Um. No one would farm GM plants if the returns on cost weren't there. Clearly, for the farmer, and therefore the consumer, they are net less expensive, even with that fat profit margin for Roundup. So-called organic farming is more expensive and it shows in consumer prices. The people who are impacted most by higher grocery store prices are the poor.

It's easy to do, just follow the Walmart (or other large corporation) business model: Maintain artificially low prices long enough to destroy the rest of the local market, create captive customers, raise prices.

In the case of a seed supply company, this could be done either via buying up competing farms and selling the end product for much less than your competitors; alternatively, supplying your seeds so cheaply that farmers would be stupid to use the alternative. Once the traditional seed supplies are gone, enjoy your monopoly.

The process you've just described is illegal in general:

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

Walmart's case is complicated.

They don't account for the pollution Roundup causes.

That's sort of a handwavy dismissal ins't it? What exactly is the pollution Roundup causes and is it worse than, say, petroleum based mulch, potassium chloride, and copper sulfate?

Yeah. I don't have any real numbers on pollution metrics either way, but it is a fact that so-called organic farming requires more land than traditional ag to produce the same output, and thus more tractor fuel burned per food, a direct source of pollution. As far as I know, (atmospheric) pollution isn't a slam dunk argument against roundup.

There are quite a few studies claiming that glyphosate is toxic. I bet this will turn out like cigarettes. Companies will fight to death until the evidence is absolutely overwhelming.