Epilogue: Have it your Way
As stated before America’s growing fast food industry has proven to be detrimental toward ranches and farms slowing picking off more and more land for their industrial plants and marketplaces. Dale Lasater a conflicted rancher in Matheson, Colorado has spotted the disappearance these ambiances and truly sympathises for the auspicious ranchers who have gone bankrupt due to the domineering being asserted from larger corporations. Small ranches and farms have literally no power to stop the altercation and are often helpless, this inspired Dale to lay down the foundation for anti-GMO grain based business called Lasater Grasslands Beef and strictly sells only organic cattle to save consumers from an unhealthy diet. Lasater
…show more content…
Conway’s Red Top, his establishment was based on the strong morals of serving customers the right way by feeding them completely organic and health food. In the 1970s, Red Top was powerhouses ran by Rich’s father and was able to hold it’s own against the nearby fast approaching chains. When his father died in the 1980s the business almost had to go to the extreme of shutting down, luckily local suppliers were there to help sustain the business until financial planning could be conducted. The family owned business later improved and became an enterprises gaining three more locations. The difficult part for him and his brothers and sisters to decided in expanding, sure the economical opportunity was great for them, but he feared he would have to sacrifice his ethics to make a profit. Mayor Mary Lou Makepeace has helped Colorado Springs’ fight for land successfully pushing for a bill that would hinder industrial expansion on to ranch and farm land. She has also played a momentum role in urban renovation, turning over 2.5 million square feet of abandoned area into urbanized neighborhood. The initiative was brought into conception when Mayor Makepeace plagued with the idea of reduces car usage, a common leader in pollution, with more access to commercial and residential outlets in the neighborhood walking or biking is a much fiscally responsible …show more content…
In-N-Out starting pays are $10.50 regardless of California’s minimum wage of $9 an hour. Most restaurants in California grumble at having to give their employees $9 a hour, California’ minimum wage ($1.75 more than federal minimum wage) while In-N-Out goes over the top by adding $1.50 more than the state’s minimum wage. Using the average amount of hours the typical American works this adds up to giving each employ seventy dollars more than California’s minimum wage would a week. Workers if are eligible receive complementary medical, dental, and vision insurance. To put a nice red bow on top of the amazing benefits that can be attained by working at establishment workers receive a free meal on work days, fifteen percent discount at company restaurants, assistance in a 401k retirement plan, company sponsored events and two paid vacation weeks after one year of service. They even have their own nonprofit organization, called “The In-N-Out Child Abuse Foundation” which has raised over seventeen million dollars in the past twelve years. Even with all these employee benefits and contributions to society In-N-Out still made an estimated six hundred twenty-five million dollars in 2012! All of these facts and statistics should surely prove to you that you don’t have to be a greedy corporation to be prosperous
Those opposed to GMO labeling have won once again. In “California Rejects Labeling Of Genetically Modified Food; Supporters Vow To Fight On”, Amy Standen points out the advantages that biotechnology companies have over local, small farms. Standen highlights the individual support, effort, and money put into labeling GMO’s. “Yes to 37” was a step away from success, until the opposing side stepped in and won the labeling battle. Through the use of direct quotes, as well as reference to companies like Monsanto, it becomes clear that biotechnology has succeeded once again. Standen uses these rhetorical strategies to evoke both an emotional, and ethical appeal within the reader throughout this article.
Agricultural production in the United States has reached phenomenal highs in recent decades, far surpassing the small local farms one would have found a century ago. Large food corporations have become dominant in our culture and especially in the food we eat, but the question of how it may be harming us without our knowledge has become a prevalent issue in our day. The documentary Food, Inc. was produced by Filmmaker Robert Kenner, along with Elise Pearlstein and was released in 2008. During the time up to this event, activists were moving against the big food corporations accusing them of inhumane practice and disease while supporting the return of organic and non-GMO crops. This film addresses this issue and provides discussions and interviews
Today’s food companies are so large that they control every aspect of the food industry. Company’s control what grows in crops, what certain crops to grow, how the crops are utilized. The documentary “Food Inc.” produced by Robert Kennar and Eric Schlosser, takes a look at America’s food industry and how our food is produced. Most consumers are not going to investigate what actually goes into the products. The documentary “Food Inc.” explains to the viewers why the companies’ way of farming is wrong. The film is biased against industrial farming. Big question everyone asks, “Where does our food we consume everyday come from?”
