Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 21-02-2004, 09:49 PM
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate

Pay attention, ****witted "vegans". This shouldn't be
that hard for you to get.

Some "vegans", in a desperate attempt to find some club
with which to beat on meat eaters, given that the limp
reed of so-called "ethical" vegetarianism is entirely
ineffectual, have seized on the supposed "inefficiency"
of producing meat as a reason to decry meat
*consumption*.

The "vegan" pseudo-argument on "inefficiency" is that
the resources used to produce a given amount of meat
could produce a much greater amount of vegetable food
for direct human consumption, due to the loss of energy
that results from feeding grain and other feeds to
livestock.

In order to examine the efficiency of some process,
there must be agreement on what the end product is
whose efficiency of production you are examining. If
you're looking at the production of consumer
electronics, for example, then the output is
televisions, stereo receivers, DVD players, etc.
Rather obviously, you need to get specific. No
sensible person is going to suggest that we ought to
discontinue the production of television sets, because
they require more resources to produce (which they do),
and produce more DVD players instead. (For the
cave-dwellers, an extremely high quality DVD player may
be bought for under US$100, while a comparable quality
television set is going to cost several hundred
dollars. $500 for a DVD player is astronomical - I'm
not even sure there are any that expensive - while you
can easily pay $8000 or more for large plasma TV
monitor, which will require a separate TV receiver.)

What are the "vegans" doing with their misuse of
"inefficiency"? They're clearly saying that the end
product whose efficiency of production we want to
consider is "food", i.e., undifferentiated food
calories. Just as clearly, they are wrong. Humans
don't consider all foods equal, and hence equally
substitutable. As in debunking so much of "veganism",
we can see this easily - laughably easily - by
restricting our view to a strictly vegetarian diet,
without introducing meat into the discussion at all.
If "vegans" REALLY were interested in food production
efficiency, they would be advocating the production of
only a very small number of vegetable crops, as it is
obvious that some crops are more efficient to produce -
use less resources per nutritional unit of output -
than others.

But how do "vegans" actually behave? Why, they buy
some fruits and vegetables that are resource-efficient,
and they buy some fruits and vegetables that are
relatively resource-INefficient. You know this by
looking at retail prices: higher priced goods ARE
higher priced because they use more resources to
produce. If "vegans" REALLY were interested in food
production efficiency, they would only be buying the
absolutely cheapest fruit or vegetable for any given
nutritional requirement. This would necessarily mean
there would be ONLY one kind of leafy green vegetable,
one kind of grain, one variety of fruit, and so on.

If "vegans" were to extend this misuse of "efficiency"
into other consumer goods, say clothing, then there
would be only one kind of shoe produced (and thus only
one brand). The same would hold for every conceivable
garment. A button-front shirt with collars costs more
to produce - uses more resources - than does a T-shirt,
so everyone "ought" to wear only T-shirts, if we're
going to focus on the efficiency of shirt production.
You don't "need" any button front shirts, just as you
don't "need" meat. But look in any "vegan's" wardrobe,
and you'll see a variety of different kinds of clothing
(all natural fiber, of course.) "vegans" aren't
advocating that only the most "efficient" clothing be
produced, as their own behavior clearly indicates.

The correct way to analyze efficiency of production is
to focus as narrowly as possible on the end product,
then see if that product can be produced using fewer
resources. It is important to note that the consumer's
view of products as distinct things is crucial. A
radio can be produced far more "efficiently", in terms
of resource use, than a television; but consumers don't
view radios and televisions as generic entertainment
devices.

The critical mistake, the UNBELIEVABLY stupid mistake,
that "vegans" who misconceive of "inefficiency" are
making, is to see "food" as some undifferentiated lump
of calories and other nutritional requirements. Once
one realizes that this is not how ANYONE, including the
"vegans" themselves, views food, then the
"inefficiency" argument against using resources for
meat production falls to the ground.

I hope this helps.


