The matter of people organizing privately to obtain their food is clearly a sensitive one to the judiciary, as was clear in my previous post. And for good reason: it gets to the issue of control. Who controls people, and what they buy? If they are organized privately, those decisions are outside the power structure’s purview.
The problem for the powers that be is that the American Constitution has been interpreted on several occasions by the U.S. Supreme Court as allowing the freedom to associate, in other words, to organize privately with like-minded people. Despite his rant, which I quoted in my previous post, I sensed that Judge David Dunlap appreciated that reality more than he may have let on.
Embargoed cheese in refrigerated storage at Morningland Dairy. During the time Denise Dixon, an owner of Morningland Dairy, was on the witness stand last Monday being questioned by the prosecutor and by her lawyer, Gary Cox of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, Judge Dunlap asked a number of telling questions about the operating procedures of the private association established by Morningland after its cheese inventory was embargoed:
“Does this private association advertise?” (“No,” she answered.)
“Does you have a separate web site for the association?” (“No.”)
“You did not put a sticker on the association’s cheese, not for re-sale?” (“No, I didn’t–I should have.”)
“Did you ask any lawyer how to distinguish your association from the corporation that is registered with the state of Missouri?” (She said she had obtained advice in this area, and obtained a new tax identification numbers, but hadn’t taken steps to discontinue the original Morningland corporation until very recently.)
The message I took from the judge’s questions was that he hadn’t completely ruled out the legality of a private association. Rather, he wanted to determine if her association met certain standards of being completely private. If Denise Dixon had been able to answer unequivocally affirmative to all his questions– tell him that not only does the association not advertise, but that it has a separate password-protected web site, explicitly warns members not to re-sell product, and had fully ended its corporate status, he may well have been more impressed. Unfortunately, she and her husband had felt compelled to organize the Morningland association on the run, under tremendous regulatory pressure.
One of the things Michael Schmidt had going for him in his Ontario court victory last year was that his cowshare was well established, and followed clear guidelines consistent with its private-association status. The message is clear: to have any chance of gaining acceptance of the approach in a court, you must dot your i’s and cross your t’s.
***
The report out of Wisconsin that 16 children were sickened by raw milk is a troubling one. Not only because children got sick, but because it provides fodder for the nightmare scenario often sketched out by raw milk opponents: children become ill from raw milk being served in a public setting. I’d like to know additional details before saying more–for example, whether the milk came from a dairy that specializes in producing raw milk, or from a commercial dairy that normally has its milk pasteurized. Either way, not a good situation.
***
A couple weeks ago, CNN published an editorial advocating that raw milk be banned. The crazy thing is that the editorial was based on the E.coli illnesses in Europe, currently being blamed on contaminated sprouts. I just wrote a rebuttal for Grist, dissecting the CNN argument for what it was–very fuzzy logic. The comments that have already accumulated make for provocative reading as well.
***
The Kristin Canty documentary about the state and federal crackdown on small farms, “Farmageddon”, is off to a great start–a three-star review on the Washington Post online edition. A number of raw milk advocates appear in the film, including Joel Salatin, Mark McAfee, Sally Fallon, Pete Kennedy, and yours truly. It’s opening this weekend in Washington, DC.
"Additionally, interviews with event attendees revealed that consuming the unpasteurized milk was statistically associated with illness."
That peculiar sentence is constructed to read like "Consuming unpasteurized milk is statistically associated with illness."
And the last paragraph doesn't add up, either:
"The farm did not sell the unpasteurized milk and there was no legal violation associated with the milk being brought to the school event. The farm is licensed and in good standing with the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection."
So did the parent steal the "legal" unpasteurized CAFO milk, or what?
Andrew
To add to this, I would suggest that for a truely successful cow-share, the consumer should become a "co-producer." This is the idea of Carlo Petrini and the Slow Food movement… it should be our motto as well.
As for the 16 children in Wisconsin–I too would like more detailed information, like the particulars of the farm, the milk, and so on. There was another article that said a mother brought this milk to the event. How did that come to happen? Did the school sanction that?
On the other side of the question is how many kids at the school drank the raw milk? If there are more than 16 of them, how come the others did NOT get sick?
