EPThttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opinion/corn-for-food-not-fuel.html?_r=0
soy...soy is nice
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 126
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opinion/corn-for-food-not-fuel.html?_r=0 soy...soy is nice | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On February 26 2013 14:42 oneofthem wrote: soy is nice no, soy is used as animal feed in intensive farm ops. don't think tofu, think mcdonalds hamburger | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
anyway i think the problem with americans and food is primarily in consumer knowledge and marketing. mass scale farming is not that terrible. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On February 26 2013 15:01 oneofthem wrote: yea, but grass fed meat is also way more expensive. that's why I want them to stop subsidizing the corn and soy, so that that meat reflects the true cost. if you factored in the true costs of factory farmed meat, with the environmental externalities and without the corn subsidy, the difference would be much less. also, we eat way too much meat in general - meat SHOULD be more expensive than it is. we subsidize it, and it's bad for us in the amounts in which we eat it. | ||
|
bumwithagun
United States153 Posts
On February 26 2013 15:03 sam!zdat wrote: that's why I want them to stop subsidizing the corn and soy, so that that meat reflects the true cost. if you factored in the true costs of factory farmed meat, with the environmental externalities and without the corn subsidy, the difference would be much less. also, we eat way too much meat in general - meat SHOULD be more expensive than it is. we subsidize it, and it's bad for us in the amounts in which we eat it. Shockingly I agree with the marxist! We eat too much meat, but this is changing with or without corn subsidies. Just today i was reading about how jewish delis are failing in LA and NY, primarily because of the gigantic relative price increases of meats like beef brisket since WW2. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On February 26 2013 15:07 bumwithagun wrote: Shockingly I agree with the marxist!. stick around. I think you'll be surprised. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
bumwithagun
United States153 Posts
On February 26 2013 15:08 sam!zdat wrote: stick around. I think you'll be surprised. lets hope not, otherwise I will be suffering from some serious cognitive dissonance. A most unfortunate situation to be avoided at all costs :p | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On February 26 2013 15:50 bumwithagun wrote: lets hope not, otherwise I will be suffering from some serious cognitive dissonance. A most unfortunate situation to be avoided at all costs :p unfortunate?!?!? that's how you know you're about to achieve a valuable dialectical insight! | ||
|
BlueBird.
United States3889 Posts
On February 26 2013 15:10 oneofthem wrote: should probably consider additional food related income subsidy then. for people who care about food quality, the cost is not usually a big concern. but for those who do, some bad meat is better than no meat at all. I do just fine without any meat at all  | ||
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
Neat link. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/20/the-sequester-absolutely-everything-you-could-possibly-need-to-know-in-one-faq/ | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
The Republicans are refusing to negotiate. And the White House is giving speeches to blame the Republicans, explaining the economic damage the sequester will do, and calling for a "balanced approach". The bad news is that it's almost certain now that there will be no deal, at least until some time after the sequester kicks in. But the good news is that according to polls the White House is handily winning the public relations battle. In other news, in a revolt against austerity and mainstream politicians in general, a comedian wins 25% of the vote in Italy (no single party won more than 30%). | ||
|
ControlMonkey
Australia3109 Posts
On February 26 2013 15:03 sam!zdat wrote: that's why I want them to stop subsidizing the corn and soy, so that that meat reflects the true cost. if you factored in the true costs of factory farmed meat, with the environmental externalities and without the corn subsidy, the difference would be much less. also, we eat way too much meat in general - meat SHOULD be more expensive than it is. we subsidize it, and it's bad for us in the amounts in which we eat it. Wow sam, you are sounding like an economist, with your externalities and your distorting subsidies and your prices affecting behaviour. | ||
|
radiatoren
Denmark1907 Posts
On February 26 2013 18:56 paralleluniverse wrote: Less than a week to the sequester and as Robert Reich says "the silence is deafening". The Republicans are refusing to negotiate. And the White House is giving speeches to blame the Republicans, explaining the economic damage the sequester will do, and calling for a "balanced approach". The bad news is that it's almost certain now that there will be no deal, at least until some time after the sequester kicks in. But the good news is that according to polls the White House is handily winning the public relations battle. In other news, in a revolt against austerity and mainstream politicians in general, a comedian wins 25% of the vote in Italy (no single party won more than 30%). Yeah well, the manslaughter convicted comedian ran a campaign on anti-corruption in a country where corruption by politicians are everyday news. Anti-austerity is probably also a factor, but when the alternatives are Berlusconi, the definition of "abuse of power" and his mail money to the people anti-austerity, Monti, the father of italian austerity and Bersani, the supposed lap-dog of Merkel, it is a tough pick! On the american side, it is still the fear of breaking the pledge to the anti-taxation god (or devil?) that keeps republicans from even engaging in conversations on "a balanced approach". It is a shame that single issue lobbies and PACs are so unbelievably strong (to some extend on both sides!) and the political race of constant chicken is so obviously destructive that politics seem more like a media theater than a place of debates and policy development. When "playing to your own base" takes over the fight for "scoring points", you know that things are problematic! | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
Annyway i dont envy the italians, they had to pick from: -a clown -a communist -a bankers friend -a gangster/playboy The commedian did realy well in 2008 as well btw, its not a one time thing. In 2008 he scored even higher then now i think. sry for off topic. Have little to say about the meat industry, i agree with sam1zdat though. There is not only productivity to think about, there is also something like animal well beeing wich should be considerd when judging the meat industry. My guess is still no deal and the democrats taking the fall for the debt/budget thingy. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On February 26 2013 22:45 radiatoren wrote: Yeah well, the manslaughter convicted comedian ran a campaign on anti-corruption in a country where corruption by politicians are everyday news. Anti-austerity is probably also a factor, but when the alternatives are Berlusconi, the definition of "abuse of power" and his mail money to the people anti-austerity, Monti, the father of italian austerity and Bersani, the supposed lap-dog of Merkel, it is a tough pick! On the american side, it is still the fear of breaking the pledge to the anti-taxation god (or devil?) that keeps republicans from even engaging in conversations on "a balanced approach". It is a shame that single issue lobbies and PACs are so unbelievably strong (to some extend on both sides!) and the political race of constant chicken is so obviously destructive that politics seem more like a media theater than a place of debates and policy development. When "playing to your own base" takes over the fight for "scoring points", you know that things are problematic! A 'balanced approach' won't work this go around because the tax and spending issues were already separated into their own negotiations. We were up against the fiscal cliff (tax increases / spending cuts) at the start of the year. An agreement was then reached on taxes and the spending cuts were delayed for two months. Obama then asked for a 'balanced approach' to address, specifically, the spending cuts. At that point the bridges were burned and negotiations died... and the two month delay is up. | ||
| ||
