Lessons from John Edwards Case: Why Prosecutors in Rawesome and MN Food Rights Cases Are Desperate to Avoid Juries
The pathetic case of the former senator and vice presidential candidate, John Edwards, is one most of us would just as soon forget about, preferring to file it away as just another sad episode in our political system's steady descent into tawdriness and corruption. That would be a mistake.
The John Edwards case--more particularly, the way it played out legally with a hung jury on most charges and acquittal on one-- actually teaches us at least two important, and related, lessons of immediate relevance in the food rights movement:
1. A jury can distinguish between poor judgment and legal malfeasance. His trial brought out vividly that John Edwards conducted himself shamefully on any number of counts. The fact that he cheated on his dying wife and solicited funds from campaign supporters to cover up his actions are just two examples of his shameful behavior. It might be said that his indefensible personal behavior made him vulnerable politically, and prosecutors jumped at the chance to use him as an example of their supposed willingness to crack down on campaign fundraising fraud.
The prosecution alleged that Edwards illegally used campaign contributions to cover up his bad behavior. The jury didn't buy into it. It acquitted him on one count and, according to media reports, was inclined toward acquittal on the other five counts as well
Now, cut to the case of Sharon Palmer, the supposed bad girl of Rawesome Food Club shame. She's the owner of Healthy Family Farms who has been excoriated in the foodie community for supposedly using outsourced food to supply customers at Rawesome Food Club and at farmers markets. One of Rawesome's founders, Aajonus Vonderplanitz, has accused her of not just using outsourced food, but of using food tainted with high levels of arsenic, mercury, and sodium, and he even put up a web site containing his allegations, called Unhealthy Family Farm.
I have written about the outsourcing allegations, including an interview with Palmer in which she admitted she had provided outsourced eggs to Rawesome Food Club for six months back in 2008, as a result of a sudden huge loss of laying chickens to wild animals. The offices of the Ventura County District Attorney and the Los Angeles County District Attorney both investigated the charges, including Vonderplanitz's allegations that the food was tainted, and didn't consider any of it worthy of criminal charges. There have been plenty of other criminal charges against Palmer--for illegally distributing raw milk, for violation of sanitation rules around egg storage at her farm, and for fraud in connection with raising money from investors to help arrange financing for the farm. It's all enough that she could be looking at more than thirty years in jail.
Now, Mike Adams of Natural Health News has come out with an impressive analysis of the testing procedures supposedly overseen by Vonderplanitz and posted on the Unhealthy Family Farm web site, and concluded it is all seriously deficient on any number of counts. "Scientifically speaking, the single-shot lab test of a ‘mystery chicken,’ whose origin and brand name is not identified on the Doctor's Data lab test, and which was apparently acquired and sent to the lab by a regular consumer who has no ‘chain of custody’ records, renders the entire laboratory test scientifically and logically invalid. The test could have very well been conducted on frozen chicken purchased at Ralph's.”
The fact that Sharon Palmer, like John Edwards, was guilty of poor judgment doesn’t make her guilty of assorted other crimes, much as many in the foodie community would like to think. Moreover, a jury of one’s peers, untainted by the corrupting influence of biased prosecutors and judges, is the best option we have of potentially making the important distinction between what is unethical or immoral and what is illegal.
2. All of which brings me to a second key lesson from the Edwards case: Accused farmers and food club operators are more likely to find salvation from a jury of their peers than from anywhere else within the legal and political system. According to various media reports, Edwards was offered a plea deal, under which he would have pleaded guilty to possibly a single count of misusing campaign contributions, and received a short jail sentence and fine. Very tempting if you are looking at many years in jail upon conviction by a jury.
But Edwards was adamant in refusing the plea deal. He wanted to get in front of a jury, because as an experienced trial lawyer, he knew that a jury would most likely understand the flimsiness of the prosecution’s case. And even though the judge in the case favored the prosecution in nearly all the technical issues that came up during the trial, the jury did indeed wind up supporting Edwards. (Though it was a hung jury on five of six counts, and it is uncertain whether the prosecution will re-try Edwards, a retrial seems unlikely given the failure of the jurors to convict on even a single count.)
It’s the same knowledge about the ability of jurors to relate to the facts of the case that has enabled personal injury lawyers like Bill Marler to reap huge rewards in the food safety arena. He threatens food producers that he will put the serious cases of injury from food-borne illness in front of a jury. The producers know that a jury will in many cases be outraged by the injuries, and will make big financial awards, so the producers settle for hopefully smaller amounts—still many millions.
The ability of jurors to cut through regulator prejudice and political agendas is why prosecutors around the country have gone to great lengths to avoid having their prosecutions in connection with food rights get in front of a jury. In the Rawesome case, they have piled so many charges on Sharon Palmer and James Stewart so as to make even the slight risk of guilty verdicts from juries threatening enough that the defendants will hopefully be anxious to settle for far lesser charges, with little or no jail time--enabling the prosecutors and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to claim victory.
The latest example of the avoid-a-jury-at-all-costs legal gymnastics by prosecutors is taking place in Minnesota. There, the misdemeanor criminal case against Alvin Schlangen, which was supposed to have been tried last month in Minneapolis, has now been re-scheduled to August 27. Not only is that the week before Labor Day, but the week of the Minnesota State Fair—possibly the most popular of its type in the country. From the prosecution’s viewpoint, hopefully not a good week to attract supporters to sit in the audience, and smile back at jurors in support of Schlangen. But maybe food rights activists will surprise the prosecutors and judges seeking to manipulate the proceedings to their advantage. You can be sure the prosecutors will be monitoring the situation closely. If they don’t like what they see, they will try other tactics. Perhaps further delays, to discourage the defendant. Perhaps re-schedule the proceedings for the day before Thanksgiving, or Christmas Eve.
If it was up to the prosecutors, and probably the judges, they’d do away with the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed…”
John Edwards, for all his character flaws, understood the power of the Sixth Amendment.
This site's mission is to provide news and analysis about food rights and raw milk. Increasingly, our access to privately available food is under attack by government and industry forces that seek to impose their choices on us. The Complete Patient seeks to provide up-to-date information and encourage the development of community to maintain traditional food acquisition options.
"she admitted she had provided outsourced eggs to Rawesome Food Club for six months back in 2008 and 2009. "
She admitted committing fraud, she has lost all credibility. As for the other "charges": you do the crime, you do the time.... She lied to the customers, had I been a customer, I would be livid. How dare her cheat people and expect not to have repercussions.
"Scientifically speaking,"
Those words run up the red flag.
Thank you, Sylvia. I promised not to post but when I saw the natural news article, I was livid and knew it would be discussed here.
So Aajanus is not his real name? So he doesn't have a real Phd? So he tells his "patients" to eat rotten raw moldy meat. I, for one, would have not become a self selected "patient" of his.
