the debate on whether new or old media are more prone to infotainment, annoying. Whether it is old wine in new Schlächen or vice versa, what counts is whether the reporting is accurate. In the case of the article for Syngenta in the NZZ am Sonntag it definitely was not. It was not then very surprising that in the same issue also prominently placed 3 / 4 listing of Syngenta found. The height of cynicism was the claim that it was recently abandon a luxury on patented, genetically modified seeds. The GM companies want to force the peasants in Vietnam, apparently with a major media campaign on the use of its patented seeds ... with advertising, etc., the swarm of higher returns. despite the promises made by seed companies in the real world - than empty promises, or even proven to be fraudulent - from India to the United States. The farmers are often in the ruinous dependence of the seed and pesticide (euphemistically referred to as crop protection) companies been driven. The
Institutionlisierung of fraudulent business models and usury in the stock market is nothing new. Established companies that violate ethical principles and erosions of the rule of law, is not a sustainable basis for business success - or only with disclosure of the foundations of a civilized society at the expense of following generations.
Addendum: If the argument is "higher income" last? In the medium term rather than long term, or only with a massive use of expensive imported fertilizers and plant protection products, which propagated economically advantageous income statement gets badly shaken. Also gets the nutrient budget des Bodens durcheinander – die Böden werden ausgelaugt und die darauf erzeugten Lebensmittel werden nährstoffarm, ein Mangel der dann wiederum mit teueren Nahrungsmittelergänzungs-Produkten ausgeglichen werden kann... Abgesehen davon, dass die Pestizide für die Bauern und Landarbeiter höchst schädlich sind und Rückstände in Lebensmitteln Allergien auslösen und Krebs erzeugen. Für den Investor stellt sich die Frage: Soll man Aktien so einem Konzern zeichnen? Oder sind die Handlungen im Grunde strafrechtlich relevant, nur bestehen zur Zeit für global operierende "societés anonymes" rechtsstaatliche Lücken, wie es der Fall Percy Schmeiser vs. Monsanto gezeigt hat? Jedenfalls wäre darauf hinzweisen, that, for example Freshfieds Dehring and Partners stated in the order it uses just such concerns that the state
sometimes should the taxpayers be responsible for costs or damages to take just such business models ... Other cases are the case vs Hunchback. Syngenta (BT-corn). Media would be invited as a fourth instance of Aufklärnungs-duty and comply with the university system, in particular, the law should strive to close the legal gaps, rather than auszuhölen via international arbitration and gentlemen's agreements continue. PS. Design, sentence structure, spelling errors are continuously verbessert.
Anhang mit Quellen in Arbeit: Weiterführende Links sind vorläufig in vorhergehenden Artikeln zum Thema zu finden.
0 comments:
Post a Comment