9 ms·

So "quiet" that Bloomberg's reporting on it? If you're a farmer, you're going to buy fertilizer from wherever and whomever unless prevented legally from doing

So "quiet" that Bloomberg's reporting on it? If you're a farmer, you're going to buy fertilizer from wherever and whomever unless prevented legally from doing so--and I, as a citizen of the US dependent on others growing this food on behalf of me, appreciate it.

tut-urut-utut 4y ago
And I, as an European, hate EU government for taking a self destructive way of introducing various sanctions that affect lives of the EU citizens in a very negative ways, without doing anything to help their proclaimed goals. At this point I am not sure if they are stupid, evil, corrupt or they just despise and hate their citizens. Or maybe all of that. You Americans are least have a pragmatic government that at least occasionally does something for your benefit. They at least say "America first", while the EU also says "America first" instead of saying "EU first".
- 88840-8855 4y ago
  The European response to the war is populist and, as you say, self-destructive. But economies and people can only suffer to a limited extent. EU will return to Realpolitik soon. Let's face it, the whole bashing of Russia as a "regional power" was idiotic and wrong on the same level as starting the Ukraine war and believing they would win it within a week. Edit: stop downvoting. How silly are you?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - jltsiren 4y ago
    The EU will not return to anything, because it can't do anything on its own. There are East/North European member states that are genuinely concerned that Russia could attack them next. They advocate for stronger sanctions. And while it's not said aloud, they believe the sanctions should be in place until there is (at least) a regime change in Russia. For them, the real issue is not the war in Ukraine but Putin. And if the economy crashes as a result of the sanctions, it's a small price to pay for safety. That's Realpolitik for them. Then there are West/South European member states that are safe from Russia and mostly just see the economic consequences of the sanctions. They are economically stronger and have more political influence. But if they try to force the issue and lift the sanctions too soon, it could well be the end of the EU.
    - 88840-8855 4y ago
      I am sorry, but thinking that Russia will invade the Nordics is dumb. Ukraine made sense, but the Nordics.. that is ridiculous. People will not carry this ideological politics as soon as they will feel the pressure over a longer period. Sanctions will go, mark my words.
      - matthewdgreen 4y ago
        Russia has invaded and taken territory from Georgia and Ukraine, both former Soviet republics. They have not (yet) invaded the former Soviet republics of Lithuania, Latvia or Estonia. These countries are all EU and NATO member states now.
      - jltsiren 4y ago
        The real issue is that the invasion of Ukraine doesn't make sense either. Russia expected a quick victorious "special operation", where the troops go in and the Ukrainian regime collapses with minimal fighting. Those expectations had no basis in reality, and Russia ended up in a major war it didn't want and was not prepared for. If the current Russian regime can start a war based on gross misjudgment, they can do it again. That's a real threat, even if Russian military is not as strong as we used to believe.
        88840-8855 4y ago
        This is simply wrong as you dont take history and dont take future into account. History: brzezinski sums it up well. Russia has some weird imperialist interest in Ukraine. They have ZERO historical interests in the Nordics. Future: Finishing this war will take how long? Active conflict 1 year give or take + licking wounds 3 year + restoring economy and finding your way in the new world order 5 years + getting ready for your theoretical war against the Nordics 10 years (this is the time Russia took to get ready for this one). In total: 19 years. How old is Putin again?
        jltsiren 4y ago
        Specifically from a Finnish perspective: Russia has a weird imperialist interest in Finland. Our history can largely be summarized as "trying to cope with living next to Russia, with varying degrees of success". From the dawn of history, until Napoleonic wars, there was an invasion from the east every generation or two. The invasions only stopped after Sweden lost Finland to Russia. After Finland gained independence, it took only 22 years before there was another invasion. The Cold War and the decades after the collapse of the USSR were the exception. We had a lifetime of peace and prosperity by leaning to the West while maintaining good relations with Russia. But that is over for now, as Putin no longer cares about having good relations with anyone. Russia is big, it's next to us, and it has become unpredictable again. Dealing with that takes priority.
- cpursley 4y ago
  You're getting downvoted by Americans with big fat paychecks in the Bay Area and other coastal cities on the energy self-sufficient North American content. Like it or not, Europe runs on Russian gas/oil/grain for the time being. The current crop of EU officials are probably not evil, but they are incredibly incompetent. By any object measure, the sanctions have filled the Russian Government's coffers and made Europe much poorer.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > any object measure, the sanctions have filled the Russian Government's coffers and made Europe much poorer With you until this point. Higher energy prices have in no way made up for the loss of Russia's reserves.