But character assassination doesn't amount to much if the state has evidence that she outsourced. There is also a slander case by Aajanus and Otting against Palmer, I believe. I haven't checked the court documents for a few months but it was put on hold for a long time because Palmer had a slander suit against them. That one must not have turned out in her favor if they allowed this current suit to continue...
I didnt start FarmMuckraker.blospot.com because I deeply wanted to malign a small farmer. It was because people in my WAPF chapter said, basically: Aajanus is crazy. He's lying. Palmer is a small farmer, we must protect her. I didn't buy the character assassination then, and I don't now. Palmer has her own history with fraud. That should speak for her character well enough.
Mr. Marlar,
Is it legal to sell eggs that are out-sourced as your own? and not inform the consumers?
There are probably relevant labeling standards, Sylvia, but who knows what issues the state agencies actively investigated. We only know about the Vonderplanitz PI report and it probably isn't enough evidence for court. It would be enough evidence for me not to buy and I expect that was the purpose of the Vonderplanitz investigation. (FTR, I'm a few hours north of LA with my own chickens, so I'm not in this market.)
It would be against the rules of most farmers markets to do this which is why Palmer claimed that the outsourced eggs all went to Rawesome rather than the farmers markets.
Amanda
Adams missed the mark on his analysis. The whole "chain of custody" business with the lab test is just strange. The test was for a consumer to check the results. I doubt there was ever any plan to present the evidence in court. How the chicken was tested is definitely a more interesting avenue for analysis but suggesting it wouldn't hold up in court and, therefore, is unscientific misses the whole context of the original test. Way back in 2010, who could have predicted the current shit storm? Someone just wanted to test their chicken and the Vonderplanitz recommendation to Rawesome (if memory serves) was to do some sort of serial testing of the chicken and eggs. That's entirely reasonable for the time these events took place.
On the Otting website issue, that matter is still in court. Adams presents the mediation documents and leaves it at that -- as if that's the most current iteration. Why they didn't follow the mediation agreement, I have no idea, but the whole website issue is still getting hashed about in suits and counter-suits. That would seem to be an important point.
On Vonderplanitz's fake Ph.D., "meh." The are painfully easy to spot and I don't get real excited over it, even with a real one myself. I read the piece and think Vonderplanitz really should drop the letters if he didn't earn them, but Adams doesn't project a lot of background in the whole story, so maybe he should regroup as well.
Amanda
Amanda, my sense has been that the lab testing of chicken, the private investigator report, the Unhealthy Family Farm web site, and the visits by Vonderplanitz to the Ventura County district attorney, among other activities, were all part of a package--to discredit Sharon Palmer and James Stewart. To Vonderplanitz, the discrediting seemed warranted. But if part of the package don't hold up to scrutiny, and following proper testing protocol would seem to be part of a credible package, then there is a problem. Vonderplanitz (and other Rawesome members) held Palmer and Stewart to the highest standards, so shouldn't they rightfully expect him to adhere to the highest standards in his effort to discredit them?
David,
I don't know what the "highest standards" would look like in this case. Even the other tests Adams refers to could have been falsified. I have my water tested and have to report the source and the source ends up on the report. That reporting wouldn't hold up to legal scrutiny which appears to be Adams' standard. What would the proper testing protocol look like that wouldn't have holes? I'm sure I could pick apart any that you lay out and we could get all caught up in that. Yet somehow in all of this, there is a good bit of evidence of fraud. I personally disregard the chicken test for other reasons, so if I wanted to poke holes, that is exactly where I'd go.
A real discussion of the fraud IMO would delve into the egg and meat outsourcing and would actually be thorough. Most people here know that I am extremely skeptical of the HFF operation. If the consumer fraud allegations are true, the chicken lab protocol discussion isn't actually all that important.
But maybe I've missed something. What makes the analysis impressive?
Furthermore, why do you consider it to be the "highest" of standards to expect a producer of a credence product not to outsource from a source that doesn't meet the label claim? IMO meeting the label claim should be a minimal standard.
Amanda
The standards for HFF would certainly include lots of things-- the quality of its products, growing conditions, production conditions, freshness...and that they abide by what the label says. I think for most people, the proof is in the pudding, as it were. You can distinguish top-quality eggs and chicken from the factory variety pretty easily in the cooking and serving. That's always been part of the puzzling part of Vonderplanitz's accusations. There were lots of people at Rawesome who swore by the quality of HFF products, and customers at farmers markets still do.
David,
She admitted to deceiving customers, therefore she did not adhere to any standards.
Sylvia is exactly right, David. Can we be assured of the quality, production conditions, etc of an outsourced product? In Palmer's "confession" to you, she said she bought the best outsourced eggs she could find, but that's a bit of a slippery statement. Did they meet the claims? Where is that analysis? When OPDC outsourced, it bought from a 10K confinement dairy. If we consumers then take offense at these violations of trust, how can you suggest that we are holding the producer/outsourcer to an unreasonably high standard? The whole basis of their business is the label claims.
Amanda,
Palmer has a lot of "slippery statements" the biggest one being her feed. A transparent and reputable farmer would be able to show receipts for her feed. I have not seen one. That and the fact that she had small claims against her from feed suppliers in Ventura county leads me to believe there is a lot we don't know about HFF practices vs. marketing claims.
Let's stay on topic here. The accusation from Vonderplanitz was that Palmer was selling poisonous chicken. Very serious accusation--potentially, criminal malfeasance. I was suggesting that the evidence behind that accusation should be credible. The Natural News investigation provides important information to question the credibility of Vonderplanitz's evidence. And on top of that, evidence that Vonderplanitz's educational credentials questionable. All I'm saying is that people who live in glass houses should be very careful about the stones they lob.
There were a host of accusations, David, including outsourcing. The "poison" angle was just one angle and I agree, it didn't have a lot of legs. That didn't mean there was no outsourcing.
"That didn't mean there was no outsourcing."
She admitted to outsourcing, so she is guilty.
By not informing the customers, she fraudulently sold them what many consider inferior products and products that may have been contaminated with chemicals (pesticides/herbicides/antibiotics/GMO, etc) and to many that is poison.
Deception not only hurts the consumers, in the broad scheme of the healthier/natural food movement, it will also affect it in a negative way.
From my understanding, Sylvia, David didn't come to the raw milk issue from an organic/natural foods framework, so your KEY point about the effect of deception is often missed in his analyses.
I hear what you are saying Amanda. She was deceptive when she sold her outsourced foods as her own. She lied to her customers and that speaks volumes of her character.
Exactly, Amanda. When I worked with a friend who is a private investigator on this subject, we saw right away that the "poison chicken theory" didn't have much legs. This whole discussion of vonderplanitz and testing chicken for toxicity distracts from the issue that mattered most to me and other farmers market consumers: Did she outsource?
