Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ricky D
Trad climber
Sierra Westside
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2015 - 03:23pm PT
|
If only the Aliens had not genetically modified our ancestors which inadvertently created cognitive awareness, then we would still just be happy chattering monkey-things munching on rodent ribs with an occasional banana for roughage.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2015 - 05:58pm PT
|
Somebody: . . . allocating goods via the market was bad because the consumers were too stupid to know what they were getting, in contrast to the knowledgeable elite, who would like to return to pre-industrial-revolution economics, where one's all-knowing liege allocated everything for the greater good.
Wow, I don’t think I like either notion.
Isn’t economics coming (slowly) to the conclusion that there needs to be some kind of oversight to ensure the common good? I mean the U.S. seems to be about ready to start prosecuting corporate managers rather than just levying strong fines.
“Buyer beware” seems have shifted to “seller take care” because people in general are spending more time doing a little bit of research. (Kudos to the Internet, in this instance.)
Sorry for being an interloper here.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2015 - 06:18pm PT
|
No facts, but it is the truth.
The meat eaters create so much negative karmic reactions for their endless violence against nature.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2015 - 06:23pm PT
|
there needs to be some kind of oversight to ensure the common good?
A truly free market does that by itself.
the "oversight" always gets twisted to the benefit of the connected and to the detriment of the consumer.
The problem we now have is that we are really now a crony corporatist economy at every level from local licensing and regulation to ensure market share is reserved to the politically connected to federal corporate welfare on the national scale.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 12:08am PT
|
No market can function without a certain amount of government "oversight." The issue is what sort and how much. When "factory farming" made meat available to the masses, the local meat purveyors, who could not compete, enacted regulation to make the less expensive meat unavailable (see, e.g. the Slaughterhouse Cases, 83 U.S. 36, 73-74 (1873). Louisiana enacted legislation to keep a monopoly on slaughtering, not to protect the public, but to protect the monopolist.)
In addition, the government has the only realistic ability to deal with property rights, contract rights, etc. If the regulation enhances competition, it would, by definition, increase market efficiency. Unfortunately, not all regulation does so, and many advocates of increased regulation fall for a "free lunch," namely that the regulators have more information than the market participants.
In particular, I find a great deal of recent additional regulation in this area has the effect of protecting competitors, rather than competition, or else serves an interest few consumers consider a "need." Take the example of country of origin labeling in meat. If consumers cared, meat labeled with country of origin would sell for more money than meat without such information. The higher price would cause more sellers to label their meat. The government has a role here, namely insuring that if a seller chooses to label the country of origin, the label accurately reflects that information. But I see very few consumers wanting the increased information that such regulations would require for everyone.
John
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 06:17am PT
|
Eat more venison.
|
|
Cragar
climber
MSLA - MT
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 12:41pm PT
|
agreed, speedgoats are my fav with elk a close second and I'll skip the venison from now on unless it is jerked. I ate to much growing up and now even looking at them makes me crave a salad.
Calling speedgoats organic is a stretch. Those square eyed suckers get all plumped up in those hella fertilized fields all throughout central/eastern MT.
It is hunting season(bow) up here and my buddy's Pa is a game processor in the B-Roots and I get the scraps. Elk Barbacoa is on the menu this weekend.
|
|
WyoRockMan
climber
South Fork of the Shoshone
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 12:47pm PT
|
Organic antelope some serious good eating.
The shrimp of the prairie.
|
|
skcreidc
Social climber
SD, CA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 12:55pm PT
|
TGT said
The problem we now have is that we are really now a crony corporatist economy at every level from local licensing and regulation to ensure market share is reserved to the politically connected to federal corporate welfare on the national scale.
I completely agree with this. In fact Obama and Monsanto have been in bed together for so long, they must have kids by now. But I can't agree that a truly free market regulates itself. I'm sorry, but this just does not happen. Corporations are mostly interested in their bottom line. And that " "oversight" always gets twisted to the benefit of the connected and to the detriment of the consumer." thing happens then too. There needs to be some oversight. We are talking about a necessity of life involving millions of people here, not tulips. In China, we have seen problems involving food solved by either government repression or mob rule. Which method do you favor? What is the alternative when a million plus people get super pizzed off because of something "bad" happening with their food source? There needs to be some legitimate body (the government?) that can step in in a timely fashon to make sure things are being appropriately delt with. Some regulatory oversight is necessary with the real question being; how much?