    - cpursley 4y ago
      Russia has actually raised minimum wage and pensions by 10% due to the huge inflow of tax revenue. They also reduced the emergency 20% interest rate to 9.5% (about same as before). And I can't find the article, but I read somewhere that they're only losing about 1/3 of the original reserves that was originally announced. The EU is getting played by both Russia and America.
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > Russia has actually raised minimum wage and pensions by 10% due to the huge inflow of tax revenue This is less than inflation. (Curious to see a source spinning it as a result of tax revenues. Even for the Kremlin, that's an idiotic argument.) It's also about the amount Russia's economy is expected to shrink this year.
        cpursley 4y ago
        - https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-to-hike-russian-minimum-wage-pensions-inflation-ukraine-war-2022-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-to-hike-russian-minimu... - https://fortune.com/2022/06/14/putin-russia-oil-gas-profit-revenue-europe-china-india/ https://fortune.com/2022/06/14/putin-russia-oil-gas-profit-r... - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-10/russia-cuts-rates-to-pre-war-level-with-eye-on-ruble-and-economy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-10/russia-cu... Keep mind that the Russian government budget operates on a $40 gallon barrel of oil budget.
- 7speter 4y ago
  You, as a European, must know that this problem has been brewing for years, since the Germans decided to turn off their nuclear plants and use Russian natural gas instead,right? Right!? Oh and, the US didn’t mandate Germany to do this, its voters did.
  - wewxjfq 4y ago
    This bullshit again. Nuclear power was 20% of Germany's electricity production and Germany replaced it with renewables. When Germany turned off its nuclear power plants, imports from Russia decreased for several years. Over the past 25 years, the only country where Germany has been importing more gas from is Norway.
  - tut-urut-utut 4y ago
    It's not only about gas and sanctions, there are many examples of EU government doing harm to Europeans. I mentioned sanctions only to highlight a contrast to the parent comment.
88840-8855 4y ago
quit in terms of US is importing, but the EU is expected to stay strong ideologically. Look. We all understand that the reaction to the war activistic and ideological. The more time will pass, the more politics will move towards Realpolitik.
- bpodgursky 4y ago
  > United States Imports from Russia of Fertilizers was US$1.28 Billion during 2021 [1] > Using data on ship movements, real-time tracking of gas flows through pipelines and estimates based on historical monthly trade, the researchers reckoned Germany alone paid Russia about 9.1 billion euros for fossil fuel deliveries — mostly natural gas — in the first two months of the war. [2] Let's not pretend these are comparable numbers. It's not like the US is about to run out of food anyway. We're a massive exporter. The goal is to boost US food production enough that the 3rd world doesn't starve to death (and if food prices go through the roof, it also helps Russia). Frankly, if we were being ruthless about it, the US might be financially BETTER off if there was a worldwide grain shortage. We're still trying to stop it. Germany is importing Russian natural gas to avoid turning on nuclear power plants for ideological reasons. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/imports/russia/fertilizers https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/imports/russia/fe... [2] https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-business-europe-germany-484fdfeecf86483356f5f003b77e30da https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-business-europe-ge...
  - stefan_ 4y ago
    Nuclear power stations that run with Russian fuel? Good try. (Not to mention they don't just "turn on".)
    - gambiting 4y ago
      Other countries can provide fuel. Multiple countries have already signed contracts with American and French companies to manufacture fuel for their(Soviet designed) reactors. It's already happening. Also a fully fueled reactor can run for a long time before it needs refueling. Germany doesn't want to turn its reactors on for like the above poster said - ideological reasons. And yeah there is a startup process, but they could have been spun up by now since the start of this war.
tenpies 4y ago
You have to understand the utter diplomatic and geopolitical incompetence of the current US adminsitration. You're talking about the same administration that literally admitted in the open to be executing cyber attacks on Russia[1]. The fact that they haven't made most of North America glow in the dark is an utter miracle. And to make my point clear, the issue isn't that they're conducting cyber attacks - that's a given. The issue is admitting it, in the open, to the news media. Everyone knows this is happening, but you don't say the quiet part out loud because it's an escalation against a nuclear power and gives them carte blanche to retaliate. --- [1] https://news.sky.com/story/us-military-hackers-conducting-offensive-operations-in-support-of-ukraine-says-head-of-cyber-command-12625139 https://news.sky.com/story/us-military-hackers-conducting-of...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- charles_kaw 4y ago
