Farmers warn food aisles will soon be empty because of crushing conditions: 'We are not in a good position'
Farmers warn food aisles will soon be empty because of crushing conditions: 'We are not in a good position'
UK Farmers, might be a good idea to specify that.
Yeah, my bad. Headline is ambiguous.
This is worldnews so...
Unlike Reddit, you can edit titles on Lemmy.
"Crushing conditions" and "not in a good place" does make me think it's about the US though.
Yeah, could have been anybody! ;)
Are these the same farmers who were protesting regulations meant to stave off these “crushing conditions?”
Are these the same farmers who were protesting regulations meant to stave off these “crushing conditions?”
If you're referring to the recent protests in Europe I'd say that you missed the mark. The recent changes would have done nothing but put European farmers out of business while moving production to South America. So in addition to creating more food insecurity it would have also done more environmental damage as things would have still have been grown / raised and then required trans-Atlantic shipping!
The EU was trying to sell it as an environmental bill but it was nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to do with food production what's been done with manufacturing; outsource the messy environmentally destructive part to somewhere else in the world so we can pretend it's not happening.
Dont forget your also De valueing the land so you can then come in and pick up huge swaths of land on the cheap when the farmers go bust.
Pretty invariably.
If only someone had listened to the climatologists 40 years ago.
If only someone had listened to scientists in the late 1800’s who correctly predicted carbon dioxide would lead to the greenhouse effect. People haven’t been listening for over a century. https://folk.universitetetioslo.no/roberan/t/EarlyEstimates1.shtml
Seems pretty stupid for the owning class to let the working class starve. I guess we'll have to find another source of food…
No snowflake ever feels responsible for the avalanche.
People in general act in their own self interest, and have trouble seeing the wider influence of their decisions.
That's why good government is so important, because establishing rules and regulations should be a dedicated job done by people committed to seeing the big picture.
But that ain't the government we got.
I'm tired of hearing that "the people" are responsible.
Companies are responsible. You walk into a grocery store and 90% of the products are packaged in plastics. Most of the products are not produced in a sustainable way. But it's the only options we have. Most people want to help the planet, but don't have the option.
And no matter who anyone votes for, governments around the world are too concerned with the economy (read: helping companies make more money) to take any real concrete action and implement laws to help the environment.
"For the people, by the people" has morphed into "For the corporations, by the corporations" in this dystopian timeline I don't want to be a part of anymore.
I think a more useful way to look at it is that the government represents the people who control more resources. If we assume that, then democracy has to extend beyond the voting booth, into the realm of resource surplus accumulation and distribution. Ultimately it's in the hands of labor. If labor doesn't allow for few to accumulate and control most of the surplus, then that surplus will be spread out among more people and thus the government would represent a wider group of people. Unionize, take the surplus and force the government to represent your unions. This is actionable.
I want proof that a ban on animal products will be first rolled out on the super wealthy and then on the rest of us
I'm convinced the owning class has divorced the working class.
Bullshit article from greedy rich Tories but it doesn't matter because everyone just went off on their own rant regardless and didn't even try and engage with any part of it beside the headline.
This is the kind of inflation that raising interest rates cannot solve. They'll try it anyway.
My salary sure isn't raising enough to keep up lol
Yeah, with a shrinking supply, prices will skyrocket no matter what
Good thing they are part of a massive single market which can absorb regional disasters oh wait.
Might be wise for individuals to learn how to grow stuff.
Family of four needs about ~44 acres of growing space to be self sufficient. That includes needing chickens and dairy animals.
Honestly, most people in the modern West eat more meat than is healthy anyway.
Turns out hunter-gatherers haven't evolved to eat meat every meal, three meals a day, all their lives.
You guys eating meat for breakfast or something?
Sausage, bacon, or ham are fairly standard
Breakfast steak is the most important steak of the day
That and bread, yes.
You guys eating breakfast?
I'm Latino and I've gone vegetarian, and to my father this is completely inconceivable. He's used to having meat every meal, and is convinced that I'm going to fall ill if I don't eat meat. I eat so many damn beans anyways that I'm good without it.
This whole eating meat every day, thing, seems pretty new right? Like industrial revolution forward. Most people in history weren't expecting meat all the time
Only because they couldn't afford it...lol
Protein has always been the most desirable and most expensive part of any meal.
The fact that Americans eat so much meat is a testament to wealth not simply bad eating behavior.
That's because the general population tried to imitate the rich when the standard of living increased, and the rich in general loved to hunt and eat lots of meat.
I am not biting into a mouthwatering slab of beef to imitate the rich.
Exactly. You should really be eating a lot of roots, nuts, leaves, and berries then occasionally catch something that can run from you.
I'm a vegetarian but my wife calls me an opportunistic meat eater, like a horse. I don't eat meat, except when it's Christmas and my mom makes her turkey, or the one time a year I allow myself to have a big Mac.
I don't think my system could handle a steak, or pork anymore, it would probably destroy me.
Said no one ever before 1900.
You people are so goddamn spoiled and you have no clue.
Eating meat is the only way our species has survived and now that we've evolved past it you act like it was never even a factor.
There's a reason tribes move with animal herds and not due to which berries are in season.
to be fair they only had to work four to six hours a day so they needed less calories
What is considered healthy in your opinion?
As someone who lost 40kg by just eating mostly meat (one year meat for lunch, salami for dinner), I'd argue it's healthier than the stuff that's advertised to be healthy.
wanna build muscle? well, eating pasta and salad every day won't get you very far.
Sure, there are other protein sources, but let's be honest, nothing is more nutritional, efficient (and delicious) than meat.
I think we should really focus on the truely unhealthy shit that's out there in the supermarkets, and not on meat.
You should study up on that vegan body builder, though I'm afraid that I don't recall his name. Remember that when you digest the meat, you are reducing back to its amino acids which your body can put back together into new proteins. The same thing happens when you digest plant matter--you reduce the plant proteins into amino acids which your body then puts back together into its own proteins.
Visit non-India Asia and get back to me. I don't know how anyone can be vegetarian there just as a general practice.
Isn't 90% of street food in Asia just some random meat on a stick?