Three companies will own U.S. meat market

If JBS gobbles up Smithfield, three companies will own U.S. meat market | Grist: "High on the hog

A typical supermarket's meat counter displays a landscape of easy bounty: shrink-wrapped chops, cutlets, steaks, roasts, loins, burger meat, and more, almost all of it priced to move.

But the dizzying variety cloaks a disturbing uniformity. As the chart below shows, the great bulk of the meat consumed in the United States comes from just four large, powerful companies. These companies wield tremendous power to dictate not just what meat is available, but how that meat is raised.

For these "meat titans," turning a profit selling cheap meat means slashing the cost of doing business. And that in turn means paying their farmer-suppliers as little as possible for live animals, and paying workers as little as possible to slaughter and process them.

Since the meat market began its dramatic arc of consolidation three decades ago, farmers have had to choose between scaling up, to make up on volume what they were losing on price, or exit the business altogether. As a result, millions of small, diversified farms have closed down their animal-raising operations over the past 30 years, and surviving farms have mostly scaled up, specialized in one species, and placed that species by the thousands in vast confinements known as concentrated animal feedlot operations, or CAFOs. These fragrant, teeming spaces are notorious sources of pollution and social decay in rural areas.

Three of the companies that now dominate the U.S. meat market -- Tyson, Smithfield, and Cargill -- will be familiar to most readers; the fourth isn't exactly a household name. Over the last two years, a Brazilian beef-packing conglomerate called JBS has come barreling into the U.S. meat market, taking advantage of a weak dollar and economic troubles among top domestic players.

First, it bought up two prominent beef players, grabbing a nearly quarter of the U.S. beef market. Only Tyson, with 28 percent, has a larger share; the agribusiness giant Cargill is tied with JBS for second place, with 24 percent of the market. Then JBS swooped in and bought two-thirds of chicken giant Pilgrim's Pilgrim's pride, giving it 18 percent of the U.S. poultry market, second only to Tyson's 22 percent. In the course of its dealmaking, JBS also acquired some pork interests, taking 12 percent of that market -- putting it in third place behind Tyson (19 percent) and hog king Smithfield (26 percent).

After all of those U.S. deals -- and its recent takeover of its former Brazilian beef rival, Bertin -- JBS is now the largest industrial-meat purveyor on the planet, bigger in terms of global meat sales than even Tyson and Cargill.

Nanotechnology: Transforming Food and the Environment - Spring 2010 | Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy

Nanotechnology: Transforming Food and the Environment - Spring 2010 | Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy:

Nano Food in the Grocery Store
A wide variety of nano-based products and processes are already on our plates, largely driven by the corporate sector, including Kraft Foods, H.J. Heinz, Nestle, Unilever, Cargill, Pepsi-Cola, Syngenta and Monsanto (Friends of the Earth, 2008). The Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars estimates at least 84 food-related items containing nano products are in the market, while investigations by Friends of the Earth report 104 food items and an additional 400-500 nano packaging products (Friends of the Earth, 2008). So what are the agri-food corporations up to at the nano scale?

Nano Farming
The agri-chemical and information technology industries have shifted down to the nano-scale to produce new agricultural chemicals, seeds, and livestock with novel functions and capabilities, as well as new systems of farm monitoring and management (Kuzma and VerHage, 2006; Friends of the Earth, 2008). Syngenta, BASF, Bayer Crop Science, Cargill and Monsanto are all undertaking research and commercialization in these areas. Syngenta, for example, has harnessed the properties of nano-scale materials to produce nano pesticides including “gutbuster” microcapsules that contain pesticides engineered to break open in the alkaline conditions of an insect’s stomach. They argue this will enable the more targeted delivery of pesticides (Syngenta, 2007). The convergence of nanotechnologies with biotechnology, also provides industry with new tools to modify genes and even produce new organisms. For example, nanobiotechnologies enable nanoparticles, nanofibres and nanocapsules to carry foreign DNA and chemicals that modify genes (ETC Group, 2004; Torney et al., 2007). In addition to the re-engineering of existing plants, novel plant varieties may be developed using synthetic biology; a new branch of technoscience that draws on the techniques of genetic engineering, nanotechnology and informatics. In a recent breakthrough in this area, researchers completely replaced the genetic material of one bacteria with that from another—transforming it from one species to another (ETC Group, 2007). These technologies clearly up the ante, increasing both the opportunities and risks offered by each of these technologies in isolation.

