• Xephonian@retrolemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s not ‘for nothing’. So-called “net zero” policies are incredibly costly to implement (not to mention completely unattainable). These policies (that aren’t voted on and pushed by global special interest groups) inflict great harm on the economy and food availability.

    Attacking farmers is never the right answer. Imagine attacking your own food supply. How pathetic.

    • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Attacking farmers is never the right answer. Imagine attacking your own food supply. How pathetic.

      My country produces enough food for our own population eight-fold. So fuck the 7/8 farmers that are fucking our environment over for a dollar.

    • catch22@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Indeed, trickle down environmental improvements will come guided by the invisible hand of the market.

      And you’re completely right, food supply should be protected. Maybe programmes to plant wild vegetation such as well suited local produce everywhere instead of bare concrete and wasteland could help, not only food supply but also the environment.

      But then that would effect farming profitability, so that of course is too idealistic and not viable… I wish I was as clever as you.

    • exocrinous@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Spending money on public infrastructure is good for the economy. It creates jobs. I’m starting to think you’re just using the economy as a euphemism for billionaire portfolios.