Bill Gates is the biggest private owner of farmland in the United States. Why?

Bill Gates has never been a farmer. So why did the Land Report dub him “Farmer Bill” this year? The third richest man on the planet doesn’t have a green thumb. Nor does he put in the back-breaking labor humble people do to grow our food and who get for far less praise for it. That kind of hard work isn’t what made him rich. Gates’ achievement, according to the report, is that he’s largest private owner of farmland in the US. A 2018 purchase of 14,500 acres of prime eastern Washington farmland – which is traditional Yakima territory – for $171m helped him get that title.

In total, Gates owns approximately 242,000 acres of farmland with assets totaling more than $690m. To put that into perspective, that’s nearly the size of Hong Kong and twice the acreage of the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, where I’m an enrolled member. A white man owns more farmland than my entire Native nation!

The United States is defined by the excesses of its ruling class. But why do a handful of people own so much land?

Land is power, land is wealth, and, more importantly, land is about race and class. The relationship to land – who owns it, who works it and who cares for it – reflects obscene levels of inequality and legacies of colonialism and white supremacy in the United States, and also the world. Wealth accumulation always goes hand-in-hand with exploitation and dispossession. In this country, enslaved Black labor first built US wealth atop stolen Native land. The 1862 Homestead Act opened up 270m acres of Indigenous territory – which amounts to 10% of US land – for white settlement. Black, Mexican, Asian, and Native people, of course, were categorically excluded from the benefits of a federal program that subsidized and protected generations of white wealth.

The billionaire media mogul Ted Turner epitomizes such disparities. He owns 2m acres and has the world’s largest privately owned buffalo herd. Those animals, which are sacred to my people and were nearly hunted to extinction by settlers, are preserved today on nearly 200,000 acres of Turner’s ranchland within the boundaries of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty territory in the western half of what is now the state of South Dakota, land that was once guaranteed by the US government to be a “permanent home” for Lakota people.

The gun and the whip may not accompany land acquisitions this time around. But billionaire class assertions that they are philosopher kings and climate-conscious investors who know better than the original caretakers are little more than ruses for what amounts to a 21st century land grab – with big payouts in a for-profit economy seeking “green” solutions.

Our era is dominated by the ultra-rich, the climate crisis and a burgeoning green capitalism. And Bill Gates’ new book How to Avoid a Climate Disaster positions himself as a thought leader in how to stop putting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and how to fund what he has called elsewhere a “global green revolution” to help poor farmers mitigate climate change. What expertise in climate science or agriculture Gates possesses beyond being filthy rich is anyone’s guess.

When pressed during a book discussion on Reddit about why he’s gobbling up so much farmland, Gates claimed, “It is not connected to climate [change].” The decision, he said, came from his “investment group.” Cascade Investment, the firm making these acquisitions, is controlled by Gates. And the firm said it’s “very supportive of sustainable farming”. It also is a shareholder in the plant-based protein companies Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods as well as the farming equipment manufacturer John Deere. His firm’s largest farmland acquisition happened in 2017, when it acquired 61 farming properties from a Canadian investment firm to the tune of $500m.

more

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-gates-biggest-private-owner-124506756.html

Elderly Asian Woman Stabbed to Death in California By Woman Out on 'Emergency Bail'

An Asian senior was fatally stabbed while walking her dogs in Riverside, CA on Saturday morning. The incident, which police say appeared to be “completely random,” occurred in the area of Golden Avenue in the neighborhood of La Sierra just after 7 a.m. Ke Chieh Meng, 64, was found bleeding from stab wounds in her abdomen. She was rushed to the Riverside Community Hospital and pronounced dead. After the incident, residents in the area reported a suspicious-looking woman. Soon, police located and arrested Darlene Stephanie Montoya, 23, of Monterey Park. A preliminary investigation revealed that Meng was “randomly confronted and attacked by the transient woman,” who then fled the scene. “When our detectives interviewed the suspect, they didn't come across anything to suggest she attacked the victim due to her race,” Riverside Police Officer Ryan Railsback told CNN. Montoya has been charged with murder, a weapons violation and potentially being under the influence of an illegal substance. She is being held at the Robert Presley Detention Center without bail. Just days before this incident, Montoya was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon. However, due to the emergency bail schedule brought about by COVID-19, she was released on a “Notice to Appear” citation. Meng’s death remains under investigation. “The suspect is homeless from LA County and is obviously experiencing mental health and substance abuse issues,” said Railsback, adding that “the attack could have happened to anyone.” Meng’s son Yi Bai, however, is demanding answers. “Why was it her? Was it because she is elderly and she can’t fight back? Was it that she was an easy target? Was it that she was Asian?” he asked KNBC. “I don’t really know why she was attacked.” Anyone with information is urged to contact Detective Dan Mercadefe

https://www.yahoo.com/news/elderly-asian-woman-stabbed-death-193007140.html

>>13367554

"Each state holds governmental jurisdiction over a defined geographic territory, and shares its sovereignty with the United States federal government. According to numerous decisions of the United States Supreme Court, the 50 individual states and the United States as a whole are each sovereign jurisdictions."