Nano Food
Nanotechnologies are being used to manufacture entirely new foods. These include ‘smart’ foods—nutritional profiles that respond to an individual’s allergies, dietary needs or food preferences. While such
designer food sounds like the stuff of fantasy, nanotechnologies make them scientifically possible. Nanotechnology is also being used to alter the properties and traits of food; including its nutrition, flavor, texture, heat tolerance and shelf life. For example, Unilever has reported breakthroughs in the manufacture of lowfat and low-calorie food that retains its rich and creamy taste and texture, applying this to a range of very low-fat ice-creams, mayonnaise and spreads (Daniells, 2008). Meanwhile, food companies are using microcapsules to deliver food components such as omega 3-rich fish oil. The release of fish oil into the human stomach is intended to deliver claimed health benefits of the fish oil, while masking its fishy taste (Friends of the Earth, 2008).

Nano Food Packaging
Nano food packaging is the most commercialized of the agri-food nanotechnologies. Nano packaging materials include barrier technologies, which enhance the shelf life, durability and freshness of food—or at least slow the rotting process. DuPont produces a nano titanium dioxide plastic additive that reduces UV exposure that they claim will minimize damage to food contained in transparent packaging (ElAmin, 2008).

Nano packaging is also being designed to enable materials to interact with the food it contacts; emitting antimicrobials, antioxidants, nutraceuticals and other inputs. This ‘smart’ or ‘active’ packaging, as manufacturers brand it, is being developed to respond to specific trigger events. For example, packaging may contain nanosensors that are engineered to change color if a food is beginning to spoil, or if it has been contaminated by pathogens. This technology is already being used in the U.S. with carbon nanotubes incorporated into packaging materials to detect microorganisms, toxic proteins and food spoilage (ElAmin, 2008).

How the Pentagon Turns Working-Class Men into the Deadliest Killers on the Planet | | AlterNet

How the Pentagon Turns Working-Class Men into the Deadliest Killers on the Planet | | AlterNet:
An excerpt from antiwar activist Swanson's new book, War Is a Lie.
December 10, 2010

Since the Vietnam War, the United States has dropped all pretense of a military draft equally applied to all. Instead we spend billions of dollars on recruitment, increase military pay, and offer signing bonuses until enough people "voluntarily" join by signing contracts that allow the military to change the terms at will. If more troops are needed, just extend the contracts of the ones you've got. Need more still? Federalize the National Guard and send kids off to war who signed up thinking they'd be helping hurricane victims. Still not enough? Hire contractors for transportation, cooking, cleaning, and construction. Let the soldiers be pure soldiers whose only job is to kill, just like the knights of old. Boom, you've instantly doubled the size of your force, and nobody's noticed except the profiteers.

Still need more killers? Hire mercenaries. Hire foreign mercenaries. Not enough? Spend trillions of dollars on technology to maximize the power of each person. Use unmanned aircraft so nobody gets hurt. Promise immigrants they'll be citizens if they join. Change the standards for enlistment: take 'em older, fatter, in worse health, with less education, with criminal records. Make high schools give recruiters aptitude test results and students' contact information, and promise students they can pursue their chosen field within the wonderful world of death, and that you'll send them to college if they live ? hey, just promising it costs you nothing. If they're resistant, you started too late. Put military video games in shopping malls. Send uniformed generals into kindergartens to warm the children up to the idea of truly and properly swearing allegiance to that flag. Spend 10 times the money on recruiting each new soldier as we spend educating each child. Do anything, anything, anything other than starting a draft.