David,
The proof is in the pudding. I bought HFF chickens and liked them! Guess what? I also found cardboard boxes with the label of Harrison's young chickens in a garbage dumpster she acknowledged using. Now, am I saying that she bought young chickens from a CAFO in Georgia that slaughters a million chickens a week and repackaged them and sold them at market? No. I have no evidence of that. She said she buys chickens for her "employees and charity" if I remember correctly our conversation. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, say, if you were Mark McAfee and you bought pasteurized CAFO milk for your employees and charities (which he says he doesn't) instesd of standing by your profuct, but what do I know about farming or farming finances?
I have bought and roasted, gasp, freshly slaughtered young CAFO chickens and they are tender and juicy and dare I say, delicious?
False in part ; false in all
In an effort to be totally transparent, and in our commitment to assure consistent supply to all consumers in CA, OPDC has changed its price points to assure sustainability.
Claravale will still be about $4 more per gallon more than OPDC ( on a Wholesale comparison basis) after the price changes. We are trying our best to keep the prices down, but trying to find GMO free organic certified Alfalfa and testing our products to assure compliance with state law... costs money.
Raw milk is expensive, especially when considering that OPDC pays into the Milk Pool ( $25k per month ) and Claravale does not. OPDC pays for organic feeds and Claravale does not. OPDC pastures its cows and Claravale does not. Prior to the price changes Claravale was $5.50 per gallon more expensive. After the changes OPDC is still lagging behind Claravale by about $4 per gallon. OPDC will begin to operate a lab and will pay for testing on a real time "Test and Hold" basis.
We are trying our best to assure consistent supply in the market. We know one thing for sure....not having product in the market is unacceptable to the consumers at any price. We know that in December raw milk in LA was being sold at $40 per gallon ( $10 per quart ) in some locations. During a recall, OPDC is hammered by calls from consumers demanding their raw milk and sharing stories of illness from drinking pasteurized milk.
Raw milk recalls cause illness because of the lack of raw milk!
OPDC is dedicated at a whole new level to assuring a consistent uninterupted supply of raw milk to its consumers. This committment, in order to be sustained, is going to cost a little more.
Tell us about the technical aspects of your "test and hold" program, Mark. I would not have imagined one to be financially sustainable. Are you testing in final packaged form? How will you store product for market as you wait for the results? Has an on-farm E. coli test been developed for raw milk or are you still using the apple juice test dip-stick tests?
I am all for more testing, but the on-farm tests don't tend to be very good. I understand that point but my concern is that this notion that "OPDC milk is safe because it's always tested" will continue as the dominant urban legend. This is why Mary Martin took the risk in 2006, based on the marketing of the testing program rather than the realities of the difficulties behind on-farm testing.
Amanda
"the on-farm tests don't tend to be very good."
Are these the same poor quality as the quick strep tests used in doctors offices? Unless they've improved in the last few years, the tests were 60%-90% accurate. About 1/3 were false negative,and the patient actually had a strep throat infection. Usually a kid.
Here we go with th Claravale bash again:
MarkMcAfee: "OPDC pays for organic feeds and Claravale does not. OPDC pastures its cows and Claravale does not."
Claravale website:
"Claravale Dairy is not certified organic by choice. We do not want to be certified organic because we do not agree completely with the organic regulations, both with their strictness in some areas and their laxness in others. Nor do we want to be associated with other conventional certified organic dairies which have some of the worst conditions and poorest quality milk on the market. As with other good ideas that have been taken over by corporate America in order to make more money, rather than the dairies meeting strict organic standards, organic standards have been made more lax so that dairies can meet them without altering their procedures. For example, as I understand it from talking to the owners of certified organic dairies, they do not have to feed their cows organic feed. Other aspects of the organic regulations are similarly misleading. In the California milk industry “organic” is just as bogus as their “happy cow”, “real milk”, and “fresh milk” campaigns. In addition, at Claravale Dairy we have our own well defined ideas about how dairying ought to be done. We do not need other dairies or committees or governments or customers to tell us how to do it.
With respect to our organic status what we have chosen to do is maintain our own standards independent of a certification process and simply let our customers know what those standards are. Here they are:
We feed our cows nothing but organic hay, organic dairy supplement, and organic pastures.
We do not use pesticides or antibiotics on the milking herd.
We do not use any GMO feeds or products.
We do not use bovine growth hormone or any other substances to increase milk production artificially.
We do not use chemical fertilizers or herbicides.
We do not bottle milk from any dairy other than our own.
AND:
"How Does Claravale Farm Differ From Organic Pastures In Cow Feeding?
There continues to be a lot of confusion and misinformation about what we at Claravale Farm feed our cows and what Organic Pastures feeds their cows. Here are the facts:
What Organic Pastures feeds their cows (according to Mark McAfee):
Hay
Grain
Pasture
What Claravale Farm feeds their cows (according to Ron Garthwaite):
Hay
Grain
Pasture
That is, there is no difference in the types of feed that Claravale Farm and Organic Pastures feed their cows.
But amounts matter… Listen to how Organic Pastures' feed their cows, in their own words."
I looked into Vonderplanitz's credentials a few months ago, and came to same conclusion that Mike Adams seems to - that they're fake, just like his name.
Vonderplanitz's real name is John Richards Swigart. This is his father's obituary:
http://www.gsbfuneralhome.com/obituaries/JosefGarfield-Swigart-209/#/Obi...
Of course, this obit could be referencing another Aajonus Vonderplanitz of Los Angeles, but I can't imagine the name is all that common.
While we're at it, Kaayla Daniel, soy-sleuth darling of the Weston Price Foundation, has her Ph.D from an online university.
"Ph.D in Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences with a Concentration in Nutritional Sciences and Anti-Aging Therapies. Union Institute and University, Cincinnati, OH, March 2004"
http://blog.wholesoystory.com/about/
http://www.myunion.edu/
http://www.myunion.edu/academics/doctoral-programs.html
It doesn't appear that any of the so-called "experts" are actually qualified to speak on nutrition. Is it possible that their nutritional theories wouldn't hold up to doctoral review, and that's the reason they forgo the traditional route?
I don't know why people get these kinds of Ph.D.s, but The Whole Soy Story was Daniel's dissertation. It's an interesting book but contains no primary research and wouldn't be accepted in a regular doctoral program.
I find myself agreeing with you, Lola. While I don't always trust the medical establishment, there are good reasons that medical doctors are required to have extensive training and outside accreditation. The same could be said of cheese makers, and dairy farmers selling raw milk to the general public... education, training, and accredition should be of a high priority.
The challenge, of course, is ensuring that everyone has equal opportunity to pursue those careers, regardless of socioeconomic class. All the more reason we need to begin a genuine grassroots struggle for economic democracy in this country. We should not mistake a laissez-faire free-for-all of conspiracy theorists and quacks as economic democracy.
Without honesty “extensive training and outside accreditation” is meaningless and tends to serve the controlling elite and their so-called perceived knowledge despite its inadequacies and irrespective of the democratic process.