  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 21-02-2004, 10:39 PM
Zakhar
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message news:wnQZb.4022
I hope this helps.


No it doesn't. **** off.

You don't add anything to any discussion. You are full of venomous diatribe.




  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 21-02-2004, 10:40 PM
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate

Impotence wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.



No it doesn't.


It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.

  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 21-02-2004, 10:51 PM
Zakhar
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
ink.net...
Impotence wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message

news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.



No it doesn't.


It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.


**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.

All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory with
your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.





  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 02:25 AM
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate

Zakhar wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
ink.net...

Impotence wrote:


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message


news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.


It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.



All you done tonight


Nice, wog: "all you done tonight". Learn English,
then perhaps you can participate.



  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 03:02 AM
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate


"Zakhar" wrote in message
...

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
ink.net...
Impotence wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message

news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.


It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.


**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.

All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory

with
your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.


Aside from your dislike for the author, what specifically do you disagree
with about the proposition?


  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 03:18 AM
Rusty Lipbalm
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate



Jonathan Ball wrote:

Pay attention, ****witted "vegans". This shouldn't be
that hard for you to get.


That's right Johny No-Balls it's not hard for us all to get. We all
understand that after spending most of your life listening to Nazi's
like Rush Limbagh and Micheal Savage you feel like you have the right
stuff to save the world from people that would like to eat healthy and
instead of being a fat Nascar junky that lives on cheetos and pepsi. We
that this shit has rotted your brain and that is why you post these
rabid diatribes that ar best do us all a great service in that you are a
poster child of the effect conservative talk radio has uneducated white
trash dirt balls like you!

Why don't you share with us all what your educational background is?
Could it be that you never went beyond talk radio? Tell us what you
think of Rush Limbaugh. Tell us if I am wrong about you. Tell us you
come from a good family that loved you correctly as a child and never
called you stupid throughout your whole life.

What we want to get through our heads is what it is that spawns such
ignorant idiots like you.

Any body got a truck load of hydrocodone, Rush has a hemorrhoid!
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second paragraph of this link and you will see just where to 8th grade
educated Jonathan Ball gets all his bile!

http://www.abctexas.com/saxe/saxe01012004.html


  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 03:20 AM
Rusty Lipbalm
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate



Jonathan Ball wrote:

Impotence wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.



No it doesn't.


It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.


How does zerba hide his stripes? What a joke little penis boy, no one is more
baptised in the ways of hate than you!

  #9 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 03:28 AM
Rusty Lipbalm
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate



Jonathan Ball wrote:

Zakhar wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
ink.net...

Impotence wrote:


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message


news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.

It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.



All you done tonight


Nice, wog: "all you done tonight". Learn English,
then perhaps you can participate.


Sure sign of a usenet loser is when the correct typos! Hard up for are
you Johny?

  #10 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 04:24 AM
Rusty Lipbalm
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate



http://www.abctexas.com/saxe/saxe01012004.html


This address may have to be copied and pasted to get through correctly.
Here is a sample of what is on the page:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thoughts on 'Mad Cow Disease' From A Self-Described
Conservative Environmental Wacko
By Allan Saxe, WBAP Political Analyst

The finding of Mad Cow's disease in a cattle herd in Washington
State recently has left me with very mixed emotions.
On one hand, I never find any joy in economic reversals. Such
reversals hurt us all in a spiraling fashion. On the other
side, I have been a vegetarian for many years both for health,
perhaps imaginative, and ethical reasons.

Good grief, what is a conservative/libertarian, as I fashion
myself, doing being vegetarian! In some people's minds,
Rush Limbaugh being one, this just doesn't make sense. But it makes
great sense to me. Limbaugh frequently talks
about the environmental wackos, and animal rights advocates along
with other liberal causes. I admire Rush very
much and agree with him on almost every issue. But I do not wish to
be lumped together with liberals just because I am
an animal advocate, vegetarian and environmental wacko.