Chris
John, I see where you are going with that argument...What was the point of the country of origin label? I just have no clue now.
|
|
meg - tp
climber
El Paso, TX
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 04:11pm PT
|
Solution is simple, you dont have to worry about reducing your red meat intake if you add edible insects to your diet once a week. Reduction in consumption is the most effective answer, but it doesn't sell well. Suff like meatless mondays and edible insect tuesdays, add variety - they don't take away.
Super tasty spicy critter fritters made with cricket flour. http://bugvivant.com/recipe/cricket-powder-recipe-spicy-critter-fritters/
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 04:23pm PT
|
Any dumbshit can pull a trigger. Takes a real man not to.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 05:28pm PT
|
Corporations are mostly interested in their bottom line. And that " "oversight" always gets twisted to the benefit of the connected and to the detriment of the consumer."
Keep in mind that unions are just labor corporations,
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2015 - 09:27pm PT
|
JEleazarian: The issue is what sort and how much [oversight].
When organizations of any sort make policy, then tend to believe that policy will solve a problem or resolve an issue once and for all. Initially it may, until people learn to game the rules and turn them to their favor.
Tax laws, for example, are renown for the loop holes they expose. Tax is a bona fide industry employing millions of people. Tax has never been a logical system of regulations. It’s always been a patchwork of rules. The tax code makes no logical sense.
Thinking that market mechanisms, or oversight by agencies, are the solutions in themselves may be at the core of the problems that we see. I’d suggest that every situation is unique, and needs to be approached uniquely. Of course, that has large implications for cost containment and efficiencies.
Policies / systems / structures are heuristics. If you want something done right, then you’re going to have to manage / oversee it closely. Systems don’t really run themselves. They are always short-term fixes.
There are no permanent solutions. To anything. Ever.
For those who don’t have the resources or commitment or care to manage things closely, expect folks to take advantage of whatever is set-up. We are creative beings, and we love puzzles.
On a side note, it is considered good business strategy to (i) squeeze suppliers and (ii) buyers whenever one can; (iii) for incumbents to erect barriers to entry into an industry; (iv) to limit the effectiveness of substitutes; and (v) to diminish rivalry by any means legal. That’s what we teach in business school, unless we teach business ethics. Then we teach something else.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2015 - 11:31am PT
|
On a side note, it is considered good business strategy to (i) squeeze suppliers and (ii) buyers whenever one can; (iii) for incumbents to erect barriers to entry into an industry; (iv) to limit the effectiveness of substitutes; and (v) to diminish rivalry by any means legal. That’s what we teach in business school, unless we teach business ethics. Then we teach something else. [Emphasis supplied]
In my opinion, too much well-intentioned regulation ends up being used for the purose (iv) I highlighted above. I would add that most of what you post is also considered good political strategy, particularly your item (iii) (See, e.g., McCain-Feingold).
I'm curious about what would be different in a business ethics class. I know that an attorney's ethical duty is to represent the client zealously within the bounds of the law. (See, e.g., ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Canon 7). Apparently, while ethical attorneys need to be as close to the law's bounds as possbile if doing so furthers clients' interests, ethical businesses have additional limitations.
John
|
|
Yeti
Trad climber
Ketchum, Idaho
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2015 - 07:20am PT
|
Leo Tolstoy said it best: "A man can live and be healthy without killing animals for food; therefore, if he eats meat, he participates in taking animal life merely for the sake of his appetite."
I hunted and fished and ate meat for my first three decades before deciding there was more to living on earth than my own appetites and retired from the carnivore's life. I'll be 77 in a few weeks and am relatively healthy and active for such an ancient.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2015 - 09:11am PT
|
JEleazarian: I'm curious about what would be different in a business ethics class.
Well, that would depend upon who teaches it. Most of those classes are taught by people who think business ethics is philosophy, so that’s what they teach—philosophy.
As a management guy, I teach organization under the belief that the ethics of work in organizations is an everyday affair in some of the smallest detail (as well as obvious legal transgressions such as what we see from VW today). I see work ethics as a key part of organizational culture.
What does the company stand for? What does it believe that is right? What are its values that it holds dear? What kind of practices does it follow? How does management lead? What kind of people does it hire? Does it think that all resources are equal? Do people matter as special resources? If they do, are they developed and treated that way? Where does profit work into the equation? Are there other objectives? Is an organization an enterprise devoted to making profits, or could organizations be seen more as communities?
