Thanks for sharing and totally support this. Key to health is food grown in a healthy and sustainable way. Also, need to encourage students to learn and innovate in the field of permaculture.
We need to teach them by demonstrating it to them by our own actions. We each need to reconsider what we do and start doing things you'd want the next generation to do.
This is an excellent, fair and equitable solution for our highly subsidized, biotoxic agricultural system. It could be the only plausible way to overturn the chemical industry's monopoly over big agriculture, without fanfare legislation. It may take some time to become fully effective, but at the very least it would get the ball rolling towards realistic, sustainable agriculture system, and help bring health back into food.
Why pay taxes at all though? Why do we need these puffoons (sic) to decide for us? Why not fund those who are actually using permaculture principles and leave out the middle man?
I agree wholeheartedly as to why allow tax subsidies at all, and the concept of funding only those who practice pure permaculture. However, the economically embedded bureaucracy has given these entrenched chemical companies tax subsidies for way too long. And in fact, should have phased them out long before they became a monopoly. If this plan should ever get enacted, it would allow chemical companies an opportunity to phase out their use of synthetic chemicals and perhaps bring about a much needed mass scale conversion to permaculture.
I try to purchase regenerative farm products when I can. Consumers can make a big difference. Currently those products tend to be more expensive, but with demand, just like organic, the prices will come down. I've found many organic products are the same price as conventional now.
In the current paradigm I agree with you that tax breaks and incentives are what drives the economy. But why remain in the same paradigm? That means we only change the peripherals and never the core. To change the core we need to get onto a currency that teaches abundance rather than a false scarcity. False because nothing is scarce if we align with nature and take things at the appropriate rate of replenishment. So simple, yet we miss it all due to the belief that we need to "profit" and "own" such things as land and resources. The concept it totally retarded yet whole populations hold this belief very strongly. Since we are in this paradigm, we still can start moving to another one, like a paradigm of abundance. People think that we should use no money but that is pure folly and ignores the fact that billions of people (probably yourself included whoever reads this) are doing things that perpetuate the problem. A currency based on abundance, such as a "people's currency" or a local currency, could alleviate our suffering and make this paradigm obsolete. Are you interested in moving or staying put and working within this sh!thole?
Exceptional proposal. The 5-year tranche structure tackles something I saw firsthand during my time working with smaller operations: short-term risk versus longterm reward. Tying the tax benefit directly to soil health metrics is what makes this workable rather than ideological. It keeps the incentive honest and tied to outcomes, not just good intentions or paperwork.
An immediate answer is to stop poisoning our soil, air and water. Rotate crops. Destroy Monsanto’s control.
Thanks for sharing and totally support this. Key to health is food grown in a healthy and sustainable way. Also, need to encourage students to learn and innovate in the field of permaculture.
We need to teach them by demonstrating it to them by our own actions. We each need to reconsider what we do and start doing things you'd want the next generation to do.
This is an excellent, fair and equitable solution for our highly subsidized, biotoxic agricultural system. It could be the only plausible way to overturn the chemical industry's monopoly over big agriculture, without fanfare legislation. It may take some time to become fully effective, but at the very least it would get the ball rolling towards realistic, sustainable agriculture system, and help bring health back into food.
Why pay taxes at all though? Why do we need these puffoons (sic) to decide for us? Why not fund those who are actually using permaculture principles and leave out the middle man?
I agree wholeheartedly as to why allow tax subsidies at all, and the concept of funding only those who practice pure permaculture. However, the economically embedded bureaucracy has given these entrenched chemical companies tax subsidies for way too long. And in fact, should have phased them out long before they became a monopoly. If this plan should ever get enacted, it would allow chemical companies an opportunity to phase out their use of synthetic chemicals and perhaps bring about a much needed mass scale conversion to permaculture.
I try to purchase regenerative farm products when I can. Consumers can make a big difference. Currently those products tend to be more expensive, but with demand, just like organic, the prices will come down. I've found many organic products are the same price as conventional now.
Many "organic" suppliers/certifications are fraudulent, and compete (that is, decimate) genuine USA organic and no-pesticide farmers.
https://organiceye.org/the-anatomy-of-a-scandal-abject-failure-by-usda-to-protect-organics/
I'm aware, but thanks for the info. I contribute to OE.
It’s a realistic first step; obviously way overdue.
In the current paradigm I agree with you that tax breaks and incentives are what drives the economy. But why remain in the same paradigm? That means we only change the peripherals and never the core. To change the core we need to get onto a currency that teaches abundance rather than a false scarcity. False because nothing is scarce if we align with nature and take things at the appropriate rate of replenishment. So simple, yet we miss it all due to the belief that we need to "profit" and "own" such things as land and resources. The concept it totally retarded yet whole populations hold this belief very strongly. Since we are in this paradigm, we still can start moving to another one, like a paradigm of abundance. People think that we should use no money but that is pure folly and ignores the fact that billions of people (probably yourself included whoever reads this) are doing things that perpetuate the problem. A currency based on abundance, such as a "people's currency" or a local currency, could alleviate our suffering and make this paradigm obsolete. Are you interested in moving or staying put and working within this sh!thole?
Exceptional proposal. The 5-year tranche structure tackles something I saw firsthand during my time working with smaller operations: short-term risk versus longterm reward. Tying the tax benefit directly to soil health metrics is what makes this workable rather than ideological. It keeps the incentive honest and tied to outcomes, not just good intentions or paperwork.
Yes, Yes! Very grateful you have your intellect/attention on this! Shared Facebook and X
Our research team has done the math on sustainable carry capacity. We can only support 3B humans.