  And yet, we're not glowing. That's because cyber attacks are not viewed the same as physical attacks, especially when it doesn't lead to loss of life. This is literally the US AND Russia's stance, so it's not a completely untoward thing to do. I'm not in support of it, but, that's the reality
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- nickff 4y ago
  To be fair, I think that admission was probably less damaging than the "minor incursion" comment from January: https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/19/politics/russia-ukraine-joe-biden-news-conference/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/19/politics/russia-ukraine-joe-b...
  - 7speter 4y ago
    Putin definitely thought the incursion would be minor. He didn’t think the Ukrainians would be (backed with advanced western weapons and intelligence) fighting back with such vigor.
coryrc 4y ago
I, as a citizen of the US dependent on others growing this food on behalf of me, am fine with reduced yields and higher meat prices, to put more pressure on Russia. I also wish we'd send in the big guns to put a lot more pressure in focused places.
- jerf 4y ago
  "Reduced yields" and "higher meat prices" is a benign way of saying "people may starve to death". What may be an inconvenience to you, a probably-rich person on the global scale, who can afford to outbid poor people when food gets short, is not necessarily just an inconvenience for others.
  - furyg3 4y ago
    People do not need to starve to death. We use a ton of land to grow a ton of plants that we then feed to a ton of animals which we then feed to humans. Or we could, you know, just eat the plants. Calculations vary (a lot), but doing that could reduce global agricultural land use from 4 billion hectares to just 1.†. On top of that we're completely wasting 30-40% of the food we do produce.†† This is not to say that all meat consumption is 'inefficient'. Cattle can graze on land that is not suitable for farming, and animals generally eat more of the physical plants than we do (animals on a feedlot are often eating fibrous parts of the plant like stalks and stubble and not just the parts we humans like to eat). But there's no way around it, industrialized meat in its current form is an extraordinarily inefficient use of land and has terrible environmental consequences. Also relevant to any discussion on fertilizer is that excessive usage basically destroys the soil. We've moved away from time-tested methods of managing crops through things like crop rotation, cover crops, promoting natural vegetation in key areas... to over-tilling, over-fertilizing, mono-cropping, and this is taking its toil on the ground we use to farm. Fertilizer is also responsible for eutrophication (nutrient pollution) which destroys local ecosystems and poisons the water. Not to mention nutrition != calories. Fertilizer is absolutely a modern technological wonder which has allowed humanity to produce food at tremendous scale, and I would not argue that it does not have its place in farming. But the current singular focus on "more yield per hectare" is a very modern, naive approach to farming that throws out a ton of considerations, and is absolutely unecessary. † https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets †† https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs
mc32 4y ago
I don't know what it is, but it seems something is not right. On the one hand the US is asking the EU and allies to stop buying oil and whatever from Russia. A few large retailers pulled out of the Russian market due to perceived pressure to do so. We tell India (traditional non-aligned country) not to buy from Russia, we chastised Brazil for buying fertilizer from Russia (despite our objections), we tighten our own embargoes and then we're like, ahhhhh, nevermind..... WE'RE going to buy from Russia. Is it lack of coordination, foresight, credibility, it's something. I am now going to imagine the hysterics Pelosi and Schumer would have if Biden suddenly and for no reason declared himself an "R". At this point maybe he should to save the Dem party.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > tell India (traditional non-aligned country) not to buy from Russia This is an odd one to include given it's almost administration policy at this point to look the other way while New Delhi goes out of its way to buy Russian oil.
  - gautamdivgi 4y ago
    And Europe isn’t buying Russian oil? You have NATO members still on Russian energy. Why bother about other countries?
    - vogre 4y ago
      Funniest part is that US and Europe buy Russian oil from India. Because Indians are able to remove all evil totalitarian molecules from it.
      - themitigating 4y ago
        "India has also denied recent reports that Russian crude imported by India was being shipped on as refined products to other countries, including the US." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-60783874.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-60783874.amp Even if it is true the oil shipments origins are being hidden so the US and Europe don't know it's from Russia. You implied they were aware it was from Russia but were ok because it went through. Article about the hidden sale https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-oil-producers-stay-one-step-ahead-of-sanctions-11654076614 https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-oil-producers-stay-one-...

