Actually, meat gains flavour with work, and the hardest-working parts of the cow have the most flavour. Kobe tastes like it does due to its high fat content.
People would be a damn sight healthier if they lived off lentils rather than meat every meal. They'd use a lot less oil and save a hell of a lot of money. Less bowel cancer too I'd expect. It'd be interesting to know how 'economical' the current system of industrial meat production would be without the corn subsidies.
while you and a few others will decide the pen is too small someone else will come along and call you barbaric for what you accept. Some may decide that one size permits too much movement which somehow injures the cow. Another might decide its painted the wrong color, get what I mean? There is permanent goal, meet one and they will make another or move it further out.
By that logic, there's nothing wrong with literally torturing animals to death for entertainment, because if you stop someone will just move the goal again.
Have you ever considered, not putting them in a pen at all? Or would this jeopardise the dollar menu?
Cycling is practical in anything other than a heavy storm, and most of your 'problems' boil down to you being unsociable. And mass-transit does work, that's why millions of people use it. In a dense enough city, it's cars that don't work.
I enjoy Fiore's work, but the site is flash hell. Nobody in iPad land is going to see it....
Of course, the world revolves around consumers of Apple products. They chose their product based on design and brand name rather than functionality, so if it doesn't fully function it's pretty much their own fault.
Ultimately, what Sowell's thesis comes down to is that communal organizations face a distortion of incentive structures. If something breaks on a farm that's owned by the farmer he fixes it. If a machine breaks on a communist farm he expects someone else to fix it--he doesn't own it. He neither profits by fixing it nor loses by not fixing.
Does that not also apply to employees in private organisations? If a machine breaks in a company owned by the worker, he fixes it. If the farm is owned by a hedge fund, he has no incentive to fix it. By your own logic, socialism is the better option. The farmer with a direct stake in his farm will run it better than a farmer who's merely an employee.
In fact, Russian agriculture prospered after the land was taken away from the capitalist land-owners and handed over the people who worked it. Despite little arable land, socialism turned Russia into a successful agricultural exporter.
The problem, however with government-funded basic research is the lack of useful applications. A centrally-funded scientist has no reason -at all- to convert his discovery into an actual invention, so this will generally not happen.
Who says that's a problem? Perhaps you think discovering the secrets of the universe isn't important if it doesn't provide you with a consumer gadget.
Yeah, throw scientists to the wolves of the private sector. So instead of discovering that new particle or galaxy, they can make a new obesity pill* to keep the fast food giants in profit, or increase the screen size of your iphone so you can more effectively wank yourself off to Internet porn in the company toilets.
*I say new, I mean, slightly change an existing pill so they can re-patent it.
This begs the question of whether improved grades actually mean the children are receiving a better education. What's the point if you're just bribing kids to regurgitate information onto a standardised exam?
Actually, Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia, and last I looked, they were best friends with America. It seems the USA doesn't care how many of their own people are killed as long as the country doing the killing is aligned with American economic interests. This is why America ostracised Cuba whilst simultaneously installing genocidal regimes in South America. If America cared about thousands of Americans being killed they'd wage war on Detroit, or McDonalds, or the military contractors.
Hard to beat the west really. The periods of deformed chickens are a staple at breakfast, and mouldy milk is considered a delicacy, especially when washed down with rancid grape juice.
What amuses me is how people will be disgusted by perfectly good haggis, but will happily wolf down inhuman quantities of industrially-produced meat grown in utterly sickening conditions. Boiled offal is bad, but chicken soaking in its own shit and disease-ridden pigs that need a constant stream of drugs to keep them alive are delicious?
I'm betting your right. vegans always ignore the fact the food chain naturally includes meat eaters, and that meat has 10x the energy of veg meaning you'd have to clear a lot more land to feed the world just on veg.
Actually meat requires more land. For a start, you need to grow the food to feed to the animals. They're cutting down rainforests just to meet demand for beef.
Gotta be China, the only country with the means and the will, although in a couple of decades they'll have a demographic timebomb.
Russia? No chance, even with all those resources and Europe at their mercy it's still a backward hellhole, the place seems to get worse with every revolution.
Who has no fucking idea what any of this means, and is only further confused by the wikipedia articles written by nerds who have no communication skills.
Social networking sites can either become incredibly successful or fail horribly, and it's generally down to luck as to which happens. He could make more money at a later date, or go bust.
They will never be like America until the food preparation technology and process improves.
Yeah, despite the best efforts, Britain is still quite a way behind on horrific industrial farming and junk food provision. We have a long way to go before we have a Smithfield of our own. Only animal welfare regulation, and working tastebuds, hold us back from achieving the dream.
