4 ms·

Yeah, we don't do the locavore thing for carbon footprint reasons, but just because it's ... nice, I guess, for lack of a better word. Once a week we get to mee

Yeah, we don't do the locavore thing for carbon footprint reasons, but just because it's ... nice, I guess, for lack of a better word. Once a week we get to meet the family that we buy fresh peaches from, and we joke with them or ask 'em how the crops are doing and so forth. They tell us if they've had to spray or not. The peaches smell like real peaches, they're fresh, they last for days so we don't have to eat all of them right away before they spoil, they're juicy. My girlfriend works at a CSA one morning a week and comes home with a week's worth of veggies that she picks. They, too, are fresh and tasty and seem different from what we're used to getting in the supermarket. We have about 160 square foot garden of our own; I'll have tomatoes ready soon, cantaloupe, watermelon, cucumbers, zucchini, corn, bell peppers, green beans, onions, strawberries ... it's just fun. If we need a little rosemary or thyme or basil for cooking, we can go outside and pick what we need. I like getting to know the people who grow my food. That somehow makes it taste better.

mark_l_watson 15y ago
Right on - my wife and I basically do the same thing: grow some of our own veggies, talk with local farmers at the farmers' market, etc. I also think that lowering our carbon and environmental footprint by eating less meat is the right thing to do.
- thaumaturgy 15y ago
  Yeah, my friend and I are pretty much unapologetic carnivores -- we half-kid sometimes about buying a 4H cow. But, I've noticed that ever since we started getting fresh veggies, I haven't minded eating the green stuff nearly as much. I'm skeptical about these food practices being able to feed everyone though. While, personally, I'd like to see dairy farms in California with pasture-fed free-range etc. etc. cattle, that would probably make milk too expensive for poorer families to afford.
  - PakG1 15y ago
    I think a lot of tribal meat eaters ate pretty sustainably because their population numbers held pretty steady, didn't explode. So just hunting wasn't enough to require the wild herds to also grow exponentially for survival. Let's face it, the issue is not meat, it's growth of the human population. But nobody wants to advocate eliminating humans (and definitely I don't), so we have to make the hard choices sometimes. I'd say the bigger issue isn't carbon footprint, it's water supply. http://www.businessinsider.com/water-use-of-foods-2011-4?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/water-use-of-foods-2011-4?op=...
    - bfung 15y ago
      But nobody wants to advocate eliminating humans A way of implementing this, nudging it towards more politically correctness, is birth control. At one extreme is China's One Child policy, which probably led to some economic benefits (yes, and created other social problems). Here's a thought: which reduces carbon emissions more, population control, or having a few people in a population do more environmental friendly stuff? (not suggesting one or the either, it actually needs some data.... sneaks away before getting stoned...)
      - neutronicus 15y ago
        Check out Singapore's policy for a middle ground. There's a cash bonus paid to women who opt for sterilization after two children, coupled with preferred admission into the best state schools for the children of sterilized women and increasing tax penalties for each child beyond the second.
        sliverstorm 15y ago
        Hmm... Not being able to attend a good school because your youngest sibling was born is a very upsetting concept in many ways...
        neutronicus 15y ago
        It pales in comparison to starving because your three youngest siblings were born, in my not-so-humble opinion. Granting or denying advantages to children is a good way to give a population control program teeth.
pault 15y ago
For me, the main reason for buying locally is economic; circulating money through locally owned businesses helps your neighbors. I would prefer to have the wealth created from my labor change hands a few times before going directly to Walmart HQ and/or some international tax haven.
- thaumaturgy 15y ago
  That's a good reason too. :-)
- dereg 15y ago
  Isn't this a good argument for protectionism? Why should people trade outside their own borders anyway?
  - thaumaturgy 15y ago
    For the same reason that people should have sex outside their own families: other groups often come up with innovative solutions to various problems, and by trading with them, you can benefit from their knowledge and experience and approaches. Of course, trading too openly can also be detrimental to one or more groups sometimes, too.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
code_duck 15y ago
Ie don't do the less meat thing for carbon footprint reasons, but just because it's ... nice, I guess, for lack of a better word.
sbochins 15y ago
The main reason I buy local fruits is because of quality. If you have to ship fruits from another country they're usually frozen and far too ripe when picked. On the other hand, when fruits are made for local consumers they are picked at the right amount of ripeness and aren't frozen. I can hardly eat a peach at a large grocery store nowadays simply because of the difference in taste.
- commandar 15y ago
  Tomatoes are a great example of this. Because they have to be shipped, commercial tomatoes are picked before they're ripe and then gassed with ethylene to make them turn red. As a result, home-grown and locally grown tomatoes tend to taste noticeably better than typical store-bought ones since they're properly ripened.

