Fuck the poor and starving, we need our energy

Fluffy gets confused.

Because many of these countries have natural resources that the developed world needs.

Because many of these countries are potential markets for things we want to sell.

And for the real reason Victorian Haves felt "compassion" for the Have-Nots: To keep them from robbing and killing the Haves.

There are other ways of preventing this.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

Then there's the whole "they're human, we're human and obligations to humankind" and all that, that most normal people with more than an ounce of compassion would feel compelled to act upon.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

What's stopping you?

What do you mean?

Fluffy gets confused.

Of course there are. And when you've killed off the entire population of one country, there'll be no one left to man the coltan mines. Until the vacuum you've created is filled by hostiles from other countries ready to give you a hard time. Rinse, repeat.

ETA: Besides, how does that fit into your Paulist isolationism?

What do you think I mean?

Dumbass. That was a direct response to this question:

Question: "Why should we give a fuck?"

Answer: "Because we're human."

Any more stupid questions?

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

You don't have to kill off everyone. Just the people inclined to kill you and steal your stuff. Plenty of work to go around after that culling.

I figured as much.

Shut up.

Yeah, like that's gonna happen.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

So you're an isolationist except when it comes to killing people in countries not your own. Gotcha.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

I doubt even the strictest isolationist would object to taking action against a country full of people seeking to kill you and take your stuff.

[YT="Entry of the Gladiators"]_B0CyOAO8y0[/YT]

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

That was the argument used for the invasion of Iraq. Ask Ron Paul how he felt about that.

Your basic desire to kill off 90% of the people on the planet (Read: Anyone who annoys you) conflicts with your "Seal off the borders and LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE!!!1!"

No wonder you can't sleep...

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

I'll not answer for other peoples' opinions.

Equal parts stupidity and shameless dishonesty. You know damned well I'm a strong believer in the right of self-defense, and "steal you and take your shit" is a pretty obvious self-defense scenario. No contradictions anywhere but your petty, lying little head.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

Except you missed the part where the reason they're killing you and stealing your shit is because you've invaded their country.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

Retroactively inserting that doesn't gain you anything.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

Not retroactive at all. You just thought there were coltan mines in the U.S.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

Ah, so for the needs of the moment, that line was meant as 100% literal and representative of the entire need to have laborers.

Well there's yer problem: You assume there is only one best way to yield a higher return.

The way you're thinking of is to maximize productivity to produce a commodity as cheaply as possible, so the margin between what it costs to make and market is as low as possible, relative to the price.

Problem is, in Business 101, that is called "a race to the bottom". Everyone is producing the same crop, so there is plenty of supply which pushes down demand and reduces prices. Eventually you can't make a profit on your crop, irregardless of productivity. In the mean time you're degrading your capability--stripping nutrients out of the soil, etc--to boot, until the point where you start actually increasing the cost of producing the crop.

But the other way to maximize your price is through differentiation--organic crops. Because not everyone is growing organic crops, there is less supply. Because you can't produce as much organic crop as you can using industrial farming techniques, there has to be less supply. Furthermore, because the crops are organic, they don't keep as long, meaning you have less competitors because geography shields you from competing on a global scale. (Of course the downside of that is that geography also prevents you from competing on a global scale, but I'll try to come back to that later.) As long as there are people who will place a premium on an organic crop (or something differentiated--say, arugula -vs- iceberg lettuce)--and they have the ability to pay for that premium, you can increase your margin by charging more, even if it costs more to produce and market it. Oh yeah, that's the other part: You need to communicate the value the customer is getting from your more expensive crop.

So yeah, by my argument, the organic crop is the "best" crop to grow, using your terms. The question then is why doesn't everyone grow organic crops. This comes back to the bit about geography I mentioned earlier. Do you think some single mother with a couple starving kids and no income in Somalia really will buy a certified organic, fair trade pomegranate, lovingly harvested by union employees, and airlifted to her market? NO. She will buy the most rice or beans she can get for the lowest price. Actually she probably won't buy anything because she doesn't have enough to make it profitable to bring even the most basic staple to her, but hey, that's Darwinism at work.

Anyway, I digress. The point is, while some farmers (Hi flow! ) may decide to differentiate and charge a higher price for a higher quality product, not everyone (Hi me! ) has the money (or is willing to pay the difference) for it. To use a metaphor, you could convince me a Rolls Royce or a Porsche 911 Carerra is the best car out there but I still wouldn't buy one because it is outside my means in every regard. Even in affluent areas that have plenty of arable land there will be a market for commodity crops as well as organics.

Damn, someone really should pay me to be smart and write well. But that's another story for another time. I guess if I want that, I'd better figure out the marketing side of things.

Agreed. Just the distillation of alcohol takes more energy than you get from the proceeds of it. Unless we are using solar distillation(which is a viable process) then its a loss all around. I am just saying its not our job to feed the world. They bitch and say we are 5% of the worlds population and we use 25% of the worlds energy, but they forget that we provide 40% of the worlds food as well. They want us to cut emissions and quit burning so much oil, then live with the consequences.

Re: Fluffy gets confused.

Until the first world bleeds itself to death trying to help and the third world, which was failing as hard as it could even with that help, implodes. Sounds like altruism is to the species what cyanide is to the individual. No thanks.

We cannot keep rushing in and shining a flashlight in places that people refuse the carry the torch for themselves. I think us doing that is part of the problem.

Damn, stop posting stuff I agree with!