Cancer is a product of industrial environment

#176
#176
kptvol said:
Really wish the poor weren't forced to eat cheese doodles. No healthy foods exist that are affordable to the unwealthy.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
Only in China, where they are pulling people out of poverty every day. Those guys eat like kings.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#177
#177
Mennonites drive cars and use electricity.

Amish ask for rides to get home. I know this living in Ohio. I have watched many Amish people accept a ride from someone else. Too me that is stupid. You can't own a car but you can ride in one.
 
#178
#178
utgibbs said:
Within my children's lifetimes (and long before they go on Social Security) we will have to address the energy imbalance in agriculture where 50 calories of inputs are required to make 1 calorie of food. We will not have make it one-to-one in their lifetimes, but it will require other choices (like, can I afford to drive my car).

You still need to get straight some things regarding "industrialization." Let's start with the most obvious food example.

We must do away with the inhumane "industrial" production of chickens, cows, and pigs. The externalities of this system should be self-explanatory. It is a product of industrialization.

Quite simply, free range must be the norm. It will mean meat is more expensive. That is fine. The modern American diet has WAY too much meat in it. In fact, free range chickens, just as an example, are more nutritous (they still have omega acids). No one who has been fortunate enough to enjoy free range meat would settle gladly for the factory farm product. Quality, in other words, replaces cheap tat.

It leads to another disconnect from industrialization - decentralization. Farmer's markets, buying eggs from the neighbor who has chickens, organiponicos, etc.

Monoculture agriculture is another form of industrialized production. This is, in a word, very stupid for everything - soil, food, water. It is good for Capital. We must move away from monoculture agriculture. You could call this "decentralizing" the agricultural genes.

I foresee a future where agricultural labor will be back in a big way. This is not a bad thing IMHO. It is a real education in the means of production.

This is the most important though:

I get the feeling you think "de-industrializing" is about getting rid of tractors and combine harversters. It has almost nothing to do with that at all. Let's look at the Amish and the Mennonites to conclude. They have a damn good system, they practice a lot of the techniques described, they have beautiful farms, and they are wealthy. Technology applied to harnessing horse and oxen power again would be the gifts of the Enlightenment applied with a new politics / a fresh non-Industrial outlook. Let's look at the Cuban model too.

The fact is, we could have gone down a similar road, using rationality, putting people ahead of profits. Instead, we get Archer Daniel Midlands as the bagmen for Watergate, and the scourge of small American farmers everywhere. Cheap tat becomes the high calorie cheese doodles and other unhealthy bunk the poor gets to eat.

If you want additional reading, by all means, pick up some Wendell Berry. He's worth reading on any subject.
Click to expand...



How many people are you willing to let die in your system?
 
#179
#179
He's pulling your legs. He doesn't believe in all of that stuff.

His tongue is firmly planted in his cheek. He is simply showing the next logical step for most of these crazy liberals if we follow their nonsense.

Great job, gibbs. Keep the satire coming.
 
#180
#180
utgibbs said:
Within my children's lifetimes (and long before they go on Social Security) we will have to address the energy imbalance in agriculture where 50 calories of inputs are required to make 1 calorie of food. We will not have make it one-to-one in their lifetimes, but it will require other choices (like, can I afford to drive my car).

You still need to get straight some things regarding "industrialization." Let's start with the most obvious food example.

We must do away with the inhumane "industrial" production of chickens, cows, and pigs. The externalities of this system should be self-explanatory. It is a product of industrialization.

Quite simply, free range must be the norm. It will mean meat is more expensive. That is fine. The modern American diet has WAY too much meat in it. In fact, free range chickens, just as an example, are more nutritous (they still have omega acids). No one who has been fortunate enough to enjoy free range meat would settle gladly for the factory farm product. Quality, in other words, replaces cheap tat.

It leads to another disconnect from industrialization - decentralization. Farmer's markets, buying eggs from the neighbor who has chickens, organiponicos, etc.

