Great piece! I was pondering writing about the new Danish cow tax; glad you did. There are two chief fronts in this ideological battle: challenging claims of climate doom, and challenging so-called solutions. I like the way you conceded the first in order to prove the folly of the second -- no need to prove the first falsehood in order to prove the second. And when the second falsehood is established -- that taxing farmers' cows will somehow remediate global temperatures -- may lead some people to also critically assessed the first a priori assumption that undergirded the idiotic response: perhaps the whole thing is a scam, or a scientific mistake.... ;)
Whenever an initiative is taken to lower our quality of life, I will only accept that it is justified if I can objectively verify that it (1) addresses the problem in the area that can reasonably be expected to have most impact and (2) that the initiative can be expected to be effective to attain the purported impact. In the case of taxing cow farts, along with many other climate topics, neither is true and it comes at the cost of additional burden on farms and consumers and endangers the food supply chain. It is simply unintelligible how the European Union can sell such measures as 'actions to save the planet.'
To your other point, I hope we get to a wider awakening too. I may get back to that in one of the upcoming pieces.
I care about good food as well and I will be right there next to you kicking.
If the EU is imposing regulations that have no effect on the climate and significant implications on the farmers and the food supply chain, then their goals is not to "save the planet" but to interfere with the food supply chain. Where does this lead? The prices for beef and dairy will go up. That opens the door for (1) Importing these products from elsewhere, benefiting those countries. Countries where the EU has no say on how the agriculture is done and it will be probably done way worse to make it affordable for export. (2) Queue the insect and lab-made beef! I wonder who benefits from that? Would it by any chance be some billionaire "philantropist" that keeps "donating" all his money away but somehow gets richer every year?
Indeed, if climate change is imminent, we cannot afford to focus on futile measures and a tax on cow burps is one of those for sure. So what drives it? Profits for companies that certain philantropies hold major shares in is a part of the explanation, but I presume there is an even higher, maybe more sinister objective. But I trust you don't want to start writing about insects in you recipes and I don't want to consume those. I am a horse, not a yellow warbler!
Great piece! I was pondering writing about the new Danish cow tax; glad you did. There are two chief fronts in this ideological battle: challenging claims of climate doom, and challenging so-called solutions. I like the way you conceded the first in order to prove the folly of the second -- no need to prove the first falsehood in order to prove the second. And when the second falsehood is established -- that taxing farmers' cows will somehow remediate global temperatures -- may lead some people to also critically assessed the first a priori assumption that undergirded the idiotic response: perhaps the whole thing is a scam, or a scientific mistake.... ;)
Whenever an initiative is taken to lower our quality of life, I will only accept that it is justified if I can objectively verify that it (1) addresses the problem in the area that can reasonably be expected to have most impact and (2) that the initiative can be expected to be effective to attain the purported impact. In the case of taxing cow farts, along with many other climate topics, neither is true and it comes at the cost of additional burden on farms and consumers and endangers the food supply chain. It is simply unintelligible how the European Union can sell such measures as 'actions to save the planet.'
To your other point, I hope we get to a wider awakening too. I may get back to that in one of the upcoming pieces.
Amen! :)
I care about good food as well and I will be right there next to you kicking.
If the EU is imposing regulations that have no effect on the climate and significant implications on the farmers and the food supply chain, then their goals is not to "save the planet" but to interfere with the food supply chain. Where does this lead? The prices for beef and dairy will go up. That opens the door for (1) Importing these products from elsewhere, benefiting those countries. Countries where the EU has no say on how the agriculture is done and it will be probably done way worse to make it affordable for export. (2) Queue the insect and lab-made beef! I wonder who benefits from that? Would it by any chance be some billionaire "philantropist" that keeps "donating" all his money away but somehow gets richer every year?
Indeed, if climate change is imminent, we cannot afford to focus on futile measures and a tax on cow burps is one of those for sure. So what drives it? Profits for companies that certain philantropies hold major shares in is a part of the explanation, but I presume there is an even higher, maybe more sinister objective. But I trust you don't want to start writing about insects in you recipes and I don't want to consume those. I am a horse, not a yellow warbler!