There are people today who are arguing that the perceived work ethics of an organization matters to personnel who work in those companies, and they matter to buyers. As a third leg of a stool, it also matters to be a steward of the earth.
I don’t have the time right now to find you the full citations, but there have been a number of reports published in the likes of the WSJ that show that buyers will pay a premium for goods from “ethical companies” or for “sustainable products” or for ethical purposes they believe in. People have higher regards for companies that hold an understanding that there are ways to serve themselves *and* their locales or industries in ways that would seem to be costly.
For example, Cisco Systems has spent millions building out a Network Academy that teaches networking in high schools and junior colleges all over the world. They do it for free: it serves them to do so and it serves their communities. People who work in the company feel great about it, too. (Look at Michael Porter’s article in the HBR entitled, “Shared Value.” It’s a new model for creating value for a broader view of “marketplaces.”)
It is also no small wonder that social entrepreneurship and impact capital are hot areas of interest and investment for the likes of JP Morgan, very large family businesses across the world, business schools, and younger students (millennials). Ethics seem to matter in decision making; people are willing to forego higher levels of profits or lower prices to satisfy their own sense of what it means to be ethical. They will vote with their feet.
If you’re interested, look at: http://www.goodcompanyindex.com/ These people (consultants) provide methodology and data regularly that show that being perceived as a “good company” (ethics that serve buyers, employees, and being a steward of the earth) has financial impact on the bottom line as well as for stock price.
I admit that not everyone is “hip” to these ideas. But it’s a “growth market,” as it were.
Be well.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2015 - 10:40am PT
|
Thanks, Mike, for the excellent answer. I was hoping that was what you're tlaking about. In my professions, I've always had the ethic that it's important to do things correctly, even in the details. I wanted to be known as someone who won't cut corners, or skimp on inputs. I don't always succeed, but knowing the goal toward which I strive helps make better decisions.
My own work ethic says I need to spend time getting two days' worth of work done today, so I can head up to the Valley for a couple of days of Face Lifting, so I'll sign off. Again, though, I greatly appreciate your obvious thought in your response.
John
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2015 - 02:39pm PT
|
What the Inuit can tell us about omega-3 fats and ‘paleo’ diets
The short answer, it all depends.
Slightly longer.
“The original focus on fish oil and omega-3s came from studies of Inuit. On their traditional diet, rich in fat from marine mammals, Inuit seemed quite healthy with a low incidence of cardiovascular disease, so fish oil must be protective,” said project leader Rasmus Nielsen, a UC Berkeley professor of integrative biology. “We’ve now found that they have unique genetic adaptations to this diet, so you cannot extrapolate from them to other populations. A diet that is healthy for the Inuit may not necessarily be good for the rest of us.”
http://news.berkeley.edu/2015/09/17/what-the-inuit-can-tell-us-about-omega-3-fats-and-paleo-diets/
|
|
skcreidc
Social climber
SD, CA
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2015 - 04:27pm PT
|
Yet other studies would completely refute the premise presented in that paper. A number of studies have come to the conclusion that the Greenland Inuit have incidence of cardiovascular disease equal to Europeans and Americans. See for example, http://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.1814937!/httpFile/file.pdf
We also reviewed studies that have assessed the prevalence of CAD (coronary artery disease) or other CVD in the Eskimo/Inuit populations in areas such as the Northwest Territories and Nunavik, in Canada or in Alaska, USA. The results of these investigations confirm that the prevalence of CAD in Inuits is as high or higher compared to non-Eskimo populations.22-23;31-32;34-35In 2003, a thorough analysis of the incidence and available mortality statistics among Inuit populations in Greenland, Canada and Alaska by Bjerregaard et al, also concluded that the totality of evidence from various Northern areas makes a strong argument for high presence of CVD in Eskimos (Appendix A in Supplementary Materials).21
Interesting reading....that the conclusions would be so different.
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2015 - 04:47pm PT
|
Sorry to disagree with you WTF. I hunted since I was 8 years old, up until I was about 35. It took me that long to realize that hunting is not a sport, its simply killing for the sake of your wants, not your needs. It you want to be a tracker or a photographer or enjoy the outdoors, thats wonderful. But pulling a trigger on a animal takes no brains or real skill or courage, in fact I believe its technically the act of a coward, instead of "sporting". and whether you realize it or not, the meat is poison to your body.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!