Factory Farming
- Thread starter kwerk
- Start date
I agree.
I work for a large soft fruit producer (large for uk at least) and we are mde to grow organics by the supermarkets, who usually state how much they need for the year, but rarely manage to sell the volumnes. We end up selling around 25% of the organics as normal fruit, which eats in the ever decreasing profit margin.
Mega farms are the only way forward if we want cheap uk grown produce. The agricultural minimum wage has mor than doubled in the last 10 years whilst the supermarket prices have hardly increased. This is unsustainable.
We are left with 3 choices
Continue with smaller scale farming and pay more
Move to large scale automated farming - with decrease in quality and variety
Import more
- Joined
- 3 May 2004
- Posts
- 17,718
- Location
- Kapitalist Republik of Surrey
I think a lot of people forget it's not their right to eat meat, on top of the fact that they think it comes in a plastic box and not from an animal. A lot of people are too squeamish to touch raw chicken, let alone prepare a whole animal, and will only eat the breast because eating meat with bones in reminds them of eating a leg or a skeleton. I've read both of those on here and I have someone at work with that view.
My opinion is it's supermarkets that have brought this about. By providing meat in neat boxes there is no exposure to carcasses hanging in butchers, that smell of raw meat, blood in the sawdust on the floor and people don't make the connection between animals and what they're eating any more.
I'm not interested in factory meat farms, either for animal welfare or for quality of end product. It's just part of the massive greedy consumption problem we have in this country.
Eat less, eat better. End of story. Spend the same in the long run.
As an environmentalist myself, I can't think of anyone in my field who is against GM foods if they save lives. But then, where do you draw the line against what is a crop that has been interbred to be drought resistant and what is a crop that is labeled 'GM' because it has been bred that one step further? It's so vague and the implications of using some GM crops to some critical natural thresholds can be devastating; for example bees, which are critical for pollination.
There is already a grain that is grown in the third world that has saved millions and the person who developed it (I think in the 60's) was awarded a Nobel prize.
My opinion is it's supermarkets that have brought this about. By providing meat in neat boxes there is no exposure to carcasses hanging in butchers, that smell of raw meat, blood in the sawdust on the floor and people don't make the connection between animals and what they're eating any more.
I'm not interested in factory meat farms, either for animal welfare or for quality of end product. It's just part of the massive greedy consumption problem we have in this country.
Eat less, eat better. End of story. Spend the same in the long run.
Not really, I think you've got it the wrong way round and that would also be an over-simplistic argument. World hunger is due to a number of things: overpopulation, oppressive regimes, crop failure, poor soil, drought, exploitation from the west, cash crops and a whole load of other reasons I can't think of.
As an environmentalist myself, I can't think of anyone in my field who is against GM foods if they save lives. But then, where do you draw the line against what is a crop that has been interbred to be drought resistant and what is a crop that is labeled 'GM' because it has been bred that one step further? It's so vague and the implications of using some GM crops to some critical natural thresholds can be devastating; for example bees, which are critical for pollination.
There is already a grain that is grown in the third world that has saved millions and the person who developed it (I think in the 60's) was awarded a Nobel prize.
Vertical farming is the future, thankfully some of the new green cities being built from scratch are going to include them, as you can regulate atmosphere, nutrients and every other aspect. You won't need any pestacides.
Gordon browns only good idea and he scrapped it. We should be building at least one total eco city, that is built around research and manufacture of green technologies and partnership businesses in from the first stages.
Gordon browns only good idea and he scrapped it. We should be building at least one total eco city, that is built around research and manufacture of green technologies and partnership businesses in from the first stages.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 2,021
- Location
- London
Cities built around food is the key, transportation needs to be brought to the bare minimum. We'll be forced in this direction regardless of whether we like it or not due to oil running out.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,564
- Location
- Warwickshire
Fact is: the meat of animals reared in a nice environment DOES generally taste better. Juicier, more flavour, more tender. You either want to pay for it, or you don't.
Agree with this 100%.
We've become far too detached from what meat actually is in this country.
Most people don't even know what good quality meat is these days.
I'll leave it to them to get their bits of topside with next to no fat on them to roast up on Sundays while I'm tucking in to a nice bit of properly hung rib of beef from my butchers.
I'd rather pay extra for nice stuff than eat lots of crap meat. Unfortunately it seems most people simply want it cheap.
Advertising and knowledge, although this is changing. People are becoming more aware of the supply chain, quality of products.
^^^Thats about all the explanation needed as far as im concerened^^^
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 2,141
Yup. It's either that, or you condone widespread famine across at least 3 different continents.
- Joined
- 3 May 2004
- Posts
- 17,718
- Location
- Kapitalist Republik of Surrey
Corrected so that it's a bit more accurate to the current world situation
I still stand by my original statement. Eat less, eat better. Spend the same.
Corrected so that it's a bit more accurate to the current world situation
I still stand by my original statement. Eat less, eat better. Spend the same.
People are greedy then, fair enough. How do you intend to fix this?