I am all for BBQ, beer and tailgating. But good steak should not be
cooked on a BBQ unless it is from Argentina and the person cooking it
is from there as well. In any event, for us this is relevant since we
have recently given up eating red meat--only chicken and fish now.
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com
Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
On Aug 16, 2009, at 8:19 PM, Clay Nichols wrote:
> Who cares. It is all pre-steak. Break out the grill, potatoes and
> beer! It is almost tailgating season.
>
>>>> Joel Wilcox <jfwilcox@xxxxxxxxx> 08/16/09 1:58 PM >>>
> I understand what you are saying, though there seems to be a bit of
> consumer bias in it. If the political power of family farmers seems
> disproportionate to their numbers, I suspect it is because the numbers
> don't tell the whole story, and it is certainly not because they
> actually are wielders of power. It doesn't take the numbers of
> farmers today to raise the amount of food we need, as compared to a
> century ago, but that doesn't lessen the vital significance of
> agriculture. Agricultural commodities are not like other commodities
> since we can't live without them. No doubt, though, that there are
> sacred cows in agricultural policy, and no doubt the example New
> Zealand provides is one to hope to achieve more universally.
>
> Joel W.
>
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Nathan
> Wajsman<photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> There is no particular advantage in supplying your own food. If a
>> farmer in another country can produce the stuff you eat cheaper and
>> better than you are better off buying from that country and devoting
>> your own resources to something you are good at. "Food security" is
>> 18th century mercantilism.
>>
>> Unfortunately, most countries have a sentimental attachment to
>> agriculture, not surprising since just a few generations ago it was
>> the biggest industry almost everywhere. Today, even though farmers
>> typically comprise only 2-3% of the population in OECD countries, the
>> farm lobby has disproportionate political power and uses it to
>> perpetuate price supports, protection from foreign competition and so
>> on. The US is by no means the only or the worst sinner--those honors
>> belong to countries like Switzerland, Japan and Norway. The EU is as
>> bad as the US with the stupid Common Agricultural Policy.
>>
>> The only virtuous country is New Zealand, which some time in the
>> early
>> 1990s (I cannot remember the exact year and I am too rushed to look
>> it
>> up right now) abolished almost all agricultural subsidies and tariffs
>> on food imports. Guess what? Today, New Zealand still has a thriving
>> farm sector, but one that survives thanks to the quality and prices
>> of
>> its products instead of government largesse.
>>
>> Nathan
>>
>> Nathan Wajsman
>> Alicante, Spain
>> http://www.frozenlight.eu
>> http://www.greatpix.eu
>> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>>
>> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
>> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
>> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 16, 2009, at 3:24 PM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
>>
>>> You are an economist, correct? No offense intended, but I'm
>>> surprised
>>> you would characterize an issue so nuanced quite so broadly. Isn't
>>> it
>>> quite complex, since it involves food supply and who controls what
>>> and
>>> how whole countries compete in the world for markets? It has nothing
>>> to do with welfare other than the fact that governments are
>>> involved.
>>> Domestic sources of food are literally of biblical significance in
>>> the
>>> scheme of things. What actually is more fundamental? I'm quite
>>> certain that no one would care about a small family farmer if there
>>> weren't something distinctly chilling about corporations controlling
>>> food supply Sorry if I'm missing something here. I'm not learned in
>>> this area.
>>>
>>> Joel W.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Nathan
>>> Wajsman<photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Yeah, and most farmers would not survive without subsidies and
>>>> various
>>>> other largesse from the Federal Government, so they are effectively
>>>> welfare recipients, just without the stigma that the welfare
>>>> recipients in cities experience.
>>> --
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>>
>>
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|