatments.

Neo-nics are degraded by UV reasonably rapidly, I believe, but there is no UV below the surface of the soil! So they stay around year after year, with more added every time something is planted. From conversations I've heard down at the local farm co-op, it's hard to find seed NOT treated with neo-nics these days in commercial quantities, and I would suspect there is quite a bit of pressure to increase the amount used per seed to extend the protection period....

The root of the issue, I think, is that neo-nics are low toxicity to animals, in some cases less than nicotine for instance, and the effects on things other than the targeted insects eating the plant that grows from the treated seed were not taken into consideration for registration. Killing bugs is good, right? Well, maybe -- what if those "bugs" are your honeybees?. Or soil building organisms?

The use of several neo-nics has been banned in bee keeping areas in France and Germany after massive bee kills. This was, I think, from soil drench of standing fields rather than seed treatment, but since the compounds stay put, it's only a matter of time before seed treatments result in soil accumulation and resultant toxic plant parts.

Bees metabolize and excrete the neo-nics quickly, but no one is sure of the effects of sub-lethal doses, and if the amounts are high enough in either pollen or nectar, you will get a rapid pesticide die off in an affected hive, the neo-nics are fairly rapid action. Bad news if the bees bring in a crop of pollen contaminated with neo-nics -- won't kill the foragers, but will eliminate nurse bees and brood.

Peter


----------



## psfred (Jul 16, 2011)

Nah, it was very complicated before man even appeared.

Sadly, there are no simple answers to anything.

Peter


----------



## lazy shooter (Jun 3, 2011)

psfred said:


> Nah, it was very complicated before man even appeared.
> 
> Sadly, there are no simple answers to anything.
> 
> Peter


I agree with the above quote, but since man came aboard it has become more complex.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Vance G said:


> , Which of your neighbors do you want to see starve without ag chemicals?


Talk about fear mongering... 40% of the countries food was produced in victory gardens during WWII. Must have forgot how.


----------



## Corvair68 (May 10, 2011)

lazy shooter said:


> "The Luddites are in full howl these days and what is reliable data is hard to decern from the masses of alarmism and wild eyed fearmongering. Which of your neighbors do you want to see starve without ag chemicals?"
> 
> The above quote by Vance G. is spot on target. Man came, man saw, man altered and now it is very complicated.


This quote s a perfect example of fear mongering. The biggest change in agriculture is not with the plants ability to produce or the pests. It is peoples aversion to hard work, and greed. I am all for making more money for less work, or making things easier, but it should not be at the expense of the environment or peoples health.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

Vance G said:


> ... I greive for the drought stricken but I don't believe the dry area anything like covers the whole short grass prairie... We must be careful of painting with the broad brush and unfortunately we can't believe much of the news because ...The Luddites are in full howl these days... Which ...neighbor... you want to see starve without ag chemicals?


So do I but thanks, I was trying to remind everyone that the natural world is so complex that it defies human ability to apply simple sounding remidies (Like Organics) to a whole complex of complex issues. I only mentioned the Short Grass Prairie streatching from Texas to the Dakotas (ie. Mexico to Canada) because that is wrere the US portion of the Short Grass Prairie is. I toured a portion of the Long Grass Prairie this summer and I found the crops late, and in the lower lying fields ruined or totally lacking because of heavy spring rains coupled with Global Warming induced cold weather. FarMore's D1400 pesticide seed coating is marketed to combat the increased likely hood that seeds or seedlings will be attacked by plant pathigan pests associated with damp and cool planting or growing conditions.

I suspect that when the first calender was demonstrated that there was a Luddite watching who started preaching doom and gloom and demanded to go back to reading the signs in spilled chicken entrails or else burning a live virgin at the stake to decipher the best time to plant. Rest assured V G, when the Luddites win and they begin dropping dead from starvation, they will have the answers to all our problems on their cold blue lips... "Blame Bayer ribbet... blame ADM ribbet... blame Montosanto ribbit... ribbit... ribbet!!!"


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

The reason I asked Ace the question on how was the boll weevil and screwworm eradicated is the following.... The screw worm was eradicated as mentioned earlier by radiation. The boll weevil was eradicated by timed massive blanket treatments of pesticides by air over vast areas of cotton growing land. The point being that pesticides can and do have a beneficial use. And without them large plantings by modern agriculture would cease to exist and we would all starve. TED


----------



## lazy shooter (Jun 3, 2011)

I know a lot of people in agriculture, and I don't know anyone who is making obscene profits. Many of my rancher pals have to work at a part time job to keep the family ranch. I have owned ADM stock, and it didn't make me rich. All this talk of the people in agriculture making huge profits does not seem logical to me.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> ...without them large plantings by modern agriculture would cease to exist and we would all starve.


Well, there's the fear mongering. 

Not even true in the slightest. We'd just need stop wasting the food we use to feed meat animals. If you actually had to pay fair market prices for the food that goes into a cow, you'd price yourself right into vegetarianism.