Which is a better buy, chicken nuggets from a nearby fast-food joint or a tender, juicy steak from the supermarket meat section? Many would resoundingly agree, the steak would be in much better taste. However, in filmmaker Robert Kenner’s documentary Food Inc, corporations who sell these steaks (among other foods) are thoroughly examined; brought to the forefront of discussion are challenges of their practices in ethics, cleanliness, and employee treatment. It is revealed that low-runged employee farmers are manipulated and otherwise forced to conform to a brigade of unforgiving corporate standards, burdensome both financially and emotionally, as they work to produce glossy, high-end products, struggling to earn just a fraction of retail prices. Silenced by threats from their employer and fearful of losing their livelihoods, farmers have little choice other than to to abide; deprioritized are such necessities like cleanliness and ethics. Through the use of irony and a condescending tone, filmmaker Robert Kenner argues that industrialized farming corporations produce not only products
The fast-food workers are expressed as a pond in a bigger game. They have to deal with their low pay in order to ensure low prices by these franchises. Jencunas concerns go on to represent the beginning of a bigger chain effect. Briefly, he states that, “The average fast food store would go from profitable to unprofitable overnight. Some would close immediately, leaving their workers worse off than they were when working for $7.50 an hour, while others would raise prices and try and remain in business, hurting consumers” (“Don't Deserve Any More, or Less”). Evaluating his reasoning we see that if fast-food workers ask for a higher minimum wage, they will in return influence the profit margin and actually increase unemployment rate in this industry. The researchers go on to inform us that if their minimum wage increases the industry won’t be able to afford the change in their profit margin and result in bankruptcy. However, Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union, which supports the fast-food strike states a different claim:
Watching Food Inc. movie was a deception and a horrifying experience on what is happening in the food industry in the U.S. After spending time on some of resources like The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on food safety, The National Food Processors’ Association that are in place to protect farmer’s industry and food consumers, to find out these agencies like are not protecting farmers nor are protecting food consumers in the U.S; and to learn about big corporations like Tyson Foods, Monsanto that are controlling food industry are putting profit ahead of consumer health, the lives of American farmer, the safety of workers and our own environment. The examples failures of U.S. laws including granting patent right of seed to Monsanto,
Examine and analyze the role and impact of strategic thinking for the competitive options of a business of your choice. Business Used in a case study: Red Bull
Genetically Modified Organisms, or GMO’s, are organisms that have had genes from a different organism implanted into their own genetic code in order to produce a new result (“Genetically engineered foods”). This practice has elicited polar responses across the globe, for a multitude of reasons. Besides the obvious reason, being the morality of changing an organism's DNA for human benefit, one frequently noted problem is the monopolization of GMO’s by the company Monsanto, whose name is nearly synonymous with GMO’s due to their involvement with these crops. Monsanto has been at the center of many controversies regarding GMO’s, and is even considered to be ranked third to last for reputation among all major American companies (Bennett). Most
In recent years farmers have faced increasing odds against their crops – bugs building an increasing resistance to pesticides, too little rainfall, skyrocketing gas prices, and an increasing demand from the public for pure and wholesome products straight from nature. In addition to these difficulties, customers still demand that prices remain low, that goods are visually appealing and that as few chemicals as possible are used. The real questions posed is – is that even a viable possibility? Though many people are uninformed about genetically modified organisms, and hence often dislike them, their benefits cannot be ignored and due to the regulations and testing by the EPA and FDA, GMOs are considered safe for consumption. GMO use should
Are you really aware of how your food is produced and what it consists of? Food production and consumption has significantly changed more in the last 50 years than in the previous 10,000 years combined. James Brewer’s article, “Food, Inc.”, focuses on the main idea that food production in the United States does not depict what’s on the packaging, but rather consists of large manufacturing companies that operate factories with harsh conditions. The article also talks about the foods that are genetically modified and their impact on the food industry. I completely agree with what Food, Inc. is discussing; our food industry is not how it used to be, the treatment and the way the animals are raised is unacceptable, and engineered foods, or genetically modified foods, are taking over the industry. Not many people are aware of what goes on in the food industry and that is what is allowing companies operate with these outrageous conditions.
A study drove by Doug Gurian-Sherman who is a lead researcher in UCS Sustenance and Environment System, demonstrates that hereditarily built corn assortments have just expanded harvest yields possibly while designed soybean assortments have not expanded yields by any means. The UCS properties the generous increment in harvest yields over the previous decade to a great extent to customary reproducing and changes in rural aptitudes. Indeed the study ventures to suggest that the U.S. Bureau of Horticulture expel subsidizing from GMO contemplates and divert it to other, more useful uses and projects. This disputable point has numerous contentions some of which I was not able say yet I have still to some degree possessed the capacity to detail my own sentiment with respect to the theme. On the premise of Hereditary building we can reason that it is still in its earliest stages and shockingly little is thought about its results in both short and more terms on people, while even less is known with respect to its impacts on the
As general concerns rise over the way our food is produced, public impressions are tainted by the actions of special interest groups (Lichte & Birkenholz, 1993). As a result, many Americans elect and influence lawmakers to directly intervene in the practices used in producing our food and fiber (Hamlin,1962). Because this nation is two full generations removed from living and working on farms, lawmakers cannot be expected to make informed decisions regarding the safe and appropriate production of our food supply (Flood &
Although GMO products have faced many backlashes by concerned consumers, the amount of benefits GMO products offer to both Farmers and consumers is
Over the years agricultural industries, especially the food industry, have developed negative reputations, all due to made up myths that people have chosen to believe in. Some of those myths include: farmers are trying to hide the way they run their businesses, the food system is controlled by select large corporations more worried about money than consumer satisfaction, and crops that are not affected by herbicides are bad because they remain normal when treated. Many of these allegations come from people who are poorly educated of how the food industry works. Let’s see if we can clear up a few things and get our facts straight.
Local farming plays a large role in the lives of everyone in small, rural communities. But the local farm scene is being taken over by large, factory farming industries. These industries not only do everything they can to control the agriculture sector and wipe out small farms, but also keep mass amounts of animals in small unsanitary spaces. The American consumers foods are being polluted with chemicals, and small farms are struggling to hold on. These industries are sucking the life out of small farming communities, not only effecting the farmers, but effecting everybody in the community as well. This study shows the harsh truth about factory farms and how they are ruining rural communities. But also on a brighter side explains how supporting local farmers benefits the consumer as well as the local economy, and explains the many ways to support small-scale, local farms.