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 doesnt make her guilty of assorted other crimes, much as many in the foodie community would like to think. Moreover, a jury of ones 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 prosecutions 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.)
Its 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 amountsstill 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 Fairpossibly the most popular of its type in the country. From the prosecutions 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 dont 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, theyd 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.
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.
Is it legal to sell eggs that are out-sourced as your own? and not inform the consumers?
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
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
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.
Vonderplanitz’s real name is John Richards Swigart. This is his father’s obituary:
http://www.gsbfuneralhome.com/obituaries/JosefGarfield-Swigart-209/#/Obituary
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 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
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?
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
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.
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.
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.
She admitted to deceiving customers, therefore she did not adhere to any standards.
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
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.
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
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.
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?
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.”
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
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.
Certified organic is based on self-reporting, and can mean everything or nothing.
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.
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—its 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.
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.
Thank You.
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 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
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
That’s great that you are able to obtain your milk and eggs at an affordable price. When my kids were young, there was no way we could’ve afforded $14/gal for milk or even $4 for eggs. Not knowing anything about your farmers, just from what you wrote, I can only assume they are surviving fine. Otherwise, I’ve no doubt they would do a price increase if needed.
Some people appear to think people in business should get big or get out. Not everyone thinks that way, nor do they wish to try and feed the whole world. It seems that when producers get big is when the contamination and poor quality comes into play.
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.
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!
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
http://www.wewant2live.com/is-aajonus-for-real-who-wrote-the-books-that-bear-his-name/
http://www.wewant2live.com/rawesome-data-comes-to-light-poisonous-chickens-eggs-etc/
http://www.wewant2live.com/why-is-aajonus-so-concerned-about-toxicity-in-commercial-chickens-and-eggs/
Seems the best thing is do your own research and ask questions and make the best choice with what you gather.
As said, Palmer admitted to deceiving people, I don’t recall if Stewart knew? This leaves their credibility in question. Trust isn’t easily given and not easily restored, if it ever is.
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.
Actually, a friend of mine told me about a couple of places where the eggs are $3.50/dozen! And they’re free-range, too.
It’s true, most people are pretty good at realizing when they need to raise prices. The milk actually did go up twice by $.50 cent increases. It was originally $4.00 when I started patronizing the farm.
Your right on about the “big” factor.
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.
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.
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.
I would like to join the chorus of others who have asked you to explain the milk market pricing/value, question/answer. What kind of formula do you, use if any? Just raise the price until people stop buying or find other alternatives? Do you adjust both up and down over time? Not meant in an accusatory tone, just curious so we can all learn.
And to answer your question about mama and her husband stradling the poverty line, I would like to point out that America’s greatest flaw is imho the greed that drives many people to want to own or control much more than they could ever need or use, and refuse to share except in return for “more riches.” I teach my children to share and be happy that they can never have enough, and that’s healthy except when your ambition goes into runaway mode.
Enough is enough, and too much is never enough depending on your view.
I’d also say that the measure of wealth should not ever be measured as a dollar or possession amount. The ongoing transfer of wealth you refer to, pales when referenced in the terms of American Indians losing all their land and culture to European settlers, or other empire builders who conquistated and plundered in the name of progress or religion, including our current own USA elected/corporatedselected leaders. The petrol will eventually stop flowing, then what?
Give me a daily sunrise/sunset, a dog and a vegetable garden and I will always be happy. Money, like sex doesn’t matter except when you don’t have any.
Sorry to resort to the very things I had complained about in an earlier post regarding religion/philosophy etc. I promise I won’t do it again. Happy milk drinking!
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
Although I am not rich, there are more things would torment me at the dentists office than the cost if my teeth were terrible.
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.
My kids did not grow up on raw dairy, neither have ever had any cavities.
http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-6b.shtml
http://news.softpedia.com/news/3-8-Million-Years-Old-Human-Jaw-Clarifies-Human-Evolution-59896.shtml
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090203093125.htm
http://www.gmilburn.ca/2009/04/03/human-evolution-and-frameshift-mutations/
I would love to know, does the farmer or anyone in the family work off farm? Aka, are they making a living “farming,” or subsidizing other people’s food.
American’s are far too used to food being artificially cheap. Milk at $8-10 a gallon, eggs at $4-6 dozen would not at all be an anomaly, but the more normal prices for these goods historically.
I’m currently homeschooling 4 children and have another on the way (remember, “Be fruitful and multiply”). My career/output is these children and seeing that they grow into adults who will better the world in some way, though perhaps small. (Hmm.. I would say I’m certainly maximizing my output there).
What I want is to become a “Radical Homemaker”!
Whatever the case with these farms and their farmers, they are producing foods my family can afford. I’m grateful to them, and even if their products aren’t perfect (organic feed, etc.) the food is cleaner, better, and the cows are more humanely treated than the industrial version. Plus, I can hand the money right to them and I can see their set-up.
Doubtless, I’m compromising in some ways, but no way can we pay $10/gallon for milk, nor $6/dozen for eggs. They would either become luxury items, or we’d have to get our own dairy animal and chickens, which at the moment is impossible.
Yes, I know $3/gallon is unrealistic-the farmers are getting killed. But there must be a happy medium.
I don’t watch TV and hardly ever put my feet up. Never had a welfare check, either. I do grumble sometimes 🙁
You are much too funny Mr. Watson, and this thread is getting tremendously long. I’m having too much fun.