|
Post by Ratty on Feb 3, 2017 5:18:00 GMT
Every time you feel the bruises, you will remember.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 5, 2017 15:26:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 5, 2017 22:20:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 6, 2017 2:02:29 GMT
Think much has really changed? Six years is hardly enough time to write another regulation that you can't be a slave to salads.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Feb 6, 2017 4:52:03 GMT
Think much has really changed? Six years is hardly enough time to write another regulation that you can't be a slave to salads. A properly-selected committee representing all stakeholders could achieve it in seven .... I think. Wait. Take out the "representing all stakeholders" bit.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 6, 2017 15:19:29 GMT
Think much has really changed? Six years is hardly enough time to write another regulation that you can't be a slave to salads. Bring on the dressing. I think I like Italian! I let it age in the pantry for a while.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 8, 2017 6:05:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 8, 2017 10:42:37 GMT
Where's The Beef? Researchers at the Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food at Oxford University in England recently estimated the emissions footprint of all food production worldwide and derived individual tax rates necessary to meet the objectives of the Paris Climate Agreement. Their biggest target is cattle, with a proposed global tax of 40 percent on beef consumption. Other meat and dairy products would be hit with price hikes reflective of their environmental impact. Milk is to be taxed at 21 percent, chicken at eight percent and eggs at five percent. Even cooking oil earns a 25 percent tax hike based on its carbon sins. Prices of this magnitude would clearly have a very significant impact on meat and dairy consumption everywhere.Removing large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions from the food sector with a global food tax would also mean removing large amounts of protein from the diets of some of the poorest people on Earth. Under the Oxford plan, death from malnutrition would actually increase in benighted lands such as Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Nepal and Myanmar. But it’s a trade-off the researchers seem to accept: “We found that the health benefits from tax-related reductions in obesity could outweigh the health losses from increased numbers of underweight people in three-quarters of all regions.” In other words, putting portly folks in rich countries on a food tax-induced diet is considered a fair trade for any deaths that might be caused by deliberately starving people in poorer countries with the same policy. How’s that for solving a First World problem?
Now they want our cows. The implement in the hands of my avatar suggests an answer to this nonsense. The Texas response might simply be ... 'Come and take them!' I could quote Jefferson, but he already has heartburn.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Feb 8, 2017 12:24:37 GMT
[Snip ] Now they want our cows. The implement in the hands of my avatar suggests an answer to this nonsense. The Texas response might simply be ... 'Come and take them!' I could quote Jefferson, but he already has heartburn. ... and likely turning in his grave?
|
|
|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Feb 8, 2017 17:59:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 8, 2017 19:21:06 GMT
Yes, they are getting it right. My mistake was not retiring 5 years ago. But I didn't, so put up with the risks. Talking about costs. I had a starter go out on a tractor on Friday. I use that tractor to provide hydralics to split wood for our daughter's family. I tried my old tricks (bypassing all safety switches). That starter is dead to the world. Had to settle for a re-built starter. $589.00 cost. A few years ago, I could have bought that starter for $180.00. This one caught me, as I service the starters every 4 years. Take them off, rebrush, rebushing them, etc. Don't think it would have made any diff tho as a short in the armature is not feasible to fix. (Part costs too much). I handle a lot of money, not much is sticking.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Feb 14, 2017 20:39:20 GMT
Got them in my lawn at the moment. Saves mowing (a little).
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 18, 2017 16:23:58 GMT
Interesting 'neurolinguistic programming'. Note that the headline is: How climate change is transforming the world's food supply Yet all the way through the article future tense is used based on the unreliable model forecasts. Dishonest as usual.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 18, 2017 18:08:06 GMT
I had to smile when I read your link Code. Mr. Myers forgot to mention that the output of food per hectare increases dramatically with higher CO2 levels. The reduction in protein is a direct result of the higher yield. Today, and in the past, this is a known outcome and is overcome by fertilizing for the higher yield. In regards to zinc etc, you can't eat enough wheat in a day to provide this needed vitamin. Eggs are a good source of zinc. The alarmism is actually sad. This guy needs a course in agronomy.
|
|
birder
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 223
|
Post by birder on Feb 18, 2017 20:44:00 GMT
I had to smile when I read your link Code. Mr. Myers forgot to mention that the output of food per hectare increases dramatically with higher CO2 levels. The reduction in protein is a direct result of the higher yield. Today, and in the past, this is a known outcome and is overcome by fertilizing for the higher yield. In regards to zinc etc, you can't eat enough wheat in a day to provide this needed vitamin. Eggs are a good source of zinc. The alarmism is actually sad. This guy needs a course in agronomy. The facts are immaterial, it's the message that's important.
|
|