8 Beers...

[Raavak]

Now all I need to hear is Monsanto designed the barley whose fermented juice I thrive upon.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No science needed. Lack of supply is not the cause of starvation, greed is. This kind of stuff happens all the time. In all countries.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/m...exico-23094422

Excess agricultural goods are often, but not always, shipped to regions that are starving and could not otherwise purchase the food. Excess supply is sometimes destroyed because it cannot be meaningfully released without causing a price depression for that good. For example, a bumper crop of almonds might be destroyed because releasing them would depress the price and drive the supplier out of business. On occasion you have a situation that looks stupid, and sometimes it is, but there's generally something deeper happening to cause the event in question.

These are complicated economic matters. Chalking world hunger up to "greed" shows an undeveloped understanding of economic consequence.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by quido [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Unfortunately idiot consumers are the pitfall of capitalism. People continue to pay more money for shittier products because they're indifferent or don't know better.

this right here. we're going to need a level of autism in order to be good consumers again though.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html

[Glenzig]

""These are complicated economic matters. Chalking world hunger up to "greed" shows an undeveloped understanding of economic consequence.""

That sentence right there is a prime example of what I'm talking about. Its ok to dump edible foodstuffs because it is more economically viable?? There may be a price depression if the commodity is released freely?? We're talking about starving human beings here. Who cares about a few more bucks? There are people that could desperately use that food.

[Raavak]

You don't get it.

If shipping food somewhere causes negative pressure on a business sector, it won't happen. Its not really a person who makes that choice, its the laws of economics.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

""These are complicated economic matters. Chalking world hunger up to "greed" shows an undeveloped understanding of economic consequence.""

That sentence right there is a prime example of what I'm talking about. Its ok to dump edible foodstuffs because it is more economically viable?? There may be a price depression if the commodity is released freely?? We're talking about starving human beings here. Who cares about a few more bucks? There are people that could desperately use that food.

And then the crops are no longer grown due to a market crash. The farmers are no longer growing and that good is no longer available. Now those who were buying it or receiving it for free/at a discount already cannot have it. The destruction of goods is sometimes the cost of the hyper-efficient distribution provided by capitalism. Do you prefer the Soviet model? The example is oversimplified, but the principle is the same.

I admire your desire to help people. Your heart is in the right place, but the aggregate situation must be considered. Short term help at the expense of the future is generally not a sound decision.

Do you have a savings account? Why do you keep that money when you could feed a starving person in Africa? Is it the evil "greed" that motivates you to save?

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

""These are complicated economic matters. Chalking world hunger up to "greed" shows an undeveloped understanding of economic consequence.""

That sentence right there is a prime example of what I'm talking about. Its ok to dump edible foodstuffs because it is more economically viable?? There may be a price depression if the commodity is released freely?? We're talking about starving human beings here. Who cares about a few more bucks? There are people that could desperately use that food.

haven't you heard? there's no morality anymore, we're a free species

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

haven't you heard? there's no morality anymore, we're a free species

Another example: The availability of donated clothes to some areas has decimated local textile industries. If someone was giving perfectly good cars away do you think most people would buy one or just take a free one?

Economic actions have economic consequences. The motivations or intent does not matter, only the ultimate consequence. I think I linked the video in this thread (or maybe the GMO thread) Milton Friedman asked if car companies should make cars even safer if it would make each car cost $1,000,000. The answer is clearly no. We accept certain risks because the cars provide so much utility. He asked the question again with the car costing $0.05 more per unit but it would save 1,000 lives. In the case the answer is yes, the car should be more expensive.

Few people disagree with that logic. This means that we all inherently accept the idea that certain results, however individually distasteful (the poor guy who died because we didn't have $1,000,000 cars), are still necessary because of the aggregate consequence (we all have cars now).

[Hailto]

Originally Posted by Shea [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That you should stop drinking immediately

http://www.organics.org/8-beers-that...immediately/#1

Stopped at number 3. Propylene glycol is completely save, and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. Stop being an uninformed hippie.

[Glenzig]

So giving food products to people who can't afford to buy said food product will cause an economic collapse? Because these people were obviously going to buy up all the food anyway, that's why they are starving. Use your common sense. Throwing food in the landfill is doing no one any good. Economic excuses for obvious greed? Get a grip.