Monoculture agriculture is another form of industrialized production. This is, in a word, very stupid for everything - soil, food, water. It is good for Capital. We must move away from monoculture agriculture. You could call this "decentralizing" the agricultural genes.

I foresee a future where agricultural labor will be back in a big way. This is not a bad thing IMHO. It is a real education in the means of production.

This is the most important though:

I get the feeling you think "de-industrializing" is about getting rid of tractors and combine harversters. It has almost nothing to do with that at all. Let's look at the Amish and the Mennonites to conclude. They have a damn good system, they practice a lot of the techniques described, they have beautiful farms, and they are wealthy. Technology applied to harnessing horse and oxen power again would be the gifts of the Enlightenment applied with a new politics / a fresh non-Industrial outlook. Let's look at the Cuban model too.

The fact is, we could have gone down a similar road, using rationality, putting people ahead of profits. Instead, we get Archer Daniel Midlands as the bagmen for Watergate, and the scourge of small American farmers everywhere. Cheap tat becomes the high calorie cheese doodles and other unhealthy bunk the poor gets to eat.

If you want additional reading, by all means, pick up some Wendell Berry. He's worth reading on any subject.
Click to expand...

I'll start with the end part on AG. Do you really believe we would have affordable tractors and combines for the mass amount of individual farming needed without industrialization?

I love the meat will cost more but people eat too much meat so no biggie argument. Thanks for deciding people's diets for them. How on earth will people afford free range chicken?

The Amish are relatively self-sustaining but the vast majority of the country is not. It is as far from real world as possible to suggest we can feed 300 + million in this country with free range chickens and Amish farming techniques.

You've omitted the distribution question altogether as well.
 
#181
#181
volinbham said:
You've omitted the distribution question altogether as well.
Click to expand...

solar powered locomotives made from environmentally friendly recycled hemp fiber?

on rainy days, they can be powered by all the BS gibbs is peddling.
 
#182
#182
volinbham said:
You've omitted the distribution question altogether as well.
Click to expand...

That probably has something to do with the fact that he's planning for every community to grow its own food, so no distribution will be needed. You'll just ride your horse (because cars are evil) down to the local farm and pick all your vegetables each night, then you'll get to chase down your free range chicken for dinner. This is your plan, right gibbs?
 
#183
#183
volinbham said:
I'll start with the end part on AG. Do you really believe we would have affordable tractors and combines for the mass amount of individual farming needed without industrialization?

I love the meat will cost more but people eat too much meat so no biggie argument. Thanks for deciding people's diets for them. How on earth will people afford free range chicken?

The Amish are relatively self-sustaining but the vast majority of the country is not. It is as far from real world as possible to suggest we can feed 300 + million in this country with free range chickens and Amish farming techniques.

You've omitted the distribution question altogether as well.
Click to expand...

On the question of feeding 300+ million you would be dead wrong. We are a huge exporter of food in just the first instance. We can look at the Cuban example as well of a population who went from a "peak oil" scenario to near self-sufficiency in less than a decade. In fact, Cuba has less of a hunger problem than we do, according to our own USDA. England feeds over 60 million in a country the size of Alabama. Sure, they import stuff (as does Cuba), but they don't have to do so. If we paid the true cost of transport, they would import far less (and we would export far less). And they rely far, far less on industrial livestock production (especially cows and pigs - not so great on chickens).

You are simply locked in an ideology.

The distribution question is by far the easiest. Far more local production and rail. No brainer. Good globalization began a long time ago. Not that I'm defending the conquistadors, but the potato made its way onto Hindi tables within a decade of coming out of South America. Distribution is easy.

Regarding meat being more expensive, it is a two way street, volinbham. You are making me pay for the externalities generated by industrial meat production. You are restricting my freedom. And thus you prove you do not truly believe in the market, and further prove the market must be "doctored" in order to work. Again, there might be less meat in the diet because of cost, but it would taste better and be more nutritious and improve health. Quality ahead of cheap tat. Your "controlling diet" argument is specious and ridiculous.

