It's good to see Europe taking the opposite approach of America with regards to Glyphosate. Forget the studies and just let time show us who is right and who is wrong.
All I do know is that humanity made it this far (15000+ years of agriculture) without such chemicals and we'll probably make it much further without them.
If you like Glyphosate, fair enough, enjoy! The rest of us might sit on the sidelines and watch this experiment unfold.
Neo-classical capitalism doesn't even acknowledge the laws of nature let alone follow them.
Jeremy Rifkin has written a lot of about this topic and his arguments that economists should first learn the laws of thermodynamics before being set loose on the economy.
Agreed, there is no conspiracy here. Just a series of systemic flaws. What's scary is that there needs to be a discussion on this but few economists are brave enough to voice their concerns. David Harvey, Steve Keen, and others are stepping up but we need more people.
Keep in mind also that the 10% reserve doesn't mean physical money (paper/coins). When a bank loans money, it can create $9 out of thin air for every real $1 it holds (be it in paper or in DB entry). When loans are being paid back, the banks count that payment as "real" money against which they can loan 9x the value again. In theory at least, this process can repeat to infinity.
I wonder if anybody unit tested this design for flaws.
The documentary "Four Horsemen" (link below) goes into these topics at length, especially money creation. Most people's jaws drop when they learn that 97% of all money in the world isn't in paper/coin form but rather 0s and 1s in a database and that it is all willed into existence as debt by a bank.
I wouldn't want to be a dumpster diver anymore than the next person but I applaud this person for actually having a view outside of rampant consumerism and following through on it.
A couple months of laying around doing nothing will drive most people crazy and they'll begin asking themselves what they want their life to be about.
And even if they don't contribute anything, should all people be required to useful to others or can't some just choose to be left alone if they are self sufficient?
In a world of scarcity I can see the argument of forcing people to contribute if they want to take back but what about a world of abundance? You and I are breathing abundant air, for free, and nobody is getting angry right? What if other resources like electricity were as abundant as Tesla once dreamed?
I'm not saying I'm right or wrong. These are just thoughts worth consideration.