Trolling Vegan Facebook group

"...But implicit in the argument that local farming is better for the environment than industrial agriculture is an assumption that a “relocalized” food system can be just as efficient as today’s modern farming. That assumption is simply wrong. Today’s high crop yields and low costs reflect gains from specialization and trade, as well as scale and scope economies that would be forsaken under the food system that locavores endorse...Forsaking comparative advantage in agriculture by localizing means it will take more inputs to grow a given quantity of food, including more land and more chemicals—all of which come at a cost of carbon emissions...In order to maintain current output levels for 40 major field crops and vegetables, a locavore-like production system would require an additional 60 million acres of cropland, 2.7 million tons more fertilizer, and 50 million pounds more chemicals. The land-use changes and increases in demand for carbon-intensive inputs would have profound impacts on the carbon footprint of our food, destroy habitat and worsen environmental pollution..."

http://freakonomics.com/2011/11/14/t...of-local-food/

^^lol I just posted that piece several posts back^^

The thing is people like myself want to farm - I don't give a fuck about growing the most efficient crop--> I care about not having a 9-5. I grow what pays.

OTOH many people like to drive into the country and buy food or wine. I simply fill this need and it works for me. More or less Im providing a product for the elite who can afford it.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Pass the brie please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamespio

And I don't think anybody in this thread is denigrating that.

However, the current large scale patterns of food consumption in the USA are no more sustainable than would be a purely "local" diet, if they were expanded to other populations. The fact is that a meat-based diet has a large ecological footprint. It doesn't mean that other diets could not, potentially, be just as bad. It just means we could probably all do better. But when some folks try to do better (even if they are misguided, at least they are trying), they get trolled by assholes like dascunt.

We're still deforesting the amazon, in large part to raise meat and drugs. That's going to bite us in the ass, and is actually already doing so. So, every person who chooses not to eat meat, is a tree saved. Every hippy who finds a way to wear hemp rather than leather, is one more tree tying up carbon. And if that hippy is dumb enough to eat tofurkey, well, hell, at least I don't have to eat that crap, so he can do what he wants.

---

Well it's not all bad-> The soy that was processed into tofu created a lot of soy meal byproduct that without cattle would go to waste. Corn from ethanol, whey from cheese... The list is endless. We simply create a lot of food waste that animals eat and produce food from. To nix them compleat would be inefficient.

This just in: how do you know if someone is a vegan?









Don't worry, they'll tell you.


Ok, I'll see myself out.

Where per capita GDP exceeds $4600 per year, the forest area of that country is stable or growing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steepconcrete

I am a organic farmer.....

Like I said I am a organic farmer who relies on selling local. This reality is not good for my conscience as many people who buy from me think they are doing the world a favor by buying overpriced food. But in reality eating local organic has no benefits other than knowing exactly where your food was grown and by whom.

---

ssssshhhhhhhhh!!!! we haven't sold all our quarters for this fall yet!

But yes and no. We are told by our customers that our meat is way better than store bought. Though that could be the butcher hanging time or that they are lightly grained who knows. We buy organic grain mix which I don't think does a thing but its part of the market. Though it hurt this year when a griz ate a couple hundred pounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamespio

Why the fuck would you care what someone else eats? Unless it's someone you love. God dascunt really is das cunt.

---

Cannibals prefer Vegans
its good to know this when flying over the Andes :fmicon:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

.... I am very confident however that the human species will not last as long as the dinosaurs (about 40 million years).

---

Apples and kumquats: can't compare the staying power of one species vs tens of thousands.

.... and then there's the whole quality vs quantity thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tippster

24,000,000 people live in the NYC Metropolitan area. How do you expect them to "eat locally?"

---

and whose fault is that? bankers/industrialists, people who want cheap labour and who've deluded themselves into thinking endless growth on a finite system is good for everyone and sustainable, mainly because they are the benefactors of such a system. and I bet youd like to see 30,000,000 by say 2025, because growth, yay.

Its obvious when you people are always silent when it comes to the elephant in the room, endless growth on a finite planet. pretending to be all about helping the common man. door-to-door snake oil salesman, basically, only significantly more dangerous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theshredder

and whose fault is that? bankers/industrialists, people who want cheap labour and who've deluded themselves into thinking endless growth on a finite system is good for everyone and sustainable, mainly because they are the benefactors of such a system. and I bet youd like to see 30,000,000 by say 2025, because growth, yay.

Its obvious when you people are always silent when it comes to the elephant in the room, endless growth on a finite planet. pretending to be all about helping the common man. door-to-door snake oil salesman, basically, only significantly more dangerous.

---

Very interesting look at population growth rates and the driving factors

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/m...lation-growth/

Heh. Also note the population growth rate today is half of where it was in the 60's

Today's NY Times on population, China, women's rights, education: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/02/op...ld-policy.html

Clifs notes version: As education and womens rights expand population growth naturally slows, perhaps reverses, rendering China's "one child" policy superfluous.

Not a difficult concept to understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

Today's NY Times on population, China, women's rights, education: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/02/op...ld-policy.html

Clifs notes version: As education and womens rights expand population growth naturally slows, perhaps reverses, rendering China's "one child" policy superfluous.

Not a difficult concept to understand.

---

Not just superfluous, but disastrous in the medium to long term, especially the lack of girls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamespio

Go back to the 19th Century and tell it to Malthus.

Gotta love the assholes that think the only issue that matters is population size, but never have a single fucking clue what to do about it. You know what reduces population growth? Economic growth, you dumbshit. There should be an IQ test requirement before people are allowed to discuss matters of public policy. Not that IQ tests are worth a damn, but it would end up working like a poll tax, instead of barring the poor, it would bar those who were worried about what an IQ test may say about them.

---

But with increases in economic growth come increases in standard of living which increases the carbon footprint of each person or the per capita. Yes generally econ growth lower birth rates but isn't Saudi an exception to this still making lots of babies and their per capita comsumption of oil is rising.

Saudis burn a lot of oil? Shocker.

And they have lots of babies even though a few of them are allowed to drive, huh.

But my dog really wants to be a vegan!!!

Forcing suppliers to have better quality product and not settling for generic crops vs. heirloom is another way to drive better ag practices. It has worked in the meat industry and more and more in speciality fruits.

The entitlement needed to believe EVERYONE SHOULD be a Vegan is the astounding part of the argument for me, given the nature of the typical Suburban household's consumption and cf.

JamesPio, your generation is responsible for some of the worst environmental war mongering to date. by selling out generations of people's H2O and O2 for timber and clearcutting in the West some places that can never grow back.

Your angry attitude at my justified sarcasm shows your failure to comprehend what this is about. Next we will see MD's handing out advice for people to "go vegan". WTF?

Just remember, a Vegetarian diet utilizes the symbiosis with animals, not a rejection of them like Vegan. The facts are that children exposed to a farm, have fewer food allergies. This may also imply they were not eating Vegan.

I could not get past page 2 without the thread degrading into the world is going into the toilet, may as well just be a brain eating zombie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DasBlunt

Just remember, a Vegetarian diet utilizes the symbiosis with animals, not a rejection of them like Vegan. The facts are that children exposed to a farm, have fewer food allergies. This may also imply they were not eating Vegan.

---

Hmmm. Dairy. So symbiotic. http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-u...airy-industry/

I highly doubt das cunt cares about his carbon footprint.