Economists Please

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

The difference is that I am looking at it from the side I see as reality and what major companies do. I work for a brokerage that represents major brands and there is in fact product savings through efficiency in larger production runs. This doesn't mean I support this as the only model, it's just the reality for most common consumer products that the masses buy.

---

It can be extremely counter-productive, though, can't it? I mean, waste must be considered a bad thing, no matter what one's political and environmental views might be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Even to suggest this totally removes any moral standing you might have maintained in this debate.

---

No it doesn't. It just means that ioan might have different views as to vegetarianism compared to yours. No-one should have a problem with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

I believe that we have a moral obligation to live a life as good as possible conditioned however by making sure that our children and grand children will inherit a world that is at least as good as the one we have got from our parents and grandparents.
This is my most important principle in life.

---

My male grandparents — well, one of them — fought in the Second World War. I hope, therefore, that achieving your hopes is no pipedream. It ought not to be difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

PS: producing better quality products that cost more but also are more environmental friendly does not mean that there will be less work, au contraire it means that more and better quality work is needed to ensure that the product meets the highest quality we expect to get.

---

Yes. Leaving aside any environmental issues, or even, in many cases, issues of cost, a lot of people consume a lot of (word I can't use). Of course, it is their choice to do so, but it saddens me that they cannot see that there are better alternatives that do not cost the earth. It saddens me even more that anyone should seek to argue against this on the grounds that caring about the environment is in some way a wishy-washy, left-wing concern. They should simply recognise that to consume 'greener' produce is to consume nicer, better-quality produce. How can this be negative, unless one has an undue level of respect for big business?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

History has proven that idea very wrong.

---

Bollocks.

The entire of civilization is predicated on collective purchasing. Be it questions of insurance, national security, the police forces, heck even the formation of corporations itself is ultimately based on the idea of a collection of people making collective purchases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

No it doesn't. It just means that ioan might have different views as to vegetarianism compared to yours. No-one should have a problem with that.

---

Vegetarianism is one thing

but

To compare animals as having the same rights as Human is disgusting, immoral and worse that even the most racist of thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Maybe you might like to expand on this by providing specific examples.

---

During some recent car shopping I avoided all GM and Chrysler products and For some construction on one of my homes I refused to use a license contractor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

PS: there is no such thing as a 'dumb animal', it's another live being that dies to feed another one. IMO opinion what's important is that we should only kill animals when we really need them to feed ourselves and not in order to make a habit out of eating good meat daily just because it is cheap nowadays. However i think that this is a theme for another thread to discuss if it is or not morally right to eat meat and if yes then what is appropriate behaviour and what is not.

---

In my case I have no problem with eating meat from animals, but the reason I put "dumb animal" in quotes is due to the fact that I don't agree with it. Regardless of the mental capacity of the animal in question I see no valid reason to allow the animal to suffer, and I think veal crosses that line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

It can be extremely counter-productive, though, can't it? I mean, waste must be considered a bad thing, no matter what one's political and environmental views might be.

---

True waste very rarely occurs in the current supply chain. At worse items are usually sold at a discount or in some cases donated. This is often used to further product promotion. In the case of food items often the food goes to local charities that are always looking for such donations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schmenke

For example, I too am willing to generally pay a little more for products that have been produced in a more environmentally friendly manner, however with a family of 4 to support, I need to limit family spending as a priority. I’ll buy the less expensive toothpaste from Wallmart rather the more expensive “organically” produced stuff that may help save a tree.

For many, limitations of personal finances govern their consumer choices.

---

I do the same but now I'm falling in the other extreme: buying a lot of products which I don't neccesarily need at the moment only because a certain shop sells very cheap. They say that abroad the hypermarkets ( like Carrefour, Cora, Kaufland, Metro, Lidl, Auchann, etc. ) are placed outside big cities. But here there are many of them, some of them even in the centre of the city. When I go to a regular supermarket near my home I'm very careful with the products I choose but when I'm in a hypermarket I always pick products thinking " I can't find it at this price anywhere else and it's good to have it in the house". When I have to pay I'm bemused. I look in the basket and see a lot of rubbish things but I have to pay 1/5 of my salary. It's not only me who act this way. If you'll see the baskets in a romanian hypermarket you'd think the end of the world will come next day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

History has proven that idea very wrong.

---

Care to elaborate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Even to suggest this totally removes any moral standing you might have maintained in this debate.

---

BS, typical vop rubbish supported by nothing, not even hot air.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Vegetarianism is one thing

but

To compare animals as having the same rights as Human is disgusting, immoral and worse that even the most racist of thought.

---

From a biological POV we are all animals.
Sure we like to think that we are smarter and have more rights, however all we are achieving with our 'superior' intelligence is to destroy the nature that feeds us, something all the other animals are able to understand much better than we do. Funny isn't it?
Most of our actions are useless and only performed for fun and pleasure, without thinking on the impact we have on our environment.

From my POV life = life no matter what kind of animal we are talking about.

Back to the point of eating meat.
Animals do hunt and kill to it and they do not kill more than what they need. Compare that to what we do and you might see who's got the higher moral ground in this situation, the human animal or another animal?
For what it's worth I would kill an animal if that is the way to save myself from starvation, but that's pretty much as far as I would go.