Wikipoopia

So, if a State grants itself a Sanctuary State/city, are they breaking Federal Law? Who makes the Laws? States or Fed?

Cause right bout now, they are all INCOMPETENT, IMPOTENT WIND BAGS.

>>13367652

Closest Delta 4.6

Strength Test

>>13367733

Thought there was an EO, seizing all these satanic bastards assets. Yet, all of them are making money hand over fist since their Kung Flu attack.

>>13367741

If you have a dick, you ain't a chick.

Stripped tranny

>>13367750

Oh, so McCarthy has done something with Transparency? Blocking the Sanctuary Status? Where? Cali is infested with illegals.

Previous Vaccines activated? Seems like it.

Cancer diagnoses see a huge spike at age 65, study finds. Doctors speculate why

When it comes to any illness, the sooner it can be diagnosed, the better someone’s chances of recovery and survival. But a review of more than 600,000 patient records found that people are delaying medical care until they turn 65 years old, despite the risks involved.

Researchers at Stanford School of Medicine discovered a “substantial rise” in new breast, lung, colon and prostate cancer diagnoses nationwide — the most common cancers in the U.S. — at 65, which is when Americans become eligible for Medicare.

A quick analysis of study senior author Dr. Joseph Shrager’s patients’ records revealed a twofold increase in lung cancer surgeries among 65-year-olds compared to those just one year younger.

The team speculates that people on the cusp of Medicare eligibility wait until they turn 65 to seek cancer screenings and treatment because they “often lack insurance as a result of early retirement,” have other health conditions that hinder the renewal of their insurance plans or cannot afford private insurance costs, according to a Stanford news release.

In all, the study, published last week in the journal Cancer, suggests that expanding Medicare to those younger than 65 could improve cancer outcomes.

“If you don’t get the right screening or prompt diagnosis you are going to have lower cure rates,” Dr. Joseph Shrager, chief of the division of thoracic surgery at the Stanford University Medical Center, said in the release. “This study underlines the important difference that some sort of Medicare expansion could make… and suggests that many people are delaying their care for financial reasons until they get health insurance through Medicare.”

The team analyzed records from patients between 61 and 69 years old who were diagnosed with lung (134,991 patients), breast (175,558 patients), colon (62,721 patients) and prostate cancer (238,823 patients) from 2004 to 2016.

Lung cancer diagnosis rates consistently increased by 3-4% each year for people aged 61 to 64, but then doubled for patients who were 65. Those for colon cancer grew by about 1-2% annually in the years before Medicare eligibility and then jumped to nearly 15% at age 65.

Overall, the biggest jumps in cancer diagnoses occurred during the transition from 64 to 65 years old compared to all other age transitions, according to the study. After age 65, diagnosis rates declined for all cancer types.

What’s more, adults older than 65 who had cancer and were insured were more likely to get surgery to treat their illness and were less likely to die from it than their younger, uninsured counterparts.

“Collectively, these results demonstrate that Medicare eligibility, an event coincident with becoming 65 years old, is associated with a rise in early-stage cancer diagnoses and a resulting survival benefit,” the study says, according to the release.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cancer-diagnoses-see-huge-spike-210635450.html

>>13368149

Why does he have the Pepsi box?

KEK

Article from 2017. Didn't POTUS just put MERCK on the list of boycott? Why was Moderna working on mRNA shit in 2017

Mysterious $5 Billion Biotech Moderna Hit With Legal Setback Related To Key Technology

A British Columbia judge has issued a ruling that puts in doubt whether Moderna Theraputics will be able to commercialize some of its first products in clinical trials using key technology that it doesn’t own.

British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Dev Dley this week granted a request from Arbutus Biopharma for a pre-trial injunction that prevents a tiny company called Acuitas from sublicensing Arbutus’ lipid nanoparticle delivery technology until the end of October. Acuitas has sublicensed the technology four times to Moderna, which appears to be using it in the first two products it has put into clinical trials.

The ruling also makes clear that Judge Dley believes that Acuitas was never authorized to sublicense Arbutus’ delivery system for use in vaccines. The first two products Moderna put in human trials were vaccines and four of the five products Moderna has in the clinic are vaccines.

Moderna is a super hot private biotech company that has raised $1.9 billion. That includes deals it has made with big companies likeMerck, Alexion and AstraZeneca,and investor cash most recently raised at a valuation of $5 billion. Led by Stéphane Bancel, Moderna is developing a new class of mRNA drugs aiming to turn human bodies into drug factories by directing cells to produce therapeutic proteins.

But getting the mRNA safely into the body’s cells is tricky. Acuitas, which is based in its CEO’s Vanouver home, sublicensed one delivery system to Moderna that wraps the mRNA in balls of fat. That delivery system belongs to Arbutus and last year it terminated Aquitas’ license to the technology. Acuitas turned around and sued Arbutus in Vancouver to preserve its rights to the techonology. Acuitas originally got the license as a result of a separate legal dispute and richly-funded Moderna tapped Acuitas for the delivery system instead of its actual owner, Arbutus.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2017/02/09/mysterious-5-billion-biotech-moderna-hit-with-legal-setback-related-to-key-technology/?sh=3af331ee75f7

>>13368413