How dare you disparage the brave, wealth-creating superhumans on Wall Street. If it weren't for them and their innovative, useful products the economy would crash and tens of millions would be unemployed.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, meat gains flavour with work, and the hardest-working parts of the cow have the most flavour. Kobe tastes like it does due to its high fat content.
I think they have these things called 'fields' nowadays.
First past the post is a pretty crappy system.
Exercise adds flavour to the meat at the expense of tenderness. It doesn't require hamburgers, just longer, slower cooking.
People would be a damn sight healthier if they lived off lentils rather than meat every meal. They'd use a lot less oil and save a hell of a lot of money. Less bowel cancer too I'd expect. It'd be interesting to know how 'economical' the current system of industrial meat production would be without the corn subsidies.
By that logic, there's nothing wrong with literally torturing animals to death for entertainment, because if you stop someone will just move the goal again.
Have you ever considered, not putting them in a pen at all? Or would this jeopardise the
dollar menu?
Define 'need', and then explain how we managed without it for thousands of years.
Cycling is practical in anything other than a heavy storm, and most of your 'problems' boil down to you being unsociable. And mass-transit does work, that's why millions of people use it. In a dense enough city, it's cars that don't work.
So what if there's a no-fly zone for months? People fly too much anyway.
Of course, the world revolves around consumers of Apple products. They chose their product based on design and brand name rather than functionality, so if it doesn't fully function it's pretty much their own fault.
Does that not also apply to employees in private organisations? If a machine breaks in a company owned by the worker, he fixes it. If the farm is owned by a hedge fund, he has no incentive to fix it. By your own logic, socialism is the better option. The farmer with a direct stake in his farm will run it better than a farmer who's merely an employee.
In fact, Russian agriculture prospered after the land was taken away from the capitalist land-owners and handed over the people who worked it. Despite little arable land, socialism turned Russia into a successful agricultural exporter.
Who says that's a problem? Perhaps you think discovering the secrets of the universe isn't important if it doesn't provide you with a consumer gadget.
Yeah, throw scientists to the wolves of the private sector. So instead of discovering that new particle or galaxy, they can make a new obesity pill* to keep the fast food giants in profit, or increase the screen size of your iphone so you can more effectively wank yourself off to Internet porn in the company toilets.
*I say new, I mean, slightly change an existing pill so they can re-patent it.
This begs the question of whether improved grades actually mean the children are receiving a better education. What's the point if you're just bribing kids to regurgitate information onto a standardised exam?
Actually, Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia, and last I looked, they were best friends with America. It seems the USA doesn't care how many of their own people are killed as long as the country doing the killing is aligned with American economic interests. This is why America ostracised Cuba whilst simultaneously installing genocidal regimes in South America. If America cared about thousands of Americans being killed they'd wage war on Detroit, or McDonalds, or the military contractors.
It's usually mechanically-reclaimed meat, i.e. stuff that's hosed off the bone at high pressure through a sieve, resulting in a sort of slurry/paste.
Hard to beat the west really. The periods of deformed chickens are a staple at breakfast, and mouldy milk is considered a delicacy, especially when washed down with rancid grape juice.
What amuses me is how people will be disgusted by perfectly good haggis, but will happily wolf down inhuman quantities of industrially-produced meat grown in utterly sickening conditions. Boiled offal is bad, but chicken soaking in its own shit and disease-ridden pigs that need a constant stream of drugs to keep them alive are delicious?
Actually meat requires more land. For a start, you need to grow the food to feed to the animals. They're cutting down rainforests just to meet demand for beef.
Gotta be China, the only country with the means and the will, although in a couple of decades they'll have a demographic timebomb.
Russia? No chance, even with all those resources and Europe at their mercy it's still a backward hellhole, the place seems to get worse with every revolution.
All the word from the beta is that it's a complete disaster.
Who has no fucking idea what any of this means, and is only further confused by the wikipedia articles written by nerds who have no communication skills.
Social networking sites can either become incredibly successful or fail horribly, and it's generally down to luck as to which happens. He could make more money at a later date, or go bust.
I'd love to vote against my Labour MP, except he's not standing as he was caught up in the expenses scandal.
Yeah, despite the best efforts, Britain is still quite a way behind on horrific industrial farming and junk food provision. We have a long way to go before we have a Smithfield of our own. Only animal welfare regulation, and working tastebuds, hold us back from achieving the dream.
How dare you disparage the brave, wealth-creating superhumans on Wall Street. If it weren't for them and their innovative, useful products the economy would crash and tens of millions would be unemployed.