"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Aitken wrote:
>> "JimLane" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Gregory Morrow wrote:
>>>> Peter Aitken wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You really don't know the point of organic? There are three:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Not eating insecticides, fungicides, and other chemicals that
>>>>> may cause
>>>>> problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Letting farmworkers do their job without exposure to poisons.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Reducing the environmental harm done by insecticides,
>>>>> fungicides, and fertilizer runoff.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the grand scheme of things I really don't care about any of that
>>>> stuff...it's akin to the "Recycling is GOOD" mantra that a lot of
>>>> folx buy
>>>> into...
>>>>
>>>
>>> And you seem to be akin to the "screw the earth, I won't be around
>>> to see the repercussions of the fuc+ked up earth I'll leave to my
>>> grand kids."
>>>
>>
>> If organic were cheaper he would buy it, I bet. Cheapness and
>> selfishness are the operative words here.
>
> It doesn't make any sense for organic produce to cost more. After all,
> the
> farmers aren't spending that money on chemicals. So please, justify to me
> the higher price. Keep in mind I'm not a farmer nor a gardener so I
> really
> truly don't know. But I do know it doesn't make a lot of sense to charge
> more for something grown the way our ancestors did it - unadulterated.
> Same
> thing with free-range chicken. So they get to run around? For this we
> pay
> more for them?
>
> Jill
>
>

Pesticides and chemical fertilizers do increase yield - that's why they have
been so widely used. The cost of the chemicals is more than offset by the
increased yield. Ditto for the factory approach to raising chickens. Organic
and free range require more work and give less yield, hence the higher
price.


--
Peter Aitken
Visit my recipe and kitchen myths page at www.pgacon.com/cooking.htm