Who would trust more Anjanou or those so called accredited individuals in charge of the FDA and CDC?
http://shivchopra.com/?p=228
The 5 Pillars of Food Safety
Written on January 25th, 2010
The USA is presently the richest and scientifically the most advanced country in the world. Its people spend proportionately the least amount of their incomes on food supply. On the other hand, the incidence of food-borne disease (FBD) in this country is the highest anywhere on the earth. The closest example of another country in this regard is Canada.
The source of FBD during approximately the last 50 years is reported to originate from indiscriminate application of the following five substances in food production: hormones, antibiotics, slaughterhouse wastes, Genetically Modified Organisms and pesticides. The types of FBD that these substances induce include cancer, antibiotic-resistant infections, neurological conditions, including BSE/CJD, diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular diseases, and immune, reproductive and other disorders.
None of the five substances is proved to be safe as required under the Food and Drugs Act of either U.S. or Canada. However, the first three of these products, i.e. hormones, antibiotics and slaughterhouse wastes, are unequivocally banned to be utilized in food production throughout the European Union countries. Consequently, U.S. and Canadian beef is not allowed to be imported into EU countries. However, the U.S. and Canadian regulatory authorities argue that the incriminating substances pose no risk to human health. Therefore, the issue is being contested before the World Trade Organization for approximately the last two decades.
Meanwhile, all five of these products continue to be marketed contrary to the Food and Drug Act of both U.S. and Canada. It is time to revise these policies and thereby protect public health and safety. In doing so, one would invoke what I refer to as the Five Pillars of Food Safety.
Ken
Who would you trust more Aajonus or those so called accredited individuals in charge of the FDA and CDC?
FRAUD VITIATES EVERY THING IT TOUCHES. now that the engine of malice has been revealed, the prosecution against Palmer + Stewart will go to pieces.
Never-the-less, it was Aajonus Vonder Planitz who single-handedly stopped the Los Angeles county from outlawing REAL MILK. Had he not stood in the gap at that point in time, it's doubtful whether REAL MILK would be flowing, legally, in California today. You can never take that away from him
This just out from Gary Null & he has some very valid points:
"I am very saddened to bring you this report today. Following the publication of our investigative story about Sharon Palmer (Healthy Family Farms), James Stewart (Rawesome Foods), Aajonus Vonderplanitz (vocal critic of Sharon Palmer) and Larry Otting (title owner of the land on which the farm operates), we received what can only be called a flood of tips (and documents) from our readers. The irrefutable conclusion from these documents, shown below, is that Aajonus Vonderplanitz, PhD, has been using phony academic credentials. His "doctorate in nutrition" was acquired from a diploma mill.
This saddens me for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that Aajonus was, at one point, instrumental in advocating raw dairy consumption in California, and now that the truth about his academic credentials has come to light, it will be used by raw milk critics to further attack the industry. Aajonus was also a nutritional consultant who taught people to "think outside the box" when it came to food choice. Although his "Primal Diet" of consuming raw, rotten meat seems bizarre to many people, he at least taught people to question the official lies of the USDA and the CDC on issues like food safety. I don't agree with most of Aajonus' conclusions on diet and nutrition, but I do agree with his questioning of the status quo."
Gary has a good point here, that this could have big repercussions within the raw milk community, as well as, within the "right to choose" foods community. Very sad that this fake degree will come back to haunt a person, as well as, certain causes.
For the record, the report you quote from here was published on NaturalNews, by Mike Adams. Not sure if Gary Null connected.
http://www.naturalnews.com/036076_Aajonus_Vonderplanitz_doctorate_nutrition.html
Thanks for the link, David. There is huge variation out there in what I'd call "fake Ph.Ds" including the light-weight programs that don't require primary research for the degree, but this fake Ph.D. service as described by Adams is beyond what I had imagined, particularly that verification service. I don't have time to follow all of the trails in that discussion, but if anyone does, post it here. Perhaps Vonderplanitz can comment.
That said, we still need an analysis of the Palmer operation.
Ken, that is eloquently said.
Those “Five Pillars of Food Safety” below the referenced link is a statement made by Dr. Chopra from his website. I inadvertently omitted the quotation marks.
Ken
Wow, was this common knowledge that Vonderplanitz was even his real name? Did his clients even know that? And now to find out his PhD is even real!! How come the authorities didn't come across this info, would they have even taken his complaints seriously had the knew....wow, talk about who's calling the kettle black! How has he gotten away with having "patients", as he calls his clients, when he's not a MD?! I wonder if now someone will go after him for practicing/counseling with having the proper credentials. Does he realize how big a can of worms he has opened up?!
I wish there was an edit button....meant to say "Vanderplanitz wasn't even his real name" and "his PhD isn't even real".
so what if it isn't his real name? it's his stage name, or nom de plume, or nom de guerre, or any one of another quite-legal guises. Compare that with the guy in the White House who was adopted then naturalized as a citizen of Indonesia, attended University on a Fulbright Scholarship - only available to foreign students - who cannot come up with the proper credentials / merely a birth certificate - who obtained his Bar Car to practice law under false pretence, yet he's gotten away with it one of the greatest hoaxes in American Hitroy for almost 4 years. Of course I refer to Barry Suetoro called by some "Barack O'Bama"
Aajonus Vonder Planitz has done an awful lot of good ... in light of which, a phony Ph. D is pretty small potatos ... organic or not
To be clear, the testing is not for pathogens. Those tests are not very accurate and tell us little. CDFA, DPH and others share this same opinion. On farm pathogen testing actually creates a serious biohazard by culturing pathogens on the farm that you do not want anywhere near the farm. Your food safety technician becomes a serious biohazard.
The "test and hold" program is based on surveilance of coliforms and SPC. The best practices in science currently hold that,... if the conditions show very sanitary raw milk then the conditions also hold that there should be no pathogens present....
So... (follow me here ) if the raw milk is very clean....it has a very low risk associated with it. Please eliminate the idea of any type of guarantees with raw milk or pasteurized milk or peanuts or cantaloupe etc....all we can do is assure that every thing has been done in a clean and sanitary way. No shit in the milk....as Mary likes to say so colorfully. Coliforms and SPC generally tell us this story. At OPDC we are running less than 5 coliforms and less than 500 SPC routinely. Now we can test and hold internally to confirm and make best decisions based on data that is available quickly.
By tracking coliforms and SPC using very accurate 3M rapid 6 hour Petry technologies, the wait is very short. In fact it does not delay the release of our products at all. We will test the product in the bulk tank as it remains agitated and very cold and make final use decisions based on its Coliform levels. Higher than standard bulk raw milk will make cheese etc...We have discussed this with CDFA and DPH and both agree that this is an excellent approach and will reduce the raw milk risk profiles to the bare minimum.
Instead of testing for needles in the haystack....it tests the entire haystack for the risk profile of finding needles. This is a much better measurement of risk and a much better protocol.
