Subject:
|
Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 4 Jun 2001 08:34:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1072 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > I understand your point. But does the average beef eating man not benift
> > from the cheap grazing in the longer term?
>
> We don't know. The true cost of subsidized beef is unknown. The true cost of
> eating more meat and less vegetables (health costs, economic benefits of
> people living longer) is unknown. The true cost of overgrazing is unknown.
> There are too many non market factors to say. That's what this thread is
> trying to get at.
>
> > Does the US not impose tax on the
> > owners of the cattle?
>
> True but not necessarily relevant.
The cheap grazing leads to higher profits. These profits are then taxed.
>
> > Does your country not gain from sourcing beef from
> > inside the USA rather than from south america?
My question betrays our cultural differences. There are may in my country
(not myself) who feel that we should remain self sufficient in food encase
we come under siege again.
>
> Not necessarily. The true cost of using the land for other things is
> unknown. The true cost of destroying ecosystems with slash and burn one
> cycle agriculture to raise beef where a previously diverse rainforest stood
> is unknown, although likely to be high. The true cost of not having proper
> property ownership systems in place in Brazil so that the poor are
> encouraged to squat in the jungle and do clearcutting instead of owning
> their own land somewhere else and being proper stewards of it is unknown,
> but likely to be high.
>
> > Is it not better that US food
> > is produced in the US?
>
> Why? Produce food where it is cheapest (when ALL the true costs are taken
> into account) to produce and ship.
>
> > > The entire system needs restructuring, not the rules around who can apply
> > > for permits and how much they cost.
>
> > I can not agree that the entire means of production should be brought in to
> > public ownership. :)
>
> Me either. Talk about creating a single global tragedy of the commons! Glad
> we have that point of agreement. Fortunately it's an irrelevant proposal, I
> don't think anyone in this thread is seriously proposing that communism
> actually works.
Has capitalism allowed it to work? I expect that, as an experimet, it would
have a better chance of working than libertarianism has.
Scott A
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
| (...) And the taxes, which do not capture the true market cost of overgrazing, are then spent on whatever programs the government feels like, rather than on alleviating the problem. Surely you're not seriously arguing that this is efficient, or (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
| (...) We don't know. The true cost of subsidized beef is unknown. The true cost of eating more meat and less vegetables (health costs, economic benefits of people living longer) is unknown. The true cost of overgrazing is unknown. There are too many (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