But there's a name for this practice of avoiding a traditional draft. It's called a poverty draft. Because people tend not to want to participate in wars, those who have other career options tend to choose those other options. Those who see the military as one of their only choices, their only shot at a college education, or their only way to escape their troubled lives are more likely to enlist. According to the Not Your Soldier Project:

"The majority of military recruits come from below-median income neighborhoods.

"In 2004, 71 percent of black recruits, 65 percent of Latino recruits, and 58 percent of white recruits came from below-median income neighborhoods. "The percentage of recruits who were regular high school graduates dropped from 86 percent in 2004 to 73 percent in 2006. "[The recruiters] never mention that the college money is difficult to come by - only 16 percent of enlisted personnel who completed four years of military duty ever received money for schooling. They don't say that the job skills they promise won't transfer into the real world. Only 12 percent of male veterans and 6 percent of female veterans use skills learned in the military in their current jobs. And of course, they downplay the risk of being killed while on duty."

How the Oligarchs Took Over America | Economy | AlterNet

How the Oligarchs Took Over America | Economy | AlterNet: "you can't understand how the rich seized control of American politics, and arguably American society, without understanding how a small group of Americans got so much money in the first place.

There's no mistaking how, in less than a year, Citizens United has radically tilted the political playing field. Along with several other major court rulings, it ushered in American Crossroads, American Action Network, and many similar groups that now can reel in unlimited donations with pathetically few requirements to disclose their funders.

What the present Supreme Court, itself the fruit of successive tax-cutting and deregulating administrations, has ensured is this: that in an American “democracy,” only the public will remain in the dark. Even for dedicated reporters, tracking down these groups is like chasing shadows: official addresses lead to P.O. boxes; phone calls go unreturned; doors are shut in your face.

The limited glimpse we have of the people bankrolling these shadowy outfits is a who's-who of the New Oligarchy: the billionaire Koch Brothers ($21.5 billion); financier George Soros ($11 billion); hedge-fund CEO Paul Singer (his fund, Elliott Management, is worth $17 billion); investor Harold Simmons (net worth: $4.5 billion); New York venture capitalist Kenneth Langone ($1.1 billion); and real estate tycoon Bob Perry ($600 million).

Then there's the roster of corporations who have used their largesse to influence American politics. Health insurance companies, including UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, gave a whopping $86.2 million to the U.S. Chamber to kill the public option, funneling the money through the industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans. And corporate titans like Goldman Sachs, Prudential Financial, and Dow Chemical have given millions more to the Chamber to lobby against new financial and chemical regulations.

As a result, the central story of the 2010 midterm elections isn’t Republican victory or Democratic defeat or Tea Party anger; it’s this blitzkrieg of outside spending, most of which came from right-leaning groups like Rove's American Crossroads and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. It's a grim illustration of what happens when so much money ends up in the hands of so few. And with campaign finance reforms soundly defeated for years to come, the spending wars will only get worse.

Indeed, pundits predict that spending in the 2012 elections will smash all records. Think of it this way: in 2008, total election spending reached $5.3 billion, while the $1.8 billion spent on the presidential race alone more than doubled 2004's total. How high could we go in 2012? $7 billion? $10 billion? It looks like the sky’s the limit.

The 9 Weirdest Things About the WikiLeaks Story | | AlterNet

The 9 Weirdest Things About the WikiLeaks Story |AlterNet:

The 9 Weirdest Things About the WikiLeaks Story

Here are the 9 craziest facets of the international uproar surrounding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange.

December 6, 2010 |

Photo Credit: AFP

The release of the US embassy cables has thus far been one of the most... interesting moments in recent US (and World) history, impacting global politics in a way that is unprecedented. Nestled amid the outrage and debate are some truly weird aspects that make the brouhaha seem like a lost installment in the Jason Bourne chronicles (or Catch Me If You Can). More important than the drama and gossip, WikiLeaks is a tentpost in the information age, a milestone potentially heralding a new era of internet transparency. As world governments balk at the exposure of their secrets -- and scramble to suppress the information -- Assange and his crew are expressing their right to free speech and facilitating the public's fundamental right to know exactly what their leaders are up to, particularly when it entails wars, torture, and secret military action. Here are the 8 craziest facets of the international uproar surrounding WikiLeaks and Julian Assange.