I bring my own (raw) milk to work each day and the other day, a co-worker asked if my milk was special. Big smile as I explained. He asked if he could try it. I said sure, but have a few questions first and proceeded to ask: Are you currently taking or have you recently taken antibiotics? What is your normal diet like? And so on. I suggested he begin with a two-ounce taste and if he liked it, two more ounces the next day. Seems excessive, since I've been drinking this milk for 4 years without incident but I eat well, don't take antibiotics, don't disinfect every surface before I touch it, and am in great health.
It is interesting that they do not name the farm. In the 2009 Wisconsin campy outbreak, the farm was immediately identified by DATCP.
This could well be milk from a commercial CAFO-type dairy that should not be consumed in its raw form. We will have to wait and see if there are any more details.
Appears that there are numerous "outbreaks" everywhere, including the USA.
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/health/news/article_1646116.php/Germany-discovers-first-human-transfer-in-E-coli-outbreak
Reminds one of Typhoid Mary in a way….
http://www.journaltimes.com/news/local/article_03ed2f9a-a3b2-11de-a9fd-001cc4c002e0.html
"The Zinniker Family Farm, a certified organic farm south of East Troy, has offered fresh raw milk through a Cow Ownership Program since the mid-1980s, according to the Web site http://www.fieldsneighborhood.org. The farm also sells certified organic milk to an organic dairy in the state. Attempts to reach the farm's owners were unsuccessful."
Does this mean they have the cow shares AND sell the milk for pasteurization?
As to Morningland Dairy, the first place is the misbehavior under color of law by the U.S. FDA and subservient authorities in the Show Me State of Missouri. If Judge Dunlap wants to get all hot and bothered because of uncrossed ts and undotted is by the proven and accepted cheese-making firm of Morningland Dairy as they try to escape the squashment and bamboozlement of the FDA et al, then Judge Dunlap is beclowning himself. Yes, the Judge could, rightly, have strict instructions on the need for precise, informed procedures for Morningland Dairy but if Judge Dunlap should neglect the first place in this affair, Judge Dunlap is a bad judge of far weightier matters.
It wouldnt be in Judge Dunlaps court without Governor Jay Nixons administrations actions. For which the Governor is accountable.
It is said that Show Me connotes a certain self-deprecating stubbornness and devotion to simple common sense.
That sounds pretty good to me. Quite an American attitude at that.
So why not?
Better than knuckling-under to federal bamboozlement.
We now call to the stand our expert witness, "Simple Common Sense."
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
Notice the date on the press release you linked to. The Zinniker farm did cause a campy outbreak in summer of 2009. They were actually my first suspects for this most recent outbreak, but after further investigating I have ruled them out as the source. DATCP still has not released the identity of the source… And I don't expect them to, given the extreme secrecy of our corporate-crony Walker Administration who has placed a long-time Farm Bureau lobbyist as the Deputy Secretary of Agriculture at DATCP. (Farm Bureau was a staunch opponent of raw milk legalization last year)
What I want to know is the definition of " illness" is. Did the kids have three days of malaise and diarrhea or were they hospitalized. There is a huge distinction.
Campy used to be considered simple travelers diarrhea until 1972 when it became a CDC bad bug.
You can bet that the CDC will classify these PMO raw milk cases in the raw milk category. Because this raw milk was not for human consumption but rather for pasteurization this is yet another act of oppression of data to further malign raw for people.
Another great case for RAWMI.
The Raw Milk Cats Cycling team is off to a great start. We sent them off from Oceanside CA this morning on their 3000 mile race across America. More to come.
The situation in WI is NOT a 'case' for your attempt at dictating the way raw milk is delivered in this country….but I guess if you repeat something enough times people will believe it's fact.
It's obvious that opponents of raw milk need data, numbers on which to thwart the popular uprising and threat that raw milk represents to Big Dairy. That's why they lump bathroom cheese and CAFO milk in their numbers…. controlling the way raw milk is created in this country has nothing to do with it…and lets be real here…your 'institute' will attempt to do just that. I don't doubt that once you get some fools in the fold, you'll start bad mouthing those that haven't paid for your program….after all three milks are better than two…right? You'll need to 'distinguish' your new 'brand' won't you?
