4/ so the "buy pork and beef from neighbors" argument falls down because we can ALREADY DO THAT. * economies of scale from train transportation of live animals, refrigerated transportation of cut meat, etc. was revolutionary 140 years ago. Far pre-FDA / USDA.
-
-
5/ * Family farms are terribly inefficient, which is why they have been collapsing in number / growing in size into agribusinesses for 140 years. * Feedlots and cat 3 tractors are not diseconomies of scale, but economies of scale.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
6/ I find the entire argument frustrating because it feeds into a meta-pattern of arguments across all politics, that (a) the thing I want is natural and will arise spontaneously, absent... (b) this one bad regulation
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
7/ pot-heads: if THE MAN didn't ban pot, we'd have wonderful hemp clothing and we wouldn't need weird chemical medicines libertarians: if THE MAN didn't ban free enterprise there'd be no poverty or racism because everyone would work at a fair price, and ...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
8/ new urbanists: if THE MAN didn't subsidize roads then everyone would live in dense cities with wonderful subways socialists: if THE MAN didn't favor capital so much worker coops would be very popular and and and...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
9/ hedonists: if THE MAN didn't push his Christian morality down our throats everyone would be polyamorous and children would be raised in a loving environment without sexual hangups and and and
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
10/ Almost no one says "I want X, and government interferes a bit with Y, but even absent Y there are inherent structural and economic forces that interfere with X, so I acknowledge that X is a beautiful dream, and can be incrementally approached, but will never be tenable"
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
11/ If you look around the world and see so many people arguing (incorrectly) "get rid of Y and my utopia X will be achieved", then as a good Bayesian you have to self criticize and really really inspect your priors that YOUR x is the one that's different.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
12/ Maybe this is a post-rationalist stance? I don't know. Maybe your one hobby horse is the exception, but I strongly doubt it. I've been having this PATTERN of argument with people for a quarter century and it's really tiresome in several different ways:
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
13/ * search for confirming evidence, not disconfirming evidence * lack of citing history from before bad thing X was implemented (e.g. gold bugs who say that fiat currency creates bubbles, and disregard that there were bubbles with gold currency) * "silver bullet" thinking
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted Prometheus 2.1
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.