1. Hackers on the Offensive

A group of hackers have pledged to wage war against companies that have "censored" WikiLeaks. Yesterday morning Operation Payback targeted PayPal in a DDoS attack (the company no longer lets people donate to WikiLeaks through its service). Later in the day they launched a successful attack on PostFinance, the bank that froze the assets of the Julian Assange Defense Fund. As of last night, the PostFinance site was still down.

2. Julian Assange Has Not Broken Any Laws ... Yet Our Government and Others Treat Him Like He Has

A Canadian advisor called for Assange's assassination, Joe Lieberman pressured Amazon to hypocritically tear down the cables, and officials and media repeat accusations that he is a terrorist despite the fact that the Wikileaks' actions have resulted in no physical harm to anyone -- unlike, say, certain governments. But amid all this, it is important to note that neither Julian Assange nor WikiLeaks have broken any laws, whether American or Australian, in releasing the leaked documents. And yet some lawmakers are so hysterical, such as GOP Senate Minority Leader Mitch O'Connell, they are suggesting the US invent new laws, solely for the purpose of bringing Assange to trial. Meanwhile, the government continues to intimidate companies who host the cables, with no actual legal ground whatsoever. As Glenn Greenwald points out:

People often have a hard time believing that the terms "authoritarian" and "tyranny" apply to their own government, but that's because those who meekly stay in line and remain unthreatening are never targeted by such forces. The face of authoritarianism and tyranny reveals itself with how it responds to those who meaningfully dissent from and effectively challenge its authority: do they act within the law or solely through the use of unconstrained force?

The Swiss government has also frozen his legal defense fund, so even if someone does invent a way to nab him legally, his right to a fair trial is compromised.

3. Julian Assange Preps “Poison Pill” in Case He’s Killed or Arrested
As established, Wikileaks leader Assange is not wrong in assuming at some point he may be arrested (Interpol’s on the hunt) or killed (world leaders want his head). Or that WikiLeaks will be shut down. And so, like anyone who knows he's a walking target, he has put out a little bit of insurance on himself and WikiLeaks. Today he announced that, should anyone attempt to harm (or incarcerate) a hair on his head, he’ll pull the trigger on a “poison pill” that would allegedly expose even more explosive information, including some documents about BP, Bank of America and Guantanamo Bay. According to the Daily Mail, an encrypted file sent out to various fellow hackers contains the information, and can be disseminated all across the internet if he decides to give them the key -- an uncrackable password consisting of 256 digits. Mark Stephens, Assange’s lawyer in Britain, has said the information is tantamount to a “thermonuclear device,” consisting of “doomsday files.” Another lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, claims she’s been receiving intimidating letters from Washington.

Ms Robinson references a letter from a state department legal adviser addressed to both herself and Mr Assange - appearing to suggest that Wikileaks and its lawyers were one and the same.

She said: 'By eliding client and lawyer, that was a very inappropriate attempt to implicate me. That is really inappropriate to come from the state department of all places; they understand very well the rules on attorney-client protocol.'

Meanwhile, the lawyers have claimed they’re being watched by strange men in dark cars parked outside their homes. Reading newspapers. Probably about their client.

4. But You Can’t Really Arrest Julian Assange
A great novelist once wrote, “Sometimes a man retreats so far inward he mistakes isolation for dominion.” In this case, though, Assange’s essential MIA-ness (he’s supposedly in England) is pretty close to dominion. He is acting like a man without a country, and this is his armor against the world. As AOL notes, “The international nature of his organization makes questions of jurisdiction nearly impossible to answer.” And because he is not a US citizen, he can’t be tried for treason, a technicality apparently lost on some leaders and journalists. While the US could technically arrest him for spying, the best bet for those searching for his hide is if Sweden could extradite him for charges related to alleged rape. That is, if Sweden managed to get it together... their first attempt at extradition was foiled by bungled paperwork -- extradition papers filed with Great Britain did not state the maximum sentence for his charges, a small but important requirement for extradition. Meanwhile, Assange’s native Australia has upped the ante, promising him consular help if he’s arrested by a foreign government, even while condemning the leaks -- meaning he might be able to, simply, return home Down Under.