Your RAMP program did little to prevent you from forking over a big wad of cash to the shyster.. I find it comical that you now realize that Bill is the enemy…. well DUH! Everyone with a shred of sense knew that. I think I recall only one person contributing here who thought he was worthy of respect and engagement, and that he would be a part of the solution…. it's also the only one who paid him off. (and the devil gets more energy).. Again I reiterate (you're not the only one who recognizes that repetition works) that an innocent, principled man would never have stooped so low, and given in without a fight…unless of course he was just thinking about the investment bankers and profit.
I bet the Vulture is just salivating at the prospect of other large industrial farms cranking out raw milk (after all your 'institute' will facilitate this). Misleading folks into thinking that some seal or program will keep the hounds at bay is way off base….your 'settlement deal with the Devil' is proof.
The situation is WI is a case for promoting small, personal, raw milk suppliers. It's a case for face to face commerce, above or below the radar. It's a case for getting to know your farmer, your neighbor and friend, who is willing to work hard to create the goodness that is in demand. The answer isn't political…or judicial…. and it sure isn't how many pounds per day a cow is giving….or what kind of return the venture capitalists are making (and it sure isn't deciding on which lawyers…ours or theirs…. we should pay how much).
You are right in one respect though, incorporating politics (or religion) into the raw milk debate is a recipe for disaster. It's divisive and and detracts from the cause. Even if a pro milk president was elected, they'd have a hard time turning the CDC, FDA, and other established 'institutions' that do the bidding of Big Dairy, on their head, and accepting a place in the market for the good stuff. (some of us strongly feel that institution is a four letter word)
Seems to me that your rawmi is taking a page from the milk boilers play book. You feel you 'own' raw milk…. just as they feel they 'own' milk in general….and are taking steps to dictate and control this emerging market. Pretty sad that your vision of the future is institute milk=good non institute milk=bad. I bet most in the raw milk community would disagree.
And they are regulated and inspected by DATCP and FDA.
I will refrain from naming names.
You are wrong, Milk Farmer. Conspiracy theories are not the way forward. The raw milk movement will only succeed by constructively addressing the complex of scientific and regulatory knowledge, combined with a grassroots dedication to our community of consumers.
If you don't want to be part of RAWMI, that is your choice. Please keep your criticism constructive, though. We don't need more conspiracy theory screeds, thanks. I think you will be impressed by RAWMI, when all is said and done.
http://www.gnolls.org/2199/you-are-a-radical-and-so-am-i-paleo-reaches-the-ominous-stage-3/
just watch
non profit doesn't mean that someone won't be making money….it'll need people to run it…and they won't be 'volunteers'.
I should stay 'constructive' as someone attempts to creates a third raw milk? Nope.
I won't sit here and watch the big guy muck it up for all the little guys (and make more profit from doing so)
"This is for the producer who is attempting to make money on raw milk production. hobby milkers do what you will, your job will keep you from effectively utilizing the following…" Tim Wightman
As soon as it becomes about making money rather than preserving our access to the food of our choice,the battle has been lost.Money is what is used to control every aspect of our lives.When we learn to work for real goals rather than for money,anything that does not get us closer to our goal will be forgotten.
Real food production can never compete with all of the highly profitable scams now available for making money.Real food producers will always be at a disadvantage when it comes to making money.Our goal should be to make real food available to those who recognize it's real cost of production.For those of us who want real food but don't want to pay extra for third party certification or worthless tests that pacify the authorities temporarily,RAWMI is not very helpful.An attempt to get conventional dairies to produce RAWMI certified milk will be about the money and in order to live on a par with their neighbors they will necessarily reduce quality in an attempt to increase quantity and therefore profit.
Miguel-
Are you saying that a dedication to food safety should not be part of the real cost of food production?
You do realize that outbreaks hurt more than just a few consumers, don't you? They are very costly for the entire raw milk movement, and for other farmers who haven't made anyone sick.
you've revealed the engine of your fiery darts against Mark McAfee = covetous-ness
you feel he's 'making too much money' … don't you?