When CDFA and DPH raised the bar for Raw Milk in CA....it just made OPDC world class high jumpers. We haev learned much and we continue to learn more. DPH has partnered with OPDC to assist with testing our cow manure this summer to track seasonal changes in ecoli pathogens. Something that has not been done in the past. Along with the emerging CA Raw Milk Market...there is emerging political interest to support more research in our regulatory agencies.
All of this will be explained in great detail at our website when this program gets started very soon. Our lab has been outfitted and the tech is being hired and trained right now.
Dear Mark,
I will watch with interest how you market this program to your consumers. Many think you already test every batch for pathogens so this is a good opportunity for you to clear up what your protocol actually is.
Amanda
All this is irrelevant, when you find that your rooster was pirated by a fox yesterday... sad but true, mourning, tears. I won't be here tomorrow, I'm just here for today.
Amanda,
We test every batch of raw milk currently...that is correct. But....it takes two days for the data to come back to us and by that time the products are already in the market place. It is far better to test the products prior to being utilized in the plant so that they go to the right products prior to being assigned to making a product.
Kristen P.
As far as Claravale is concerned...I am not bashing them at all. I am simply telling the truth about what they do and what we do....nothing but the facts.
Claravale has made illegal organic claims repeatedly. That is a fact. Their brochures in stores have made these statements and CDFA's Ray Green has repremanded them several times for this.
Claravale does not pasture their cows. Take a drive by and see your self or earth Google. They have no pastures. It is a dry desert, there is no water to irrigate. Why would Claravale buy organic alfalfa from Nevada at $150 more per ton than local conventional alfalfa from 35 miles away? It is clear....Claravale does a fine job of producing high quality conventional traditional Jersey raw milk. BUT it is not organic certified and it is not pastured. Organic means a third party inspects everything you do....Claravale has no one looking at their operations. Claravale prices their products at about $17 per gallon at Wholesale. OPDC prices their raw milk at $13.30 under our new pricing schedule.
Kristin P. Now you have all the facts and just the facts. No bashing here.
If you want the facts...ask Garthwaite to produce the audit trail for his organic feeds....
Mark
"OPDC prices their raw milk at $13.30 under our new pricing schedule. "
Is that $13.30 per gal and is that what the stores will charge? If so, that is a decrease in what I paid in Sacramento, which was $14 to $16 per gal.
A few years ago when I needed to buy certified organic hay, a local, certified organic beef farmer offered to buy conventional hay and resell it to me -as certified organic - so I'd have the organic paper trail.
Certified organic is based on self-reporting, and can mean everything or nothing.
OPDC irrigates in order to have pasture, correct?
In terms of sustainability, how sustainable (in terms of electricity/fuel consumption/clean water availability) is it to irrigate the desert in order to pasture some cows? Claravale seems more environmentally responsible in this respect by not squandering resources trying to create pasture where none grows naturally.
Mark,
From your own comments and the turn-around on the tests, I have never had the impression that you test all of your milk for pathogens and yet that is the impression you've given your consumers. You have a new opportunity to educate them about the reality of your testing program.
Amanda
All of this demonstrates why small, local, and personal is best.
Small and local means person-to-person---no intermediate layers, no diverting of responsibility, no watering down of effects. Does that mean perfect? Of course not in this fallen world. But it does mean that whatever bad things might happen are contained to a degree that can be dealt with by individuals. (And, by the way, because the customer is eye-to-eye with the supplier, the likelihood of aggressive malfeasance is greatly reduced---it’s easier to bomb a village than stab a man.) And, by the way, if I know that the neighbor who supplies my milk or spinach or fixes my car or my water heater is an honest, well-intentioned fellow, and he screws up, I am more likely to exercise the most glorious of all human traits--forgiveness--and cut him a break, opening the door to work together as brothers to improve. With a lawyer or agent or representative or employee between us, that can hardly happen. Such are poor substitutes for friends.
Bigness, layers, distance, process rules, experts... these have all separated us and taught to rely not on our own observation, knowledge, and intuition, but on the advice and counsel of those who have no understanding of us or personal interest in us as individuals (but who do have an acutely well-developed sense of self-interest). It's been a few generations now that big systems have been the rule, and see what has become of us. We no longer have the will, or sometimes even the ability, to take care of ourselves and our neighbors. Now even food, one of the most basic of all components of life, has become the responsibility of massive agencies and corporations, doctors and lawyers.
Complexity is the refuge of scoundrels.
I'll raise a glass of farm, fresh milk to your thoughts Mr. Milano, which carry much wisdom and truth.
Thank You.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" -Ralph Waldo Emerson
Thank you Mr. Milano! Your comment is right on the mark.
Word on the street in Wisconsin is that there is going to be record voter turnout. Today is the recall election of our hated Koch-financed governor Scott Walker, who was the target of historic protests just over a year ago.
Not that the election really matters all that much. The Dems managed to effectively co-opt all of the grassroots energy into the recall, as they tend to do, and in doing so direct progressive activists away from the more effective strategies for social change (direct action, mass protests, the general strike, etc...)
It is worth mentioning, however, that John Kinsman (an organic dairy farmer, long-time left-wing activist, and the president of Family Farm Defenders) had a little personal chat with Tom Barrett (the D's candidate) prior to the 2010 election, about not making the same mistake of vetoing the raw milk bill as (then governor and Democrat) Jim Doyle did in 2010. Hopefully, if elected, Barrett will heed Kinsman's advice.
1 fraud (Palmer) + 1 fraud (Aajonus) = 2 frauds. A PhD is not needed to do the math and connect the dots to raw milk.
MW
Also, don't shoot the messenger. Just saying there is no logic in Natural News' suggestion that 1 + 1 fraud cancels out to zero. The author should disclose his grades in math during high school and college.
MW
Your math is great, but your inferences less so. I thought Natural News was questioning the evidence gathering and credentials of accuser Aajonus Vonderplanitz that Sharon Palmer sold seriously tainted chicken. He was suggesting she might have been the victim of a smear campaign, and that to the extent Ventura County's investigation relied on the Vonderplanitz allegations (which we don't know), it may have been compromised. It's easy for you and others here to suggest, "They're all a bunch of frauds," and that might be cute if just Vonderplanitz and Palmer were slinging mud. But there are serious legal charges involved apart from any of that. Sorry to be a party pooper.
LOL
You’re right, however in this age of relativism people need to be continually reminded of, or prompted to reconsider certain absolute moral truths such as to not “steal”, lie and deceive, “the government hates completion”.
Ken
"The government hates competition,"
Its official. Tom Barrett has conceded, making Scott Walker the first sitting govenor in American history to be recalled and survive the recall election.
I will continue to remind everyone of this, as events concerning raw milk unfold in Wisconsin over the course of the next two years. This will be the true test of how American-style "libertarianism" works in practice.