5. Columbia Students Warned Against Linking to Wikileaks ... then Columbia Decides Linking to Wikileaks is OK
Last week, Columbia University’s School of International and Political Affairs told its students not to link to or Tweet anything having to do with WikiLeaks, warning their curiosity could endanger their chances of ever being employed by the government. The school’s employment office sent out an email to the students, many aspiring diplomats, saying an alumni from the State Department gave them a heads up about seeking Wiki info, noting that even posting comments about the leaks "would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information." The directive scared a lot of grad students for quite a few days. That is, until yesterday, when SIPA Dean John H. Coatsworth decided to err on the side of free speech, clarifying the Columbia email that was initially seen as a scare tactic. In a subsequent email to students, Coatsworth wrote:

“Freedom of information and expression is a core value of our institution. Thus, SIPA’s position is that students have a right to discuss and debate any information in the public arena that they deem relevant to their studies or to their roles as global citizens, and to do so without fear of adverse consequences.”

Furthermore, another SIPA Professor told Wired.com that students would be remiss if they didn’t seek out the Wikileaks cables. “If anyone is a master’s student in international relations and they haven’t heard of WikiLeaks and gone looking for the documents that relate to their area of study,“ said Middle East expert Gary Sick, “then they don’t deserve to be a graduate student in international relations.” The First Amendment prevails. Also... touche.

6. “Sex by Surprise?"
The charges against Assange in Sweden have now been characterized as “sex by surprise” -- and no one seems to know exactly what that even means.

Assange's London attorney, Mark Stephens, told AOL News today that Swedish prosecutors told him that Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715. "Whatever 'sex by surprise' is, it's only a offense in Sweden -- not in the U.K. or the U.S. or even Ibiza," Stephens said. "I feel as if I'm in a surreal Swedish movie being threatened by bizarre trolls. The prosecutor has not asked to see Julian, never asked to interview him, and he hasn't been charged with anything. He's been told he's wanted for questioning, but he doesn't know the nature of the allegations against him."

The charges have something to do with condoms, and their lack of use, or breakage, although it’s largely unclear exactly what. The women accusing Assange have stood behind their accounts, but he believes the Swedish government's seemingly wishy-washy actions are part of a larger conspiracy to nab him for WikiLeaks. The New York Times:

According to accounts the women gave to the police and friends, they each had consensual sexual encounters with Mr. Assange that became nonconsensual. One woman said that Mr. Assange had ignored her appeals to stop after a condom broke. The other woman said that she and Mr. Assange had begun a sexual encounter using a condom, but that Mr. Assange did not comply with her appeals to stop when it was no longer in use. Mr. Assange has denied any wrongdoing and has questioned the veracity of those accounts.

Yesterday, new warrants were issued for Assange and he is presently making arrangements to meet with Scotland Yard. The premise for the warrants has not been revealed.

7. Future Cables Reference UFOs!
So maybe this is more like the X-Files. In a rare interview with the Guardian last week, in which Assange answered reader-submitted questions, he confirmed that not-yet-published documents reference unidentified flying objects. And lest you think he is jumping any sort of shark, it should be known that his information was vetted with journalistic rigor, just like every other piece of info he’s published. The full question and answer:

Mr Assange,
Have there ever been documents forwarded to you which deal with the topic of UFOs or extraterrestrials?

Assange: Many weirdos email us about UFOs or how they discovered that they were the anti-christ whilst talking with their ex-wife at a garden party over a pot-plant. However, as yet they have not satisfied two of our publishing rules.
1) that the documents not be self-authored;
2) that they be original.
However, it is worth noting that in yet-to-be-published parts of the cablegate archive there are indeed references to UFOs.

Of course, it’s not exactly proof of the existence of aliens (or even alien-like bacteria here on earth), but it is a fascinating bit that not only intrigues, but illustrates the breadth of information Assange is sitting on.