tut-urut-utut 4y ago

And I, as an European, hate EU government for taking a self destructive way of introducing various sanctions that affect lives of the EU citizens in a very negative ways, without doing anything to help their proclaimed goals. At this point I am not sure if they are stupid, evil, corrupt or they just despise and hate their citizens. Or maybe all of that. You Americans are least have a pragmatic government that at least occasionally does something for your benefit. They at least say "America first", while the EU also says "America first" instead of saying "EU first".

88840-8855 4y ago
The European response to the war is populist and, as you say, self-destructive. But economies and people can only suffer to a limited extent. EU will return to Realpolitik soon. Let's face it, the whole bashing of Russia as a "regional power" was idiotic and wrong on the same level as starting the Ukraine war and believing they would win it within a week. Edit: stop downvoting. How silly are you?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jltsiren 4y ago
  The EU will not return to anything, because it can't do anything on its own. There are East/North European member states that are genuinely concerned that Russia could attack them next. They advocate for stronger sanctions. And while it's not said aloud, they believe the sanctions should be in place until there is (at least) a regime change in Russia. For them, the real issue is not the war in Ukraine but Putin. And if the economy crashes as a result of the sanctions, it's a small price to pay for safety. That's Realpolitik for them. Then there are West/South European member states that are safe from Russia and mostly just see the economic consequences of the sanctions. They are economically stronger and have more political influence. But if they try to force the issue and lift the sanctions too soon, it could well be the end of the EU.
  - 88840-8855 4y ago
    I am sorry, but thinking that Russia will invade the Nordics is dumb. Ukraine made sense, but the Nordics.. that is ridiculous. People will not carry this ideological politics as soon as they will feel the pressure over a longer period. Sanctions will go, mark my words.
    - matthewdgreen 4y ago
      Russia has invaded and taken territory from Georgia and Ukraine, both former Soviet republics. They have not (yet) invaded the former Soviet republics of Lithuania, Latvia or Estonia. These countries are all EU and NATO member states now.
    - jltsiren 4y ago
      The real issue is that the invasion of Ukraine doesn't make sense either. Russia expected a quick victorious "special operation", where the troops go in and the Ukrainian regime collapses with minimal fighting. Those expectations had no basis in reality, and Russia ended up in a major war it didn't want and was not prepared for. If the current Russian regime can start a war based on gross misjudgment, they can do it again. That's a real threat, even if Russian military is not as strong as we used to believe.
      - 88840-8855 4y ago
        This is simply wrong as you dont take history and dont take future into account. History: brzezinski sums it up well. Russia has some weird imperialist interest in Ukraine. They have ZERO historical interests in the Nordics. Future: Finishing this war will take how long? Active conflict 1 year give or take + licking wounds 3 year + restoring economy and finding your way in the new world order 5 years + getting ready for your theoretical war against the Nordics 10 years (this is the time Russia took to get ready for this one). In total: 19 years. How old is Putin again?
        jltsiren 4y ago
        Specifically from a Finnish perspective: Russia has a weird imperialist interest in Finland. Our history can largely be summarized as "trying to cope with living next to Russia, with varying degrees of success". From the dawn of history, until Napoleonic wars, there was an invasion from the east every generation or two. The invasions only stopped after Sweden lost Finland to Russia. After Finland gained independence, it took only 22 years before there was another invasion. The Cold War and the decades after the collapse of the USSR were the exception. We had a lifetime of peace and prosperity by leaning to the West while maintaining good relations with Russia. But that is over for now, as Putin no longer cares about having good relations with anyone. Russia is big, it's next to us, and it has become unpredictable again. Dealing with that takes priority.
cpursley 4y ago
You're getting downvoted by Americans with big fat paychecks in the Bay Area and other coastal cities on the energy self-sufficient North American content. Like it or not, Europe runs on Russian gas/oil/grain for the time being. The current crop of EU officials are probably not evil, but they are incredibly incompetent. By any object measure, the sanctions have filled the Russian Government's coffers and made Europe much poorer.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > any object measure, the sanctions have filled the Russian Government's coffers and made Europe much poorer With you until this point. Higher energy prices have in no way made up for the loss of Russia's reserves.
  - cpursley 4y ago
    Russia has actually raised minimum wage and pensions by 10% due to the huge inflow of tax revenue. They also reduced the emergency 20% interest rate to 9.5% (about same as before). And I can't find the article, but I read somewhere that they're only losing about 1/3 of the original reserves that was originally announced. The EU is getting played by both Russia and America.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > Russia has actually raised minimum wage and pensions by 10% due to the huge inflow of tax revenue This is less than inflation. (Curious to see a source spinning it as a result of tax revenues. Even for the Kremlin, that's an idiotic argument.) It's also about the amount Russia's economy is expected to shrink this year.
      - cpursley 4y ago
        - https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-to-hike-russian-minimum-wage-pensions-inflation-ukraine-war-2022-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-to-hike-russian-minimu... - https://fortune.com/2022/06/14/putin-russia-oil-gas-profit-revenue-europe-china-india/ https://fortune.com/2022/06/14/putin-russia-oil-gas-profit-r... - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-10/russia-cuts-rates-to-pre-war-level-with-eye-on-ruble-and-economy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-10/russia-cu... Keep mind that the Russian government budget operates on a $40 gallon barrel of oil budget.
7speter 4y ago
You, as a European, must know that this problem has been brewing for years, since the Germans decided to turn off their nuclear plants and use Russian natural gas instead,right? Right!? Oh and, the US didn’t mandate Germany to do this, its voters did.
- wewxjfq 4y ago
  This bullshit again. Nuclear power was 20% of Germany's electricity production and Germany replaced it with renewables. When Germany turned off its nuclear power plants, imports from Russia decreased for several years. Over the past 25 years, the only country where Germany has been importing more gas from is Norway.
- tut-urut-utut 4y ago
  It's not only about gas and sanctions, there are many examples of EU government doing harm to Europeans. I mentioned sanctions only to highlight a contrast to the parent comment.

