Meat Ban

Another radical nut case who wants to dictate what people can eat.

Should just put a ban on humans existing, imagine the problems that would resolve.

Can’t decide which reaction
Frustration, anger, worry or falling about laughing over how stupid it is.


Please someone powerful put the real science out there every time this nonsense surfaces.

Never did like lawyers ... one more resounding reason with this halfwit.

Yes. Ban the most nutrient-dense foods on the planet in an age of already disastrous nutritional deficiency. What could go wrong?

If this happens in my lifetime, the Poll Tax riots are going to look like a peaceful protest. Sadly it would probably happen with acceptance over the course of several decades as the insidious, ethically driven propaganda continues. Hopefully at some stage we will see sense, but I’m not convinced. Humans are idiots.

Carlo M. Cipolla's laws of stupidity.

Law 1: Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.
No matter how many idiots you suspect yourself surrounded by, Cipolla wrote, you are invariably lowballing the total. This problem is compounded by biased assumptions that certain people are intelligent based on superficial factors like their job, education level, or other traits we believe to be exclusive of stupidity. They aren’t.

Law 2: The probability that a certain person be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.

Cipolla posits stupidity is a variable that remains constant across all populations. Every category one can imagine—gender, race, nationality, education level, income—possesses a fixed percentage of stupid people. There are stupid college professors. There are stupid people at Davos and at the UN General Assembly. There are stupid people in every nation on earth. How numerous are the stupid amongst us? It’s impossible to say. And any guess would almost certainly violate the first law, anyway.

Law 3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.

Cipolla called this one the Golden Law of stupidity. A stupid person, according to the economist, is one who causes problems for others without any clear benefit to himself.
The uncle unable to stop himself from posting fake news articles to Facebook? Stupid. The customer service representative who keeps you on the phone for an hour, hangs up on you twice, and somehow still manages to screw up your account? Stupid.
This law also introduces three other phenotypes that Cipolla says co-exist alongside stupidity. First there is the intelligent person, whose actions benefit both himself and others. Then there is the bandit, who benefits himself at others’ expense. And lastly there is the helpless person, whose actions enrich others at his own expense.

Law 4: Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places and under any circumstances to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.
We underestimate the stupid, and we do so at our own peril.

Law 5: A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

And its corollary:

A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit.
According to Cipolla

We can do nothing about the stupid. The difference between societies that collapse under the weight of their stupid citizens and those who transcend them are the makeup of the non-stupid. Those progressing in spite of their stupid possess a high proportion of people acting intelligently, those who counterbalance the stupid’s losses by bringing about gains for themselves and their fellows.

Declining societies have the same percentage of stupid people as successful ones. But they also have high percentages of helpless people and, Cipolla writes, “an alarming proliferation of the bandits with overtones of stupidity.”
“Such change in the composition of the non-stupid population inevitably strengthens the destructive power of the [stupid] fraction and makes decline a certainty,” Cipolla concludes. “And the country goes to Hell.”

Reading through this again this has made so many things clear to me now.

Muneeb said:

Should just put a ban on humans existing, imagine the problems that would resolve.

Click to expand...

Depends on which ones, I know who would go on my list first .....................
( and talking of lists)

Tophat1900 said:

Another radical nut case who wants to dictate what people can eat.

Click to expand...

I don't eat a massive amount of meat, but I still want that choice

Robinredbreast said:

I don't eat a massive amount of meat, but I still want that choice

Click to expand...

Exactly, when freedom of choice is denied, society becomes less and less democratic.

its already happening in many universities. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49321560

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...resident-banned-beef-admits-students-wouldnt/

"Eating meat could be banned like smoking, one of Britain’s foremost barristers has predicted, as he called for the offence of ‘ecocide’ to be introduced to prosecute those who damage the nature on a massive scale."

So, vast swathes of monocropping doesn't do this? Palm Oil production doesn't do this? Forest clearing for soy beans doesn't do this? And for what, cheap, nutritionally poor foodstuffs that have a very high return for producers, and biofuel.

Regenerative farming to feed real food to real people while feeding soil and protecting the natural habitats of all wildlife is what we need.
Once the soil is dead we are in big trouble.

Guzzler said:

"Eating meat could be banned like smoking, one of Britain’s foremost barristers has predicted, as he called for the offence of ‘ecocide’ to be introduced to prosecute those who damage the nature on a massive scale."

So, vast swathes of monocropping doesn't do this? Palm Oil production doesn't do this? Forest clearing for soy beans doesn't do this? And for what, cheap, nutritionally poor foodstuffs that have a very high return for producers, and biofuel.

Regenerative farming to feed real food to real people while feeding soil and protecting the natural habitats of all wildlife is what we need.
Once the soil is dead we are in big trouble.

Click to expand...

Oh c'mon. You know as well as anyone that facts are secondary. The truth doesn't matter and never has. It only matters what you can make people believe, and we already know that people are stupid.

Jim Lahey said:

Oh c'mon. You know as well as anyone that facts are secondary. The truth doesn't matter and never has. It only matters what you can make people believe, and we already know that people are stupid.

Click to expand...

Sad but true.

Just to add that a lot of these monocrops are subsidised by the taxpayer so I vote to stop this practice of paying twice for stuff that could be argued is fuelling the rise of ill health across the world. There! I fixed it.

Best I start training my cats to go hunting ...

Energize said:

Best I start training my cats to go hunting ...

Click to expand...

You're gonna need a bigger cat...

Guzzler said:

You're gonna need a bigger cat...

Click to expand...

That's OK - they'll eat more than they bring home for me so will gain weight soon enough, especially if I stop restricting their meals here

Alternative - adopt a lion ... ???

LOL

Energize said:

Best I start training my cats to go hunting ...

Click to expand...

Nope. Sorry but cats are out too. Just humans, soy crops and unicorns.

Energize said:

That's OK - they'll eat more than they bring home for me so will gain weight soon enough, especially if I stop restricting their meals here

Alternative - adopt a lion ... ???

LOL

Click to expand...

You have in a way raised a serious point though. If meat is taxed beyond the pocket of most people you can almost guarantee that the Black Market will see sides of Lamb and chickens being sold in deserted car parks with all the risks (unregulated, unsafe and remember the horse meat scandal?) to feed people the food they would choose to eat in the first place.

Guzzler said:

You have in a way raised a serious point though. If meat is taxed beyond the pocket of most people you can almost guarantee that the Black Market will see sides of Lamb and chickens being sold in deserted car parks with all the risks (unregulated, unsafe and remember the horse meat scandal?) to feed people the food they would choose to eat in the first place.

Click to expand...

Unintended consequences of government policy? Nah