I got the measure of the man a few years ago when he came to Burnaby BC, and gave us vital information – gratis – which inspired an to grow her business to a cowshare making the best food in the world available to 500 households
If the mission statement is " … to make real food available to those who recognize it's real cost of production", Mark McAffee could retire right now, having proven the concept. But he's a classic American entrepreneur doing the kind of thing that made this nation great, once upon a time
You remind me of Idaho's Dairy Princess for 1966, milking 2 cows in Emmett Idaho, sneering + snarling at me on the Yahoo RawDairy forum, for "gouging" = ie charging too much at $15 gallon = while she gave away the product of her labor for $2 a gallon. Entranced in the stupidity of "pittance farming" she put herself out of business. Now no-one in her neighbourhood gets REAL MILK. Meanwhile Organic Pastures delivers 60,000 portions per week.
Money itself is not the root of all evil : it's just a technology. Like booze, and credit, and sharp scissors, some people can handle it and some cannot.
What matters in large institutions is leadership … The LACK of which, this country suffers from. It's a joy to behold what Mark McAffee is doing.
At time mark "2 minutes 30 seconds"…you will see the "Four Raw Milk Cats" cycling team including Dr. Cat Berge DVM PHD ( and RAWMI Director ) starting off on the 3000 mile RAAM Race Across America.
http://www.raceacrossamerica.org/raam/raamfp.php?N_webcat_id=109
As to the remarks above….
Negative BS is negative BS….
RAWMI will prove itself as highly valuable to those that chose to use it as a tool and produce raw milk from 2 cows or 300 and to also for those that consume it. Finnally some standards and science and a departure from FOOD INC FDA PMO endorsed raw milk confusion and disruption.
Consumer transparency will be enhanced with: the farmer profiles, their food safety plans ( RAMP like ) and the farmer stories and consumer testimonials, preferred insurance rates being made available, and bacteria counts posted to the RAWMI website…..will be an example to all.
RAWMI is open to all…even cow shares….it is not elitist…it is essential for progress and safety and it is 100% volentary.
Mark
Food safety is the number one consideration.How can we measure food safety?I suggest that food quality is what we need to be concerned about.Quality and safety are the same thing.When the goal becomes profit and the scale becomes large,quality is diminished,sometimes forgotten. Because I reject present testing methods as useless does not mean that I am against safe food.An abundance of one type of opportunistic bacteria in a sample might mean that there is a problem.Namely, that something has eliminated the bacteria that normally would be the dominant bacteria in the system.But what I see of the tests is that they are testing for the presence of one type of bacteria.This information is useless at best and often distracting as to the real cause of the systemic problem that exists if any problem does exist.The current tests are inadequate,even misleading.We do not get a RELATIVE count of the many types of bacteria actually present in the milk sample from any of these tests.
I believe we can examine the quality of the bacterial community in the milk in the same way that seawater samples are evaluated for bacterial relative abundance and biodiversity."Everything is everywhere, the environment selects".What we want to know is what types of bacteria will be dominant in the milk as it is stored until the time it is consumed.In high quality milk the lactic acid bacteria will easily out compete the opportunistic bacteria. Do we know what environment most favors the growth of the lactic acid bacteria? Does mineral content matter? Sweetness? Fat content? Diversity of fatty acids? Fatty acid profile?
Epidemiology is a commercial business.It is not science.We cannot depend on outbreak data .Epidemiology has more to do with politics than science.The present "pathogen" tests are nothing more than crude products that are aggressively marketed to businesses as insurance against business losses.Don't fall for their lies.Please don't accept their view of disease and do an even better job than they do at their backwards view of the situation.RAWMI could research a way to measure true milk quality,but I will predict that it does not.Money will dictate what research is done and the Institute seems to be about saving existing conventional dairies from bankruptcy rather than a way to get the best milk to as many people as possible.
Gordon,
Is there more food security in sourcing your food from one large farm or sourcing it from many,many small farms? Traditionally ,many small farms have fed the world.All we need to do is remove the obstacles that prevent these small farms from being re-established.For young people just starting out,there is a lot to learn.For conventional farmers making the transition there is also a lot to learn.In the latter case there is also a lot to unlearn.Sometimes the attitude that "I know how to do this" is the biggest learning disability one can have.