The ideological and financial backing of Scott Walker is thoroughly libertarian in orientation. Walker's biggest financiers are the Koch Brothers, the petro-chemical billionaires who own Koch Industries which is the largest privately held company in the US today.
David Koch actually ran on the Libertarian Party ticket in 1980, as their vice-presidential nominee, to the right of Ronald Reagan on destroying the public sector. Koch bought the nomination for a half a million dollars. The Koch's father, Charles, was a founding member of the John Birch Society (Barney Google was kind enough to quote the second president of the JBS in the previous thread, proving my point about the right-wing orientation of American "libertarianism"). The JBS has a long history of racism, McCarthyism, and far-fetched conspiracy theories (i.e. flouridation of water was a "communist conspiracy")
This will be the true test of how libertarianism actually works in practice, as it regards raw milk. Under Scott Walker, we have already seen the prosecution of Vernon Hershberger. Now, with the retirement of many senoir DATCP employees, the destruction of the public sector unions (which means management has more power at the workplace in the public sector), I am guessing that we will see another crackdown on raw milk in the next few years.
Wisconsin's proud progressive traditions of open and democratic government have been thoroughly destroyed by the combination of corporate money and libertarian ideology. We'll see how kind this new free-market utopia is to our raw dairy farmers... I'm guessing it won't be. I'd love to be proven wrong.
I thought the recall, held yesterday, was an example of an open and democratic government in Wisconsin, Walker's margin of victory may have been larger than when first elected. Big Dairy is powerful and it is real easy for an unelected candidate to agree with you prior to election day, however, when he is in office things change. I would bet that Barrett would have listened to Big Dairy far more than an artisan cheese maker, more money with them.
Union money had a significant loss yesterday, but I take it you prefer the Union special interest money over the corporate special interest money.
I would not consider this election to be anywhere close to open and democratic government. Walker has refused to meet with his own constiuents or legislators on the other side of the aisle, and has spent a record amount of time at out-of-state fundraising events.
This election was more like an auction, selling off political power to the highest bidder. Huge amounts of campaign cash flowed in from out of state on both sides, although Barrett was outspent several times by Walker.
The conservative business unions, once again, made a huge mistake by throwing in their lot with the Democrats. But such is American politcs, where we lack a real political movement and party to represent the interests of the entire working class. Instead we are left with the choice of the center-right Democrats and the hard-right Republicans, so it shouldn't be a surprise when voters choose the real thing over the fakes.
Bob LaFollette is rolling in his grave...
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, conspiracy theories, BLAH, BLAH Koch brothers, BLAH, BLAH DATCP is great, BLAH, BLAH!!! The working folks of WI voted AGAIN for relief from the union stranglehold and their corruption, and Bill can't stand it. He'll remind us of his whacked out ideology over and over hoping that if we hear a lie long enough..... maybe we'll think it's the truth? LOL
I'm sure if Barret got in, raw milk would have breezed through because some ultra left farmer set him straight. LOL! I guess that farmer should have talked to Doyle to set him straight too. Oooooopps. Just ask the Brunner's, Craigs, Andersons, and a host of others how great it was under Democrat Doyle (who vetoed the raw milk bill) with the DATCP hounds out to destroy them. Ask Tim Whightman how it was a long time ago when he was being falsely accused. DATCP has always been corrupt and served big dairy and it will continue on that path regardless of which party is in office. You can pretend they are such good caring people, but in the real world we know the truth.
There is a saying in WI about Madison. It is 70 square miles surrounded by reality! Bill, maybe you should get out of fantasy land and see what is happening in the real world. Start a farm, or a cheese plant, actually DO something other than spew.
I agree with you that it does not matter that much which party is in power, Cheyenne. However, I never said DATCP is great. I'm just pointing out that DATCP management has a more authoritarian about raw milk than the field-level inspectors, and that by destroying the unions you are only empowering management at DATCP. And I'm definetly not a fan of Doyle or Barrett. Let's make that clear -- Doyle also had his share of attacks on working families. When he raised the minimum wage, he also included a stipulation forbidding municipalities from passing their own minimum wage, since it was Madison's municipal minimum wage ordinance that compelled the state gov't to raise it a few years ago.
Frankly, I am not surprised by these election results, and I've been telling friends on the left that I expected a Walker victory. Unlike many of them, I spend a lot of time in rural areas making cheese. I was just at Cedar Grove on Monday making raw sheep's milk cheese with my friend Willi Lehner at Bleu Mont Dairy. The owner of Cedar Grove was a Barrett supporter, btw.
Also, it's important to point out that the Walker admin (and Republican AG Van Hallen) are the ones pursuing criminal charges against Vernon Hershberger, not a Democrat. If we want a regulatory agency that is not beholden to big dairy, then we need to fight to remove corporate power from the halls of government. We cannot view this issue in isolation from others. The oppression of workers in both the private and public sector by corporate capital goes hand-in-hand with the oppression of farmers. There are many farmers who understand this, which is why over 70 drove their tractors to the capital square last spring in the "Tractorcade" -- the largest political protest in Wisconsin history, with over 150,000 in attendence.
This is just another example of how the Democratic Party co-opts and demobolizes grassroots movements. There is a saying that comes to mind -- The Democratic Party is a graveyard of progressive social movements. I am reminded of 2004 when the anti-war movement got behind pro-war Democrat John Kerry, only to be defeated by a narrow margin. History sure has a way of repeating itself, doesn't it?
sorry, typo:
DATCP managment has a more authoritarian *attitude* about raw milk than the field-level inspectors...
These field level inspectors, do they not have a mind of their own or the wherewithal to follow their conscience?
In Canada the perceived left (NDP) managed to acquire power in several provinces and in so doing their true colors surfaced. As it turns out there is little difference between them and the liberals who are center-right. The conservative party, which I am reluctant to classify as a hard-right political entity, is currently in power.
You state, “If we want a regulatory agency that is not beholden to big dairy, then we need to fight to remove corporate power from the halls of government”. I agree and that is why it is imperative that we assert our God given free will.
In reality the situation is that if we do take a stand we must be prepared to isolate ourselves from the status quo and head in the opposite direction rather then follow the rest of society who are running towards a cliff.
http://fairwhistleblower.ca/books/corrupt_to_the_core.html
“After a promising start, Chopra’s career with Health Canada went nowhere as he repeatedly clashed with management over certain drug approvals. The end came for Chopra and his colleagues a few years after their Senate appearance, when all three were fired simultaneously. They have spent the past four years in hearings before the Public Service Labour Relations Board (PSLRB), as their union battles to have them reinstated.”
Ken
Thanks for the book reccomendation, Ken. This is a great example of why it is important to fight for the rights of employees to contest the power of their employers without the fear of losing their job. I am also reminded of the case of the high-level Canadian scientists in the early 90's who were fired after testifying against the safety of Posilac (aka, rBGH) in front of the Canadian parliament.