88840-8855 4y ago

quit in terms of US is importing, but the EU is expected to stay strong ideologically. Look. We all understand that the reaction to the war activistic and ideological. The more time will pass, the more politics will move towards Realpolitik.

bpodgursky 4y ago
> United States Imports from Russia of Fertilizers was US$1.28 Billion during 2021 [1] > Using data on ship movements, real-time tracking of gas flows through pipelines and estimates based on historical monthly trade, the researchers reckoned Germany alone paid Russia about 9.1 billion euros for fossil fuel deliveries — mostly natural gas — in the first two months of the war. [2] Let's not pretend these are comparable numbers. It's not like the US is about to run out of food anyway. We're a massive exporter. The goal is to boost US food production enough that the 3rd world doesn't starve to death (and if food prices go through the roof, it also helps Russia). Frankly, if we were being ruthless about it, the US might be financially BETTER off if there was a worldwide grain shortage. We're still trying to stop it. Germany is importing Russian natural gas to avoid turning on nuclear power plants for ideological reasons. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/imports/russia/fertilizers https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/imports/russia/fe... [2] https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-business-europe-germany-484fdfeecf86483356f5f003b77e30da https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-business-europe-ge...
- stefan_ 4y ago
  Nuclear power stations that run with Russian fuel? Good try. (Not to mention they don't just "turn on".)
  - gambiting 4y ago
    Other countries can provide fuel. Multiple countries have already signed contracts with American and French companies to manufacture fuel for their(Soviet designed) reactors. It's already happening. Also a fully fueled reactor can run for a long time before it needs refueling. Germany doesn't want to turn its reactors on for like the above poster said - ideological reasons. And yeah there is a startup process, but they could have been spun up by now since the start of this war.