Your comments contain some real pearls of sage advice.
RAWMI serves all, small and large alike and is a resource for small and large alike. It is my hope that many different types of producers find the tools at RAWMI valuable in their effort to assure flavor and safety.
Yes. There is an incredible amount of study and research to be done to get raw milk the firm footing it deserves so it will be respected, after at least 100 years of PMO excused horrid conditions and Food Inc processor oppression.
One last thing, why is it the an organic farmer making money is a bad thing. The concept of a farmer in rags, a poor redneck that lives at the poverty line is ridiculous AND a central reason why farming is not sustainable and why we have no sources of economic fuel for our national jobs engine.
The next person to claim that OPDC is rich or that I am after the big bucks, needs to come spent a day with me, so they can eat those words.
Money is needed to be sustainable if you want jobs for America and jobs are going to be created We provide great jobs for 58 people all over CA. That makes OPDC bad?????
We need lots more places like OPDC all across America. Good pastures, good food, great jobs,feeding great people. Good for all.
One last thing, our RAMP program started in late 2007 as SB201 was being created and after Marler scared our insurance company and after the lessons of 2006. RAMP has been very successful at producing raw milk that is reliably safe and delicious and yes, soil conditions are part our risk consideration.
I am not at all suggesting you, but we live in this time in this country and have seen the profit motive folks lie, steal, and cheat their way onto everyone's plate. Just because there's a rejection of the industrial model doesn't imply that people want farmers to be poor. (In fact, those who embrace the industrial model are some of the most impoverished farmers today.) Likewise, just because someone rejects a particular line of testing doesn't mean they are for unsafe food. You ought to know better than to use that argument. Because we are proponents of raw milk (we being most of the regulars on this blog), we are constantly accused of indifference to food safety and food-borne illnesses.
I agree with Miguel regarding testing for counts of selected bacteria. I think the safety of the milk is in the ratio of all its constituents. If a news article contains no typos and no spelling or grammatical errors, is it a quality article? If we're going to teach, teach, teach, then we have to do if beginning at the soil.
Tell us why RAWMI is different (in that it is trustworthy and valid from a food safety perspective).
And finally, what is PMO?
I can only comment on the very small amount of information about the standards that has been revealed. Tim's statements left me with concern that production per cow as in conventional dairying needs to be maximized in order for farmers to make a living on a par with the rest of the community.I would like to have standards that focus on soil health,cow health and human health.With these in place,then we can let people be creative about how the money is used.Money is likened to the blood of the economy.It needs to circulate in order to have a healthy economy.I have no problem with money coming to and going from the farm.It is simply a tool or like the blood, a way to move energy around.Our goals should be the health of the economy,the land and it's people.Like the blood in our veins,you do not need to be concerned about it unless your goals are not being met.Energy spent on monitoring the flow of money is wasted and money that is taken out of circulation and accumulated is a symptom of a diseased economy.Like our blood ,money in the economy flows the best when we relax and don't think about it.
PMO is the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance. It is the official " bible " for the FDA, dairies and processors industry than contains all standards for processed milk in the USA. Nearly all states have adopted most if not all of the PMO as their state law.
When RAWMI is up and going, everything will become clear, it will still however and forever be a work in progress. Much has been learned from CA, Pen state, USDA organics, WAP and the 110 year old Certified Raw Milk Association The AAMMC.
The most important test done by a laboratory, to verify raw milk quality, is an aerobic Standard Plate Count. This is NOT a selective media designed to isolate a particular bacterial strain or species. The only requirement for a bacteria to grow on a normal SPC plate is that it can tolerate oxygen and digest the basic nutrients provide in the agar. There are many bio-diverse species which grow on these plates.
Another consideration is the temperature at which the plate is incubated — sometimes the plates are incubated at or near body temperature, other times they are incubated at refrigerator temperatures (the temperature at which the milk is stored) to indicate the population of cold-loving bacteria in the milk.
An SPC is simply a measure of the number of bacteria in the milk. Milk which is grossly contaminated will have a high SPC.
The second most important measures of milk quality are Somatic Cells Counts (not related to bacterial composition) and coliform counts. Coliforms are measured with a selective agar (violet red bile agar) which contains lactose (milk sugar). This agar does allow some non-coliforms to grow, but these colonies are easily identified because they do not turn purple.