Side note, according to the political compass, the NDP is centrist:
http://politicalcompass.org/canada2011
"RAWESOME BOMBSHELL: The Invalid Case Against Sharon Palmer"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=D6ZxXcAHtco
The real fools in the RAWESOME case are the people at the LA County Health Department that would follow or depend on anything that Dr. Vanderplantz would report. The RAWESOME affair is a pissing match between old business partners that fell out of love....end of story.
Sylvia,
OPDC " store delivered wholesale prices" are now at $6.65 per half gallon ( up 85 cents per half ). That means about $13.30 per gallon and the stores mark it up from there.
"RAWESOME affair is a pissing match between old business partners that fell out of love....end of story.
I've no doubt that for many of the previous customers, Palmer's admitted deception of the outsourced foods is not the end of story.
Exactly, nor is it the end of story for her old, current and new customers at farmers markets.
I think it's snobbish to assume that just because someone earned a degree unconventionally, they are less knowledgeable on something. One gets out of any education what they put into it. Doubtless, there are those who go Ms. Daniels' route and do poorly, just as many who attend highly-respected universities and colleges perform disappointingly in their careers.
Now, if Ms. Daniels has displayed obvious ignorance of her field of expertise, or is known for bad research that's another story. But it still has more to do with her own integrity and habits than how or where she got her degree.
The Daniels comparison was made before the "diploma mill" news broke -- her degree is different from Vonderplanitz. However, the problem with her degree is that it didn't appear to require primary research, so we can't judge her research at all. I don't think anyone here is saying she's not smart or not successful, but she didn't go through the requirements of a regular Ph.D. program. I imagine she'd tell us that herself.
Mama, you are missing a major point here...he did not EARN a degree at all...he BOUGHT a bogus/fake degree from a degree mill. There were no classes, no courses, no training what so ever. You pay over $1,000 & up for these bogus degrees, they will also provide you with bogus transcripts, letters of recommendations, etc, for an additional fee. I gaurentee that some on this blog have studied nutrition, holistic healthcare, naturopathic care, quite extensively & thoroughly, yet don't present any type of bogus degree. The other troubling thing is that he claimed to be "treating" patients, but he is not certified, licensed, nor credentialed to do so. Yes, he was instrumental in assisting with protecting access to raw milk, but all the other things that he did are very troubling.
Hi Deborah,
I understand what you're saying about this Vonder-whatever (why pick a crazy pseudonym like that?). I was responding more to the comments referring to Kaayla Daniel's internet-obtained degree and the implication that such forms of education are automatically inferior to conventional methods.
Also, if someone successfully heals people without credentials, I personally would have no problem being treated by them. Obviously, I would have to do my own research about them first, just as I want to check out the farms from which I buy milk and eggs. But I don't patronize my dairy farmers because of their certification-I do it because they are a very reputable and transparent operation.
Mama - I got a kick out of your statement "why pick a crazy pseudonym like that?", yeah, I totally agree with your question, very strange indeed. And not only has he gone by that name, he has also gone by 3 other names as well (one of which is even more bizarre than Vonderplanitz). He had also been an actor on the soap opera "General Hospital"! The more that I find out about this person, the more concern that I become...how can he get away with treating "patients" (as he refers to them) without any credentially and licensing? He is claiming that 4 of his "patients" are suffering from liver damage that he claims are due to Sharon Palmer's chickens & eggs, but I wonder if the actual causes are from his very bizarre diet!! I have a couple of physician friends within the LA area that are very concerned about this. With regards to Kaayla Daniel, I must have missed the post about her, but I am familiar with her & I do know that her credentials are very good.
I don't understand how I can be buying milk for $5/gallon while people are coughing up $14. Okay, I know the farm from which I buy probably isn't "certified organic", etc. But is it that different from OPDC milk?
Also, I buy eggs from a local farmer for $4/dozen. Once again, I'm sure she's not using top-quality organic feed (she's a one-woman operation and she really loves her birds, which is why I buy her eggs). But paying $8 or $10/ dozen??? We could never afford that, and since I've just gone vegetarian that would present a real challenge!
you're buying milk for $5 per gallon because your supplier is financially-illiterate. He or she can't count, let alone do they know what the word "inflation" means. Years ago, on the RawDairy forum on Yahoo, a lady nicknamed KC got her kicks, excoriating me for "gouging" when I boasted that we had the highest-priced REAL MILK in America. Then, our shareholders were paying $15 per gallon, to have their property [ dividends in milk ] delivered to the Big City, 80 miles from the farm, in glass jars. Meanwhile, she was charging $2 per gallon, at the farm, in the customers' own container / Emmett Idaho. Last heard of, she was pathetically soliciting donations, in order to purchase a cream separator, so as to make a few extra $$. Precisely as I'd predicted, she squandered her capital by giving the milk away for less than it was worth - all costs in. If your farmer is doing it as a labour of love, fine. But a ] -she's putting herself out of business and b ] by depressing the price, she's and making it doubly-hard on others, just down the road, who are producing milk, trying to pay the mortgage. If farmers don't eat ... you don't eat.
In that same time-frame, the price of an ounce of silver went from $8 per ounce, to $28 per ounce. Why that matters is because the dollar of the united States of America - to this day - is 371.25 grains of pure silver. To this day, the currency of the US is on a bi-metalic standard, whether you understand it, or not. Just as water finds its own level, so do values in a genuinely free market.
So you don't have an answer as to why prices at flourishing dairies are so different in different parts of the country? That's certainly in line with the agenda of the RAWMI statists here who disparage the active customer movement. Meanwhile, I'm curious about the real answer myself.
In a "genuine free market", centralized government wouldn't be forcing upon us the use of money at all (historically, natural economies almost never used money as a medium of exchange, let alone the fraudulent "store of value"), and there would be very little food commodification, including none in dairy. But for corporate-statists like you "free market" is just another phony term which means whatever you want it to mean.
I'm the only one here with a rigorous definition of "free market": Zero centralized hierarchy, and zero top-down, supply-driven economic features. All economy is 100% demand driven.
We see your real agenda - you don't want the food grower to be part of a community, or even to get a "fair price". You want the grower to be another mercenary, and merely want him to do "better" relative to other predators than he does now. I guarantee you that with that hang-separately mentality (for which Monsanto and Cargill are laughing heartily at you right now), you'll accomplish nothing but to hang separately.
How do you explain all your difficulties with the state, according to your ideology? I can explain them easily with mine, and I can predict the outcome.
I agree. It's completely foolish for farmers to look at each other as competitors. If there ever was a time for that, it's certainly over now.
Mr. Watson,
You don't seem to understand. If the prices are beyond a person's income, they can't give the farmer money for his/her taxes,etc. We're not all wealthy "foodies". And, I'm happy to relate that these farmers appear to be doing very well!
One thing that might be helping them is that they have a number of enthusiastic young volunteers working there. Is it pathetic to draw on the interest and energy of young people? I never knew soliciting donations was pathetic, so maybe volunteerism is as well.