I am a conservative/libertarian on economic issues and a strong
national defense advocate. I have voted for
President Bush and will do so again. I am a great admirer of Ronald
Reagan and believe in limited government far
more than most Republicans. Please Rush, don't lump us vegetarians
and animal rights people with liberals.
Personally, I am a calm vegetarian. I never make a big deal over
eating dinner with friends who order chicken fried
steaks or hamburgers. And I would never even argue with a woman
wearing a mink coat, though I might look at her
strangely.



  #11 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 02:44 PM
Zakhar
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate


"Dutch" wrote in message
...

"Zakhar" wrote in message
...

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
ink.net...
Impotence wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message

news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.

It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.


**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.

All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory

with
your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.


Aside from your dislike for the author, what specifically do you disagree
with about the proposition?


It's SHIT.

I'm not going to kick shit about, no matter how "nicely" you ask, especially
~~jonnie~~ the baldy dwarf's shit *.*





  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 05:31 PM
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate

SuckHard wrote:

"Dutch" wrote in message
...

SuckHard wrote in message
.. .

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
thlink.net...

Impotence wrote:


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message

news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.

It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.

**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.

All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory


with

your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.


Aside from your dislike for the author, what specifically do you disagree
with about the proposition?



It's SHIT.


That's not specific at all. What is it with which you
disagree? Actually, we all know already that it's
merely the fact that I wrote it; you didn't really read it.

  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 06:37 PM
Zakhar
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
ink.net...
SuckHard wrote:

"Dutch" wrote in message
...

SuckHard wrote in message
.. .

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
thlink.net...

Impotence wrote:


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message

news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.

It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.

**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.

All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory

with

your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.

Aside from your dislike for the author, what specifically do you

disagree
with about the proposition?



It's SHIT.


That's not specific at all. What is it with which you
disagree? Actually, we all know already that it's


Who's "we all"?

merely the fact that I wrote it; you didn't really read it.


I read enough to determine it was shit, just like I don't need a full
laboratory report to know when I tread in dog shit.

Anyway, I'm not going to kick shit about until I loose it, particularly
dwarf droppings.




  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 06:58 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate

ESL wrote:
I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.

It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.

**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.

All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory

with


your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.

Aside from your dislike for the author, what specifically do you


disagree

with about the proposition?


It's SHIT.


That's not specific at all. What is it with which you
disagree?


That's the question you need to address, Suckhard. What point(s) do you
call "SHIT" and -- most importantly -- why? Can you correct anything Jon
wrote in the original post?

snip rest of evasion

  #15 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 22-02-2004, 07:08 PM
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate

Impotence wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
ink.net...

SuckHard wrote:


"Dutch" wrote in message
...


SuckHard wrote in message
.. .


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
arthlink.net...


Impotence wrote:



"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message

news:wnQZb.4022

I hope this helps.


No it doesn't.

It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
and acknowledge it.

**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.

All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory

with


your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.

Aside from your dislike for the author, what specifically do you


disagree

with about the proposition?


It's SHIT.


That's not specific at all. What is it with which you
disagree? Actually, we all know already that it's



Who's "we all"?


Think about it for a couple of decades, GregGeorge.



merely the fact that I wrote it; you didn't really read it.



I read enough to determine it was shit


No, you didn't.



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate Rudy Canoza[_1_] Vegan 1141 04-05-2012 06:10 PM
Now That The Contraception Debate Is Behind Us, Now We Need To Debate Policy On Converting The Jews Before The End of Days Joe ReBoot General Cooking 0 04-03-2012 03:06 AM
The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate Fred C. Dobbs[_2_] Vegan 47 24-05-2010 03:22 PM
The myth of food production "efficiency" in the "ar" debate Rudy Canoza[_4_] Vegan 448 23-03-2008 07:06 AM
Fascinating Discussion on the Future of Food Production Emma Thackery General Cooking 0 11-07-2007 04:57 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017