These are very simple technologies, and they have been used for many decades by laboratories testing milk and dairy products. In my experience, they are helpful tests to conduct, in addition to the more primitive testing methods you advocate for.
The clabbering test, which you frequently refer to, is an excellent on-farm test to use to monitor milk quality. I use that test myself. In generations past, it was known as the "Wisconsin Curd Test" and was suggested by the American Association of Medical Milk Commissions. See this document from 1904, prior to the advent of widespread pasteurization in Wisconsin:
http://images.library.wisc.edu/WI/EFacs/USAIN/DFC/DFC1904n02/reference/wi.dfc1904n02.i0008.pdf
Other tests which are conducted include the milk protein, butterfat, total solids, solids not fat, and ash content (minerals). These are all tests routinely done by established dairy laboratories around the U.S.
You are right that there are some more fancy tests which look for presence of very specific pathogenic organisms, and these tests are useful in addition to the tests I described above. But the backbone of any raw milk safety plan is SPC, SCC, Coli, Protein, Fat, and Solids.
I fail to understand your objection…
Perhaps I am misreading you… if you are saying that we need more developed tests that look at other factors like fatty acid composition, I would agree with you. But from my understanding, those tests already exist, and are even more specialized and expensive than the pathogenic tests that are able to isolate specific organisms.
The tests I referred to above are relatively inexpensive to conduct (except the pathogen tests), and I think give a fairly good indicator of the major factors in the milk composition which relate to food safety.
And you are right… they provide you with a certain amount of liability insurance, because you now have a body of objective third-party evidence about the safety and quality of your milk. I'm afraid we are not going to get around liability issues in this day and age, as much as we would like to. Our best bet is to find the most effective way to deal with it.
This video is for you.
"There will be blood,."
Don't bother responding to me, i already know what you will say.
Herzog vs Organic Pastures
http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/raw-milk-on-trial-at-neha/
MW
The most effective check on state power in an industrialized society is an independent organized working class. The first thing that Hitler did when he took power in 1933 was outlaw trade unions. It was also a trade union in Poland — Solidarity — that helped topple the Soviet bloc in the 1980s.
I support collective bargaining rights for all workers, including dairy farmers. Maybe if the raw milk movement was more organized, we could be more effective at bargaining with the public health people over reasonable testing standards for legal raw milk. Instead, we remain divided because of the extreme individualist ideologies and conspiracy theorists.
Do you enjoy being a feudal serf of corporate wealth?
http://crushthestreet.com/Disclaimer.html
Take note:
"Disclaimer
CrushTheStreet.com is owned by Micro Cap Awareness, LLC.
…
Our activities involve actual conflicts of interest, since we receive monetary or securities compensation in the very securities we are promoting and shortly after we receive the monetary compensation we promote the securities or after we receive the securities, we sell the securities during our promotional activities or thereafter. The non-affiliate third party shareholder from which we receive compensation also has an actual conflict of interest since he or she is paying us securities compensation for promotion services and such non-affiliate third party shareholder may sell other shares he or she holds while we are promoting the issuer that issues the stock that the third party shareholder holds."
Here is the website for the parent company — http://www.microcapawareness.com/
I can't seem to find any more specific information about who funds them right now. Either way, it would appear that this is a website taking $$$ from Wall Street. It is sad that there are people in the raw milk movement who are propogating this kind of corporate propoganda.
You spend way too much time trying to prove everyone wrong. (Maybe it's not everyone else that's wrong, but you.)
This is not an issue of unions, but of public unions. I have no problem with private unions. You tend to lump all union workers into one category, and that is your mistake.
Public unions receive their compensation on the backs of the taxpayers, the very "workers" you say you support.
So if you agree with public unions, then you agree that it's okay for an armed man to come to my house and steal my money down the barrel of a gun, or I risk imprisonment (that's what taxes are) if I don't comply? You're okay with that?
You detest corporate greed but love government greed and their monopoly on theft and force?
Now who's the shill…but you Marxists love that, don't you, stealing others money and freedom under the guise of "democracy"?