mark_l_watson 15y ago

Right on - my wife and I basically do the same thing: grow some of our own veggies, talk with local farmers at the farmers' market, etc. I also think that lowering our carbon and environmental footprint by eating less meat is the right thing to do.

thaumaturgy 15y ago
Yeah, my friend and I are pretty much unapologetic carnivores -- we half-kid sometimes about buying a 4H cow. But, I've noticed that ever since we started getting fresh veggies, I haven't minded eating the green stuff nearly as much. I'm skeptical about these food practices being able to feed everyone though. While, personally, I'd like to see dairy farms in California with pasture-fed free-range etc. etc. cattle, that would probably make milk too expensive for poorer families to afford.
- PakG1 15y ago
  I think a lot of tribal meat eaters ate pretty sustainably because their population numbers held pretty steady, didn't explode. So just hunting wasn't enough to require the wild herds to also grow exponentially for survival. Let's face it, the issue is not meat, it's growth of the human population. But nobody wants to advocate eliminating humans (and definitely I don't), so we have to make the hard choices sometimes. I'd say the bigger issue isn't carbon footprint, it's water supply. http://www.businessinsider.com/water-use-of-foods-2011-4?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/water-use-of-foods-2011-4?op=...
  - bfung 15y ago
    But nobody wants to advocate eliminating humans A way of implementing this, nudging it towards more politically correctness, is birth control. At one extreme is China's One Child policy, which probably led to some economic benefits (yes, and created other social problems). Here's a thought: which reduces carbon emissions more, population control, or having a few people in a population do more environmental friendly stuff? (not suggesting one or the either, it actually needs some data.... sneaks away before getting stoned...)
    - neutronicus 15y ago
      Check out Singapore's policy for a middle ground. There's a cash bonus paid to women who opt for sterilization after two children, coupled with preferred admission into the best state schools for the children of sterilized women and increasing tax penalties for each child beyond the second.
      - sliverstorm 15y ago
        Hmm... Not being able to attend a good school because your youngest sibling was born is a very upsetting concept in many ways...
        neutronicus 15y ago
        It pales in comparison to starving because your three youngest siblings were born, in my not-so-humble opinion. Granting or denying advantages to children is a good way to give a population control program teeth.

pault 15y ago

For me, the main reason for buying locally is economic; circulating money through locally owned businesses helps your neighbors. I would prefer to have the wealth created from my labor change hands a few times before going directly to Walmart HQ and/or some international tax haven.

thaumaturgy 15y ago
That's a good reason too. :-)
dereg 15y ago
Isn't this a good argument for protectionism? Why should people trade outside their own borders anyway?
- thaumaturgy 15y ago
  For the same reason that people should have sex outside their own families: other groups often come up with innovative solutions to various problems, and by trading with them, you can benefit from their knowledge and experience and approaches. Of course, trading too openly can also be detrimental to one or more groups sometimes, too.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

code_duck 15y ago

Ie don't do the less meat thing for carbon footprint reasons, but just because it's ... nice, I guess, for lack of a better word.

sbochins 15y ago

The main reason I buy local fruits is because of quality. If you have to ship fruits from another country they're usually frozen and far too ripe when picked. On the other hand, when fruits are made for local consumers they are picked at the right amount of ripeness and aren't frozen. I can hardly eat a peach at a large grocery store nowadays simply because of the difference in taste.

commandar 15y ago
Tomatoes are a great example of this. Because they have to be shipped, commercial tomatoes are picked before they're ripe and then gassed with ethylene to make them turn red. As a result, home-grown and locally grown tomatoes tend to taste noticeably better than typical store-bought ones since they're properly ripened.