tenpies 4y ago

You have to understand the utter diplomatic and geopolitical incompetence of the current US adminsitration. You're talking about the same administration that literally admitted in the open to be executing cyber attacks on Russia[1]. The fact that they haven't made most of North America glow in the dark is an utter miracle. And to make my point clear, the issue isn't that they're conducting cyber attacks - that's a given. The issue is admitting it, in the open, to the news media. Everyone knows this is happening, but you don't say the quiet part out loud because it's an escalation against a nuclear power and gives them carte blanche to retaliate. --- [1] https://news.sky.com/story/us-military-hackers-conducting-offensive-operations-in-support-of-ukraine-says-head-of-cyber-command-12625139 https://news.sky.com/story/us-military-hackers-conducting-of...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
charles_kaw 4y ago
And yet, we're not glowing. That's because cyber attacks are not viewed the same as physical attacks, especially when it doesn't lead to loss of life. This is literally the US AND Russia's stance, so it's not a completely untoward thing to do. I'm not in support of it, but, that's the reality
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
nickff 4y ago
To be fair, I think that admission was probably less damaging than the "minor incursion" comment from January: https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/19/politics/russia-ukraine-joe-biden-news-conference/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/19/politics/russia-ukraine-joe-b...
- 7speter 4y ago
  Putin definitely thought the incursion would be minor. He didn’t think the Ukrainians would be (backed with advanced western weapons and intelligence) fighting back with such vigor.

coryrc 4y ago

I, as a citizen of the US dependent on others growing this food on behalf of me, am fine with reduced yields and higher meat prices, to put more pressure on Russia. I also wish we'd send in the big guns to put a lot more pressure in focused places.

jerf 4y ago
"Reduced yields" and "higher meat prices" is a benign way of saying "people may starve to death". What may be an inconvenience to you, a probably-rich person on the global scale, who can afford to outbid poor people when food gets short, is not necessarily just an inconvenience for others.
- furyg3 4y ago
  People do not need to starve to death. We use a ton of land to grow a ton of plants that we then feed to a ton of animals which we then feed to humans. Or we could, you know, just eat the plants. Calculations vary (a lot), but doing that could reduce global agricultural land use from 4 billion hectares to just 1.†. On top of that we're completely wasting 30-40% of the food we do produce.†† This is not to say that all meat consumption is 'inefficient'. Cattle can graze on land that is not suitable for farming, and animals generally eat more of the physical plants than we do (animals on a feedlot are often eating fibrous parts of the plant like stalks and stubble and not just the parts we humans like to eat). But there's no way around it, industrialized meat in its current form is an extraordinarily inefficient use of land and has terrible environmental consequences. Also relevant to any discussion on fertilizer is that excessive usage basically destroys the soil. We've moved away from time-tested methods of managing crops through things like crop rotation, cover crops, promoting natural vegetation in key areas... to over-tilling, over-fertilizing, mono-cropping, and this is taking its toil on the ground we use to farm. Fertilizer is also responsible for eutrophication (nutrient pollution) which destroys local ecosystems and poisons the water. Not to mention nutrition != calories. Fertilizer is absolutely a modern technological wonder which has allowed humanity to produce food at tremendous scale, and I would not argue that it does not have its place in farming. But the current singular focus on "more yield per hectare" is a very modern, naive approach to farming that throws out a ton of considerations, and is absolutely unecessary. † https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets †† https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs

mc32 4y ago

I don't know what it is, but it seems something is not right. On the one hand the US is asking the EU and allies to stop buying oil and whatever from Russia. A few large retailers pulled out of the Russian market due to perceived pressure to do so. We tell India (traditional non-aligned country) not to buy from Russia, we chastised Brazil for buying fertilizer from Russia (despite our objections), we tighten our own embargoes and then we're like, ahhhhh, nevermind..... WE'RE going to buy from Russia. Is it lack of coordination, foresight, credibility, it's something. I am now going to imagine the hysterics Pelosi and Schumer would have if Biden suddenly and for no reason declared himself an "R". At this point maybe he should to save the Dem party.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> tell India (traditional non-aligned country) not to buy from Russia This is an odd one to include given it's almost administration policy at this point to look the other way while New Delhi goes out of its way to buy Russian oil.
- gautamdivgi 4y ago
  And Europe isn’t buying Russian oil? You have NATO members still on Russian energy. Why bother about other countries?
  - vogre 4y ago
    Funniest part is that US and Europe buy Russian oil from India. Because Indians are able to remove all evil totalitarian molecules from it.
    - themitigating 4y ago
      "India has also denied recent reports that Russian crude imported by India was being shipped on as refined products to other countries, including the US." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-60783874.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-60783874.amp Even if it is true the oil shipments origins are being hidden so the US and Europe don't know it's from Russia. You implied they were aware it was from Russia but were ok because it went through. Article about the hidden sale https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-oil-producers-stay-one-step-ahead-of-sanctions-11654076614 https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-oil-producers-stay-one-...