Here's your problem, you see this as black and white – one side is good and one side is bad – when the reality is, both sides are bought and paid for, and are working towards the same endgame. But you're picking the side that suits your sensibilities, and can't break out of the left-right paradigm. Sad that so many in the raw milk movement are buying into your crap and promoting this kind of socialist propaganda under the guise of "change".
There are no trial transcripts of the Lauren Herzog case Milky Way links to–and never will be– because the case was settled out of court more than two years ago, as described in this posting:
http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/2009/4/17/a-settlement-brings-a-quiet-close-to-the-contentious-food-bo.html
It's a mystery to me why the Marler Clark law firm suddenly insists on re-living this case, which occurred nearly five years ago, even after all the parties agreed to refrain from discussing financial terms as part of the settlement. The PowerPoint presentation has a long list of medical and other expenses as part of the presentation. Could it be because the subject of raw milk brings listeners to the presentation, who eventually bring clients to the firm?
David
I am not a Marxist. Marx was an authoritarian who supported the dispossession of the feudal peasantry from the land, and the development of industry, as neccessary step towards his goal. My goal is to PREVENT the dispossion of small farmers from the land. This makes me very anti-Marxist.
As I'm sure you know, there are many small organic farmers in Wisconsin who supported the struggle against Scott Walker's agenda. The farmer-labor "tractorcade" on March 12th was an outstanding rally that was attended by about a hundred thousand people in Madison. Dozens of farmers from around the state drove their tractors around the capital square, rallying against the union-busting and pro-corporate austerity budget which is devestating farming communities throughout rural Wisconsin.
Here is an excellent story about the rally by Joel Greeno, who sits on the Family Farm Defenders board, and is a multi-generational family dairy farmer:
http://www.alternet.org/story/150879/how_wisconsin%27s_war_on_workers_hurts_farmers/
http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2011/06/13/wisconsin_beer_wars
I don't understand why the old news is continually dug up either. They have not presented anything new, same old tired words. Perhaps it is a way to bring in more revenue for the firm? People in business usually don't do things unless it makes more $$$ for them.
Too bad it didn't go to court, it may read like the Mcdonalds coffee case, when you read all those transcripts, it sheds a different light on the case other than what the media put forth.
"But blaming this particular piece of legislative maneuvering solely on Walker seems misplaced. The Joint Finance Committee voted 14-2 to approve the legislation — only one Democrat and one Republican opposed it. Apparently, in Wisconsin, when MillerCoors talks, everybody listens. "
Barney nailed it. "You spend way too much time trying to prove everyone wrong. (Maybe it's not everyone else that's wrong, but you.)"
Oh, there are a whole lot of us small organic farms that have had enough pillage and plunder by the entitlement crowd and their unions! We stand firm no matter how vicious their hatred is for us working folks that have been carrying the burden. I know that doesn't matter to you as only your opinion and distorted reality counts.
Answer this, Bill, yes or no.
Do you believe that the government has the right to take my property though taxation to fund the salaries of public employees, the amount of which I have no say in, and whose union bosses donate money to the campaigns of politicians that increase my taxes to further fund public union salaries?
Bill, if you answer no, your argument against the legislation curtailing the collective bargaining power of public unions is null and void.
Bill, if you answer yes, you are NOT for the small farmer/worker as you claim to be, as youd agree that the government has the right to tax the worker until bled dry.
So which is it?
Stripping collective bargaining rights had nothing to do with saving the state and taxpayers money. Walker himself admitted it under oath in his testimony to congress. See here:
As for the question of taxes, let's keep in mind that the biggest tax on our income is an invisible tax which we never see on our checks — the artificial supression of wages (or as a dairy farmer… bulk milk prices) by corporate monopoly. I worked 60 hours last week, while Southern Wisconsin currently has a 15% unemployment rate. Why won't businesses hire more people so that those who are working can work a normal 40 hour week? Oh wait… that's right, they are trying to keep unemployment high and wages low.