If I'm ever faced with prices like those discussed here, we'll simply be forced to stop purchasing the foods which means everyone's out of luck!
Volunteer-ism is a nice passtime, but it's not a foundation for a successful business. Of course I admire this next generation's energy as they reconnect with their heritage on the farm, but an operation which relies upon charity, will last only as long as does that good will.
In the case of KC - Idaho's Dairy Princess for 1966 - on the Raw Dairy Forum on Yahoo, my point was that she railed at us for high prices, rather than learn to cope with the debasement of the money supply aka inflation.
In order for the Campaign for REAL MILK to take its proper place in society, we have to disabuse people of the idea that we are perennial victims. That requires us to be business-like. That requires pricing one's product properly. This is what divides those who are content with small quaint "pittance-farming" operations, from guys like me, who hold that a farm family ought to be able to live at a middle-class level.
In this, the richest land in the world, in all history, there's no excuse for not being able to purchase good food.
I urge you to change your way of thinking ... there is no limit on your ability to create wealth, with which to trade for what you want
As some people have put it so well, there's a difference between making a living and making a killing.
I'm very interested to see that I haven't gotten a real answer about the discrepency in the pricing. I fully expected someone to explain this mystery, rather than become-well, belligerent.
Mr. Watson, I know you are enthusiastic about people having children. Well, those of us rearing children (especially on one income) CANNOT blow $14 on one gallon of milk. We currently purchase 6 gallons of milk a week. $336.00 a month is a wee bit too much for our budget!
Our farmers appear to be living at just as high a standard as we.
If we can't afford it, we won't buy it. Everybody loses.
I just actually absorbed this sentence you wrote: "In this, the richest land in the world, in all history, there's no excuse for not being able to purchase good food". Did you really think about that before you wrote it?
As it is, we live very modestly, and it is my goal to live even more frugally for many reasons, one of them being so my husband can leave the job he has hated for many years. It's absurd to imagine us scrimping and belt-tightening so a businessman can live a more lavish life-style than we do!
Financially, we are more fortunate than many people nowadays, thanks to my hubby's meticulous budgeting. I would say that having little or no income is an extremely valid reason for not being able to purchase $14 milk or $8.00 eggs.
Mama = you did not comprehend what I said : your take on it is the exact opposite of what I said overall, which is : quit "thinking poor", as though minimizing your consumption is the answer to lack. Start maximizing your output - participate in the wealth of this nation by creating some and trading. God gives everyone of us, a talent. Put it to use. You can have what you want by helping others get what they want.
Gordon, would you believe that some of us have no ambition to "maximize our output" and just want to have enough to live on, enjoy the basics of a leisurely life and be left in peace by wealth crusaders? Maybe that's what our "riches values" are, compared to traders and those who seek to use their talent to help others, who may just prefer to be left alone. Wealth = Worries. Not for me.
Ora, I appreciate what you're saying, and I admire people who are serene in their circumstances. But, this thread started with me addressing the whyning about the price / value of REAL MILK. When Mama and her husband graduated from high school, was their career plan to live just above the poverty line? Probably not. Then how is it so many Americans find themselves just a paycheque away from destitution, in this, the richest land in the world? My answer is : race traitors in high places stole the gold + silver from the money system. See Lenin's quote on the surest way to subvert a country is by debasing its currency.
We are living through the greatest transfer of wealth, in all history ... having been seduced into squandering our heritage. Now it's being conveyed to those who hold the the debt notes of the US of A. What you're seeing play out is, the inevitable outcome of social-ism destroying personal initiative / productivity, so = all men being equal, of course, they get to share in the shortage.
From one cow in the backyard, our cowshare grew into an enterprise which feeds 1000 people some of the best food in the world, handling $2000 per day, and employing 6. Five years ago, none of that existed. Would the members be better off if I'd just stayed home with my feet up, watching the tube, waiting for the govt. to send me a welfare cheque in the mail, and grumbling about why gourmet food was "too expensive"?
Jesus Christ said "I come that you may have life, and have it more abundantly." That means in every aspect.
"But, this thread started with me addressing the whyning about the price / value of REAL MILK. "
You are incorrect, this portion of the thread started with Mama asking the following: "I don't understand how I can be buying milk for $5/gallon while people are coughing up $14. "
You responded by saying that her farmer was basically inept. Tsk tsk name calling and/or character assassination, especially when you don't know the person doesn't make you shine.
It is a shame that you see it as whining, when it is nothing more than being realistic. If you don't have the money, you do not buy it. It's called living within your means. Very simple.
BTW she has not yet had her question answered.
"Would the members be better off if I'd just stayed home with my feet up, watching the tube, waiting for the govt. to send me a welfare cheque in the mail, and grumbling about why gourmet food was "too expensive"?"
Are you inferring that if someone doesn't make $2000/day they are sitting at home with their feet up, watching TV and waiting for a welfare check? Wow, there are a lot of people living pay check to pay check and they work very hard for that money. And they aren't living above their means. And no they cannot afford $14/gal of milk.
"race traitors in high places" And this is correlated to the topic of raw milk? Don't bother answering as I really don't care.
"race traitors in high places" most certainly does co-relate with the Campaign for REAL MILK, because their calcualted debasement of the currency, IS the root of the demise of Ameica. You'd better learn to care about it, because it's playing-out in your neighbourhood, this very hour.
I am well aware that lots of people are working hard and barely making it to the next cheque. I was trying to shed some light on how that came about. They'd pay $14 per gallon ( and more) if they only knew that it would save them hundreds of times more, in dental and healthcare costs, later. How much is it worth to look at a beautiful smile in a child with perfect teeth, versus sitting in the dentist's office tormented by wondering how you're going to pay him? This is not rhetoric ; one of the best proofs we have of the nutritional superiority of REAL MILK, is, the superior teeth and bones in those who drink it.
I stand by my statement that someone charging $5 per gallon for genuine grass-fed raw milk, is giving it away for less than the cost of production. Let's compare notes a year from now, when hay and gasoline prices have doubled, and we'll see if that farmer is still providing it to anyone other than just his family
right now $4/gal in our area does just fine for a family of 8 on a diversified farm. They have no off farm income and they do not live richly but nicely. They consider it a ministry. Eggs are $2/doz, the chickens, beef and pork are like the other things, more expensive than the store items, but affordable for nearly everyone.
Although I am not rich, there are more things would torment me at the dentists office than the cost if my teeth were terrible.
What area are you in? Does the family only farm, or do members work off farm?
Most often, prices like this mean the family is subsidizing people's food by working off farm jobs.
Are they feeding organic feed? Even at non-organic feed prices, these prices are crazy low, but before I comment further, I would like some more info.
The fact that $4/gallon is more than they would get in the commodity system is an irrelevant point - the whole system is intended to destroy farmers and artificially suppress the price of food, the Roman bread and circuses approach.
Pages