Re: Obesity (was Extropic Priniciples)

From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Thu Mar 06 2003 - 11:36:34 MST

  • Next message: Adrian Tymes: "Re: Anti-Obesity Implants"

    --- Max M <maxmcorp@worldonline.dk> wrote:
    > Adrian Tymes wrote:
    > > As has been pointed out in countless places,
    > including
    > > repeatedly on this list before, famine is a
    > > distribution problem, not a food shortage. We
    > have so
    > > much spare food available that people are talking
    > > about using some of it to replace petroleum fuels.
    >
    > Isn't that a rather simplistic view of economics? If
    > you just take all
    > the food there is and distribute it around it will
    > have two big negative
    > side effects.
    >
    > - The farmers in the poor countries will loose the
    > market for their
    > products, as food becomes free, and so will loose
    > their motivation for
    > being farmes. Thus adding to the problem.
    >
    > - The farmers in the rich countries will not get a
    > reasonable price for
    > their products, as it is given away to the poor, and
    > so will loose their
    > motivation for being farmers.

    In both cases, you don't simply give the food away to
    the poor. Someone pays a reasonable price on behalf
    of the poor. In fact, that is more or less the system
    we have today, except that in the areas where famine
    happens, governments (in effect, if not always in
    fact) seize the food that was going to the poor and
    sell it for their own profit. (Those who would buy
    food on behalf of the poor only have so much money, so
    they can not repurchase and redistribute that which
    will be reseized indefinitely.) At its simplest, this
    is straight-up robbery - exchanging food for no value
    (not even the abstract protection or other government
    services that taxes pay for) - except it's legal.
    (Or, at least, the robbers are never punished for
    their deeds.)

    It's a distribution problem - as in, a problem with
    the actual physical distribution. In effect, those
    under famine are being deprived of the right to buy
    food, as we would understand "buy" (which includes the
    right to use what one buys without having it taken
    away). This highlights one of the primary differences
    among the world's governments: those who desire their
    citizens to flourish and who live off the generated
    excess, versus those who desire their own wealth and
    standard of living first and foremost with little
    regard for that of the governed. (Though, it is of
    note that the methods used to implement the latter
    usually result in a worse standard of living for the
    governing class than most people, including the
    governing class, enjoy in the former. This
    self-defeating nature at the price of everyone
    involved is one reason why the latter is often
    regarded as "evil".)



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 06 2003 - 11:44:05 MST