If we look at the municipial solid waste figures (these do not include industrial wastes) we see that 60% of what we throw away is compostable materials. :facepalm: Of these 250 million tons 14% are straight "food scraps."

As far as "thinning the population" well, the obesity epidemic is predicted to be the #1 health problem in the near future (if not already). Again, a beneficial consequence falling out of a new paradigm.

You are locked in the Man's paradigm. De-industrialization has nothing to do with returning to the Stone Age. It has everything to do with recognizing the true human condition outside the backdoor and turning the tools of Enlightenment away from the needs of Capital and directing them at the needs of people.

@MG - the entire paper industry should be converted to hemp forthwith. Hemp would be a star player in a new Green Revolution. A fast growing, nitrogen fixing rotation crop with 20,000 potential products? You bet! Get it in the ground! Grandma comrades knitting hemp sweaters with peace signs! Long Live the Workers!
 
Last edited:
#185
#185
utgibbs said:
Regarding meat being more expensive, it is a two way street, volinbham. You are making me pay for the externalities generated by industrial meat production. You are restricting my freedom. And thus you prove you do not truly believe in the market, and further prove the market must be "doctored" in order to work. Again, there might be less meat in the diet because of cost, but it would taste better and be more nutritious and improve health. Quality ahead of cheap tat. Your "controlling diet" argument is specious and ridiculous.
Click to expand...

no one is forcing you to do anything. Your "better meat" is available now you just choose not to go get it. I have plenty in my freezer right now and could name 5 other posters that have the same. Perhaps it is you that needs to be rebooted
 
#186
#186
utvolpj said:
no one is forcing you to do anything. Your "better meat" is available now you just choose not to go get it. I have plenty in my freezer right now and could name 5 other posters that have the same. Perhaps it is you that needs to be rebooted
Click to expand...

I'm one. We buy our beef and chicken from a local farmer who hasn't anything to do with industrial style production. He's organic so it's expensive, but it makes my wife happy. Our ground turkey comes from the store and it wigs her out.

I can assure you that Americans would absolutely wig out if they had to buy meat from the local guy like this as their staple.
 
#187
#187
heck for the price of a shotgun shell you could have the original free-range turkey. Of course they're a little harder to find and catch
 
#189
#189
utvolpj said:
no one is forcing you to do anything. Your "better meat" is available now you just choose not to go get it. I have plenty in my freezer right now and could name 5 other posters that have the same. Perhaps it is you that needs to be rebooted
Click to expand...

Every deer season I find myself in Mennonite country for some old timey butchering. I can guarantee you I haven't eaten meat produced from industrial livestock rearing in well over 15 years.

Regardless, I'm still paying for the externalities of YOUR industrial meat system. Either pay the proper cost, or think about the reboot. Either way, you are trampling on my freedom....
 
#190
#190
yet you're ok with trampling on mine with other things. Your hypocrisy is noted
 
#191
#191
utgibbs said:
Every deer season I find myself in Mennonite country for some old timey butchering. I can guarantee you I haven't eaten meat produced from industrial livestock rearing in well over 15 years.

Regardless, I'm still paying for the externalities of YOUR industrial meat system. Either pay the proper cost, or think about the reboot. Either way, you are trampling on my freedom....
Click to expand...

how are you paying for anything of mine, unless the government is dictating, thus eliminating freedoms.

Your "freedoms being trampled upon" argument is probably your worst, and the bar is damn near out of sight on that front.
 
#192
#192
BigPapaVol said:
I'm one. We buy our beef and chicken from a local farmer who hasn't anything to do with industrial style production. He's organic so it's expensive, but it makes my wife happy. Our ground turkey comes from the store and it wigs her out.

I can assure you that Americans would absolutely wig out if they had to buy meat from the local guy like this as their staple.
Click to expand...