In the old days, meats and finer foods were the foods of the rich and a big belly was a sign of affluence. However today, due to agriculture subsidies, meat is quite cheap. The problem lies in the reduction of energy as it is converted into muscle mass. Generally, 10 lbs. of grain equals 10 lbs. of food, unless you feed it to a cow or chicken or hog, then you get 10 lbs. of grain equals 1 lb. of food. And lets forget about all the food being turned into ethanol. How wasteful are we that we burn food to drive around in small metal houses.


----------



## VeggieGardener (Oct 4, 2011)

Vance G said:


> We must be careful of painting with the broad brush and unfortunately we can't believe much of the news because of the Climate change agenda. But what I have been reading about the neonicinoids scares the bejesus out of me if it is true and not propaganda. The Luddites are in full howl these days and what is reliable data is hard to decern from the masses of alarmism and wild eyed fearmongering. Which of your neighbors do you want to see starve without ag chemicals?


Wow, you worry about broad brushes and point a finger at alarmism and fear mongering on the part of others and then close with a statement like that! What reliable data do you have to support the idea that my neighbors would starve if it weren't for ag chemicals?


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

Corvair68 said:


> ... The biggest change in agriculture is not with the plants ability to produce or the pests. It is peoples aversion to hard work, and greed...


Fine,  then get yourself a short chunk of tree trunk, preferably one with a stout limb growing out of it at a steep upward angle. Use a hand sharpened stone to sculpt the small end of the trunk into a point. Harden off the point with fire. Harness your wife and children to the protruding limb of your organic home made plow and start growing all your families’ food and fiber under the usufruct economic conditions endured by European peasants for thousands of years. Somehow I doubt that not owning anything or turning every thing you produce over to the Laird of the Manor will cure anybody’s' wealth or greed issues. I do predict however that it will work miracles on the average persons' aversion to what passes now-a-days for hard work. 

Oh, one other thing, I forgot to mention that from here on out and forever and ever more, that there isn't going to be any more of that stuff called an education rearing it ugly head in your tar paper shack (that is if you and your family are lucky enough to be allotted a tar paper shack by the Laird of the Manor or plantation overseer). So be doubly doubly sure that you take all your children out of school so you can teach them by your example how to root with the wild hogs or die trying. 

Good luck and may God bless. You'll appreciate the help.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> ... The boll weevil was eradicated by timed ... treatments of pesticides... The point being that pesticides ... do have a beneficial use... without them ... we would all starve. TED


Ted, no we wont, the most ruthless and violent among us will still prosper and eat quite well thank you. The real issue is do we want a civilization where conduct like the above is the norm?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> The point being that pesticides can and do have a beneficial use. And without them large plantings by modern agriculture would cease to exist and we would all starve. TED


It will never happen that way. Starvation will happen when the soil can no longer support life. That is how it happens.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

This one's heading to Tailgater real fast!


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

> There is quite a bit of concern INSIDE the EPA that these compounds may have not been properly evaluated before being registered for widespread use as seed treatments. -psfred


Haven't heard that from anyone in the EPA. Overwhelming concern there right now seems to be NPDES. But I'm not in the inside loop there.



> The root of the issue, I think, is that neo-nics are low toxicity to animals, . . . -psfred


Please don't fall into the trap of trying to exclude insects from the rest of "animals." Insects are animals. 



> The use of several neo-nics has been banned in bee keeping areas in France and Germany after massive bee kills. -psfred


The use was suspended, but use in both countries has been reinstated. I don't know all the details, so I won't be able to say why, but Germany, in particular, is allowing use of neonicotinoids very similar to the way they're being used here.


----------



## tedlemay (Oct 3, 2011)

These neonicotinoids ..... according to what i heard from a guy at ohio state is very scary to say the least. as was stated the adults survive but the brood do not. brood hatch dropped to like 30%. this was with very very minute amounts! Info from Jerry 
Hayse. think my figures are correct!
Ted


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

The boll weevils scientific first name is Bohemia, that makes this little ditty apropos for an insect pest who no one knows where it first came from or where it calls home. 
(Picked or sung in the style of the Memphis Blues or else
Country and Western) 

The farmer said to the boll weevil
“Boll Weevil, I see you’re on the square.”
The boll weevil said to the farmer
“Mr. Farmer, my whole darn family’s there.”
Cause he’s looking for a home, home, home
Got to find him a home….

The farmer said to the boll weevil,
“I’ll bury you in the red hot burning sand.”
The boll weevil said to the farmer
“I’ll show you that I can stand it like a man.”
Cause he’s looking for a home, home, home
Got to find him a home…. 

Well the boll weevil said to the farmer, 
“Mr. Farmer, you better sell your ol machines,
Cause when I get through with your cotton,
You can’t even buy gasoline.”
Cause he’s looking for a home , home, home
Got to find him home…. 

Well the boll weevil said to the farmer
“Mr. Farmer, I would like to wish you well.”
The farmer said to the boll weevil
“Boll Weevil, I wish you were in .” 
Cause he’s looking for a home, home, home
Got to find him home….

The boll weevil ate half of my cotton
The cotton factor, he took all the rest. 
The only thing the boll weevil left for me
Was my wife’s old cotton dress.
And it’s all full of holes, holes, holes
And it’s all full of holes….

