Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday July 29 2014, @05:56PM   Printer-friendly
from the big-wins-can-happen-in-small-places dept.

Natural Society reports

The West Virginia State Supreme Court finalized a big blow to the biotech giant Monsanto this month, finishing a settlement causing Monsanto to pay $93 million to the tiny town of Nitro, West Virginia for poisoning citizens with Agent Orange chemicals. The settlement was approved last year, but details were worked out only weeks ago as to how the funds were to be spent.

The settlement will require Monsanto to do the following:

  • $9 million will be spent to clean dioxin contaminated dust from 4500 homes.
  • $21 million will be spent to test to see if people have been poisoned with dioxin.
  • Citizens will be monitored for such poisoning for 30 years, not just a few months.
  • An additional $63 million is to be allotted if additional tests for dioxin contamination testing is necessary.
  • Anyone who lived in the Nitro area between Jan. 1, 1948, and Sept. 3, 2010 will be tested for dioxin. Although they must show proof they lived in the area, they will be eligible for testing even if they no longer live in Nitro.
  • Former or present employees of Monsanto are not eligible for any of these benefits.
  • An office will be set up to organize testing for Nitro citizens. The registration of participants is to be overlooked by Charleston attorney Thomas Flaherty, who was appointed by the court.
  • Residents have a right to file individual suits against Monsanto if medical tests show they suffered physical harm due to dioxin exposure.
 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by bziman on Tuesday July 29 2014, @06:12PM

    by bziman (3577) on Tuesday July 29 2014, @06:12PM (#75175)

    This is a drop in the bucket for a company the size of Monsanto, and they'll just pass the cost on to their customers. If I poisoned a city, I'd go to jail. Where are the jail sentences for the people who allowed this? Corporations are people, right, until it comes to accountability.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=3, Interesting=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by Alfred on Tuesday July 29 2014, @06:28PM

    by Alfred (4006) on Tuesday July 29 2014, @06:28PM (#75183) Journal

    Not only that, they pay nothing to individuals and 2/3s of it isn't going anywhere yet.

    An additional $63 million is to be allotted if additional tests for dioxin contamination testing is necessary

    That is a very big portion resting on a very big conditional and it only goes to more testing. The whole thing is chump change to a big corp and they can probably weasel out of most of it.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @01:47AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @01:47AM (#75345)

    This can only be the beginning for the money roll.
    Watch how scary it gets when they figure out it actually pays to poison cities.

    How much is that testing equipment going to cost?
    Who is providing it?
    What affiliations to government do they have?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @09:08AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @09:08AM (#75433)

    Here a good rule of thumb: Any time you're thinning about writing or saying "they'll just pass the cost on to their customers" stop and think for a bit. Because it's almost always a really dumb thing to say. If a company could successfully raise prices they almost certainly would have already done so, without the need to "pass along" some cost. Cost does not determine pricing. It doesn't have much influence at all unless everybody has the same costs.

    • (Score: 1) by bziman on Wednesday July 30 2014, @06:04PM

      by bziman (3577) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @06:04PM (#75620)

      Advice: if you're going to call someone "dumb", make sure you spell check your post before hitting submit.

      • (Score: 1) by Max Hyre on Saturday August 02 2014, @03:24PM

        by Max Hyre (3427) <reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {eryhxam}> on Saturday August 02 2014, @03:24PM (#76731)
           I.e.: ``My hair's been thinning for years.'' It would take a damned good grammar checker to catch that one, and I suspect there aren't any that good.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04 2014, @08:16AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04 2014, @08:16AM (#77125)

        Good point. Because a typo that resolves to another English word is the important part of the post. Well spotted!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @10:14AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @10:14AM (#78781)

        You weren't called dumb, you said a dumb thing. The two are not the same. Take the opportunity to learn from it, not merely feel insulted.