8. Feds Go Nuts to Prevent Soldiers from Seeing Wikleaks
Soldiers in Iraq attempting to read the leaked cables -- or even read articles about them -- get a redirect notice on their government network saying they’re on the verge of breaking the law. The redirect has affected virtually every major news website, clearly, since not one has refrained from covering Wikileaks (despite their mass condemnation of the stuff). But as Gawker points out, “Many of those soldiers receiving the warnings have security clearances that would have granted them access to the State Department cables before they were leaked.” One presumes the same goes for some of the government employees, who were issued a similar warning about reading the documents.

9. Iran Accuses US of Leaking Wikileaks
An ironic conspiracy theory when one considers the outrage Cablegate has sparked among everyone from Hillary Clinton to Mike Huckabee, although our Secretary of State exercised quite a bit more restraint than the gun-happy Huckabee. But considering what the leaks revealed -- that countries all across the Middle East have urged the US to strike against Iran -- it’s an understandable conclusion. The leaks prompted an Israeli paper to express triumphant joy in feeling solidarity for its extreme stance on Iran -- an op-ed was titled The World Thinks Like Us–and Ahmadinejad stated his view on the matter explicitly, asserting the American government made the cables ”organized to be released on a regular basis and they are pursuing political goals.” Meanwhile, cables that stated Iranian dissidents had some involvement with the Israeli Mossad would not only strengthen current powers but undermine the dissident movement itself -- endangering the lives of Iranians critical of Ahmadinejad’s policies. The Daily Beast:

“New and harmful” was how Freilich described the WikilLeaks revelation that Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, consulted with Washington about working with Iran's students and ethnic minorities to topple Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime in Iran.

Julianne Escobedo Shepherd is an associate editor at AlterNet and a Brooklyn-based freelance writer and editor. Formerly the executive editor of The FADER, her work has appeared in VIBE, SPIN, New York Times and various other magazines and websites.

three planets will go direct

three planets will go direct
- SCORPIO -
DEATH AND REBIRTH:
"Venus and Jupiter Turn Direct - November 18

An intensification of energy happens when a planet turns retrograde or direct. Like a focalized beam, the energy associated with the planet and the zodiac archetype penetrates into our collective and individual consciousness. Soon three planets will go direct, during which time their energies will act as spot lights to beam truth into our consciousness.

Both Venus (was in Scorpio, now at 28 degrees Libra) and Jupiter (in Pisces) go direct November 18. Mark November 17-19 on your calendar and be aware of what you feel. Do you feel clearer, more ready to move forward, more honest about what you really want, more connected to your heart? Do you feel more optimistic, more hopeful, less afraid, more courageous? Something has shifted inside you. What is it? This is part of your rebirth and recalibration process. Stay tuned to yourself. Another awakening is scheduled when Uranus in Pisces goes direct December 5.

Mercury Retrograde - December 10-30

Matt Taibbi: Courts Helping Banks Screw Over Homeowners | Rolling Stone Politics

Matt Taibbi: Courts Helping Banks Screw Over Homeowners | Rolling Stone Politics: "The rocket docket wasn't created to investigate any of that. It exists to launder the crime and bury the evidence by speeding thousands of fraudulent and predatory loans to the ends of their life cycles, so that the houses attached to them can be sold again with clean paperwork. The judges, in fact, openly admit that their primary mission is not justice but speed. One Jacksonville judge, the Honorable A.C. Soud, even told a local newspaper that his goal is to resolve 25 cases per hour. Given the way the system is rigged, that means His Honor could well be throwing one ass on the street every 2.4 minutes.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

THIS shows a culture that is slowly giving in to a futuristic nightmare ideology of computerized greed and unchecked financial violence. The monster in the foreclosure crisis has no face and no brain. The mortgages that are being foreclosed upon have no real owners. The lawyers bringing the cases to evict the humans have no real clients. It is complete and absolute legal and economic chaos. No single limb of this vast man-eating thing knows what the other is doing, which makes it nearly impossible to combat — and scary as hell to watch.