Where does "BIO", sustainability and "SOCIAL" really begin?

Updated: Aug 14, 2019

Is it nowadays enough to search for a bio-supplier, buy the products from him and sell them ourselves as bio-products or as products with sustainability?

We have answered this question for us with a definite NO because unfortunately there are way more bio-products on sale than really being produced. pursues the goal to have the whole value chain in-house for all our real values. Only that way, we can guarantee 100% that these real values are even existing, are belonging to us and that we are entirely able to determine what happens with them.

Within the scope of our Paulownia plantation in Indonesia we grow superfoods (like ginger, curcuma, jackfruit…) in between the trees and all this in 100% bio-quality, 100% sustainably (we reforest old plantations) and 100% socially. From the start on our employees earn above the national average. They cannot only feed their families and themselves very good, but also afford things, which many others, unfortunately, can't afford.

Compare to many other competitors; we have an optimum starting point because of our combination of paulownia and superfoods. The outlook is quite encouraging, because we have top bio-superfoods and a forest, which promise a great harvest in 8 years, and as well we will be able to supply the population with real bio-products.

A lot of competitors offer their workers or other local people as well to get provision (afterward) if the products get sold.

For us, this is the completely wrong approach and seems like a game with the "guilty conscience" or even said "extortion".

Well, their statement seems to be the following:

"If you do not buy our product, but one of the competitors, so the person is not getting any money or other provisions."

We can't express with words, how reprehensible this argumentation is.

If we buy a product and enjoy a product (e.g., our tea), we want to be sure from the beginning that the persons, who have produced this product laboriously live well and like their work. Don't you think?

Why should these persons only get more money if we buy the product? What if only 1.000 products get sold of 10.000 products being produced? Does this mean that the 9.000 products which go to the garbage are taking the dreams of 9.000 persons with them to the rubbish? What the hell does this have to do with SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY??

Companies which are arguing like this, are still exploiting their workers and passing the parcel to the consumers. If the customer buys, everything is fine. If the customer does not buy, the company does not care because it didn't have to pre-finance anything. Giving the risks to others and claiming only the profits for themselves is the wrong way nowadays.

The globalization should also be used to generate a good income for the people who are producing our foods and letting them participate in the product's success. If 1 kilogram of tea costs 300 USD and a worker on the plantation only earns 1,50 USD per day, something goes wrong (one plate of rice already costs 2 USD!)

Our workers in Indonesia are, for example getting food-money. This way, they can use their whole paycheck for whatever else they need or want to have. As you can see, it can be done differently.

There are other ways. Exactly this is our concept – this is and the brands and

"Earn money together – not from each other!"

#itsmymoney #purelife #itsmyteatime #investments #organic #socialinvestments #money

106 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All