It is becoming more and more feasible for agriculture interest to eradicate certain insect pests, if not drive them to total extinction. You must start with extensive knowledge of the complete life cycle of that pest, including its susceptibility to various pesticides. Therefore in efforts like the on going Boll Weevil Eradication Program the old saw about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing was never truer. Thanks to certain organophosphate pesticides, careful study of the boll weevil’s complete life cycle, detailed knowledge about the cotton plant, cooperative efforts to maximize, corodinate, and disseminate this knowledge, plus the will of cotton planters across America to succeed, the boll weevil looks like he is not long for this world. 

All the shouting, arm waving, and wild eyed denials to the contrary. It appears that the scientific reality is that Malathion coupled with the BWEP has saved beekeeping in cotton growing regions of the American south. Where before cotton fields were sprayed or dusted up to 20 times each year and during the time of year when cotton was most attractive to honey bees at that, since our local BWEP was declared a success, I can not remember seeing, hearing, or smelling a single cotton poison application aimed at boll weevils for 10 years.


----------



## lazy shooter (Jun 3, 2011)

Barry:

This entire thread if off topic and POLITICAL.

Lazy


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

"Global Warming induced cold weather" Did you really just say that? I hope it was a joke and I just missed it.

I also find it interesting that several claim that we will starve without Big Ag. I recall very well when Big Ag was considered the problem and was going to be the cause of the starvation. I actually see more evidence of that prediction taking place than that individuals cannot provide for themselves. Just because a person is not growing their own feed, does not mean they cannot. Remember that Big Ag put thousands of small farms out of business, when or if Big Ag fails those farms will return. The failures of Big Ag are already motivation for some to return to the small farm.
Big Ag is not the only answer. Just the current one. If they where to disappear today, we would still produce not only the food we need, but the food for many others.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

> Remember that Big Ag put thousands of small farms out of business, when or if Big Ag fails those farms will return.


That is just not true. Acreage farmed by farmers raising commodity crops has increased to maintain income at acceptable levels. That has coincided with a migration of children raised on farms who did not want to stay on the farm. Job availability allowed this. A desire to make a decent living and work fewer hours was another.

In cases where farmers have chosen to diversify crops and markets they can support themselves on smaller acreages.

Not all farmers have the right personality to market crops directly to the consumer. My grandfather was one. My uncle and now cousin are farming on shrinking acres and making more money. When my uncle started to diversify the farm he caught a lot of grief from grandfather who still owned the land. He also had some customers of his certified wheat and soybean seed tell him they would quit farming before they "truck" farmed. Some are no longer farming because they were not profitable enough with the acreage they were farming.

Also, there are not a large population of people with the capital, equipment, land and knowledge looking to get back into agriculture.

To keep this on track for the OP neonics are a tool. They are very effective at what they do. They will be replaced in the future with some other tool. In the overall scope of things they probably pose less of a threat to honeybees than other insecticides used on the past.

Tom


----------



## slickbrightspear (Jan 9, 2009)

there is another thread on here somewhere stating that almonds are being pulled from the label of neonicotids as the amounts being found in pollen and nectar were high enough to effect bees. seems that in trees it does accumulate with repeated use in trees


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

TWall said:


> Job availability allowed this. A desire to make a decent living and work fewer hours was another.


Both of these options have faded fast. What has made it difficult to go back to organic farming is the land got expensive and most of it has been destroyed by chemicals. Once you have lunch with the devil you are done. You can't just go to confession and have your sins absolved.


----------



## Corvair68 (May 10, 2011)

Scrapfe said:


> Fine,  then get yourself a short chunk of tree trunk, preferably one with a stout limb growing out of it at a steep upward angle. Use a hand sharpened stone to sculpt the small end of the trunk into a point. Harden off the point with fire. Harness your wife and children to the protruding limb of your organic home made plow and start growing all your families’ food and fiber under the usufruct economic conditions endured by European peasants for thousands of years. Somehow I doubt that not owning anything or turning every thing you produce over to the Laird of the Manor will cure anybody’s' wealth or greed issues. I do predict however that it will work miracles on the average persons' aversion to what passes now-a-days for hard work.
> 
> 
> Oh, one other thing, I forgot to mention that from here on out and forever and ever more, that there isn't going to be any more of that stuff called an education rearing it ugly head in your tar paper shack (that is if you and your family are lucky enough to be allotted a tar paper shack by the Laird of the Manor or plantation overseer). So be doubly doubly sure that you take all your children out of school so you can teach them by your example how to root with the wild hogs or die trying.
> ...


Your comment has almost nothing to do with what I said... But I already do grow a great deal of my own food. I have a large vegetable garden, apple trees, blue berries, raspberries, black berries, strawberries, herbs and more. I also raise chickens, and I do all this with out GMO seeds, chemical pesticides or herbicides. Sure I have to spend more time pulling weeds and squishing bugs, but it is a thousand times better that the alternative. I can also go to sleep at night knowing if anyone in my family got poisoned or sick, or if the land or water around my house was contaminated, I did all I could to prevent it.


----------