:good!:

It works, volinbham.

Many Americans would be taken aback at first, as with anything different than their experience, but as soon as a bunch of their friends and colleagues started doing it, they would jump aboard.

Now, this raises such an important point - being grounded in the real world outside the backdoor and being brought closer to the reality of meat eating, it may well make them consider eating less.

However, it is a failure of industrial civilization that this extreme disconnect between food and the responsibility for food exists. It's a corollary of an aloof and careless culture.
 
#193
#193
utgibbs said:
:good!:

It works, volinbham.

Many Americans would be taken aback at first, as with anything different than their experience, but as soon as a bunch of their friends and colleagues started doing it, they would jump aboard.

Now, this raises such an important point - being grounded in the real world outside the backdoor and being brought closer to the reality of meat eating, it may well make them consider eating less.

However, it is a failure of industrial civilization that this extreme disconnect between food and the responsibility for food exists. It's a corollary of an aloof and careless culture.
Click to expand...

price being the problem, not the method.
 
#194
#194
BigPapaVol said:
how are you paying for anything of mine, unless the government is dictating, thus eliminating freedoms.

Your "freedoms being trampled upon" argument is probably your worst, and the bar is damn near out of sight on that front.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting there are no externalities of industrial meat production?

If you are eating as you say you are, then you aren't trampling on my freedom in this instance, BPV.

Those who aren't paying the proper cost of meat from the industrial livestock production are. I'm not making a big deal about it, but this rather narrow and ridiculous definition of "freedom" developed on VN runs both ways. This is one of those ways.
 
#195
#195
BigPapaVol said:
price being the problem, not the method.
Click to expand...

Although price will never reach industrial lows (unless, of course, we actually PAY for the externalities), prices would come down significantly.

Have you forgotten the laws of supply and demand?
 
#196
#196
utgibbs said:
Are you suggesting there are no externalities of industrial meat production?

If you are eating as you say you are, then you aren't trampling on my freedom in this instance, BPV.

Those who aren't paying the proper cost of meat from the industrial livestock production are.
Click to expand...

I don't care if there are, I'm asking how you're paying for them unless the government is forcing it.

I still use the grocery store, but I in no way force you to eat any way. You have the option to do whatever you please.

If the reduced pricing from mass production weren't profitable, it would go away. If the government would get the hell out of the ethanol and subsidy business, pricing might move. There's still nothing trampling your freedom, unless it's our government, which presumes we're too stupid to handle our own affairs and need its help.
 
#197
#197
utvolpj said:
yet you're ok with trampling on mine with other things. Your hypocrisy is noted
Click to expand...

I was actually making sure you understood your hypocrisy.

I don't subscribe to your views. I don't have a narrow, negative definition of freedom. I subscribe to the positive definition of freedom.
 
#198
#198
utgibbs said:
Although price will never reach industrial lows (unless, of course, we actually PAY for the externalities), prices would come down significantly.

Have you forgotten the laws of supply and demand?
Click to expand...

supply and demand matters, but the cost of production isn't going to be very dramatically impacted for the local guy. He isn't getting to economy of scale, ever.
 
#199
#199
BigPapaVol said:
If the reduced pricing from mass production weren't profitable, it would go away. If the government would get the hell out of the ethanol and subsidy business, pricing might move. There's still nothing trampling your freedom, unless it's our government, which presumes we're too stupid to handle our own affairs and need its help.
Click to expand...

It is profitable because it doesn't pay for its externalities.

:facepalm:

However, an enlightened view on ethanol!
 
#200
#200
BigPapaVol said:
supply and demand matters, but the cost of production isn't going to be very dramatically impacted for the local guy. He isn't getting to economy of scale, ever.
Click to expand...

It will be more expensive but it is higher quality as well.

Whether it would be more expensive than the industrial model which pays for its externalities is debatable. As far as I can tell, there is little difference between free range eggs and mass production right now.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top