Adam Smith, the founder of modern economics, described this phenomenon of the invisible tax on workmen's wages in his famous treatise The Wealth of Nations:
http://geolib.com/smith.adam/won1-08.html
So to answer your question, there are two things that are certain in life, death and taxes. If we are going to live in a society in which the marketplace is the center of the economic life of society, then I do support a progressive taxation system in which the wealthy and large corporations pay the largest share. (I would prefer to live in a society in which the market was a peripheral part of the economic life of society, and the community was the center, but I do not forsee this happening anytime soon in America.)
Unfortunately, our current administration prefers to place the majority of the tax burden on the middle class while giving large tax breaks to big business. I do not support this, at all.
I realize my response may be to complex for you to understand. You are free to screem your head off about conspiracy theories and other things. That is not moving us any closer to raw milk freedom, though.
"In 1979 IH named a new CEO, who was determined to improve profit margins and drastically cut a ballooning cost structure. Unprofitable model lines were terminated, and factory production curtailed. By the end of the year, IH profits were at their highest in 10 years, but cash reserves were still too low. Union members became increasingly irate over production cutbacks and other cost-cutting measures. In the spring and summer of 1979, IH began short-term planning for a strike that seemed inevitable. Then on November 1, IH announced figures showing that president and chairman Archie McCardell received a US$1.8 million (in 1979 values) bonus. McCardell sought overtime, work rule, and other changes from the UAW, which led to a strike on November 2, 1979.[2]
"Soon after, the economy turned unfavorable, and IH faced a financial crisis. The strike lasted approximately six months. When it ended, IH had lost almost $600 million (in 1979 value; over $2 billion today).[3]
"By 1981 the company's finances were at their lowest point ever. The strike, accompanied by the economy and internal corporate problems, had placed IH in a hole that had only a slim way out.[4] Things only got worse until 1984, when the bitter end came.
"International Harvester, following long negotiations, agreed to sell its agricultural products division to Tenneco, Inc. on November 26, 1984."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Harvester#Downfall_and_ending
If unions are so great, why isn't Detroit a workers' paradise?
And as far as the legislation against craft breweries, Wisconsin passed this same legislation for wineries 4-5 years ago. Where was your outrage then, Bill?
Wow, you really think your shit doesn't stink, don't you?
By the way, you spelled "too" wrong.
(It's not corporate monopoly that makes your wages so low, it's the fiat dollar system, idiot.)
I have rabbled-roused against the three-tier system in the past, just not on this forum.
Detriot today is actually a blooming example of what can be done in a post-industrial city gutted out by globalization. It was also the cite of the US Social Forum a few years ago. There is a resiliant urban agriculture movement and strong grassroots community organizations.
The reason that Detriot was gutted out is because of corporate globalization — NAFTA, GATT, WTO, etc… and other "free trade" agreements that allow huge multinational corporations to "race to the bottom" and exploit people and natural resources in places where enviromental and workplace safeguards are not as good as they should be. I have many activist friends who were involved in the famous anti-WTO protests in 1999.
It is telling how the new fascist "tea party" leadership in Michigan has decided to forcibly shut down Catherine Ferguson HS for teenage mothers that is teaching them sustainable living skills such as animal husbandry and gardening:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/42725827#42725827
I am done posting here for the day. I have more important things to do.
Remember, the first thing that Hitler did when he took power in 1933 was outlaw trade unions. Scott Walker has learned well. And to clarify my position, I do NOT support the recall elections because I think they are a joke that is distracting from the real issues at hand, which is organizing a local resiliant sustainable democratic cooperative economy.
Yes or no?
We can't just blame fiat money for the economic problems we face. There were economic depressions and crises when the US was on the gold standard during the 1800's, and the populists (coalition of farm and labor) spent decades fighting the gold standard because of how it screwed over small farmers and made it hard for them to pay off their debt. If Ron Paul got his way, he would return us to the Gold Standard. (I do not support the Fed, btw…)
The problem we face right now is unprecented concentrations of corporate wealth which control our entire political system. Simply suggesting that the government "butt out" is not going to solve the problem of extreme class division between the haves and have nots, it is only going to make it worse. In the meantime, the repressive powers of the state will tend to increase as the disparity between the haves and haves-nots increases.
As I said before, this response may be too complicated for you to understand. Feel free to scream your head off about conspiracy theories. That is not getting us any closer to a free and democratic society, though.