4 ms·

The 1992 moratorium to allow the stocks to the recover is it being managed, correct. It’s an example of a coordination problem that that darn nanny state is dec

The 1992 moratorium to allow the stocks to the recover is it being managed, correct. It’s an example of a coordination problem that that darn nanny state is decent at handling. But restarting fishing won’t help the outports much if at all, because the efficient solution to the problem of someone needing to go out into the ocean to get a bunch of cod changed from being a town acting as an aircraft carrier for small fishing boats into a large fishing boat that returns straight to a larger port, and the industry as a whole employing an order of magnitude fewer people.

engineer_22 4y ago
> It’s an example of a coordination problem that that darn nanny state is decent at handling. I agree with you, but I think you're being condescending. I agree with you that the industry has changed and certain ways of life wont be sustainable in that context. It's unfortunate.
- empyrrhicist 4y ago
  > I think you're being condescending. I share some of the attitude, because farming and fishing get weirdly good branding compared to other extractive industries. This thread is full of people opining about how things would be better if only the government would stop pushing regulations they don't understand on hardworking farmers who know better. I live in the US state of Iowa and it's a truly laughable sentiment. There was a recent local public radio call in show where water quality experts and environmental engineers were told by a caller to "try riding along in a combine sometime to see what it's really like out there". These people are experts in their fields and have absolutely studied farming, but get talked down to by large agribusiness concerns like they're naive little kids. It makes me really angry to see, when the environmental harms agriculture in my state commits are so well documented. With that context, I tend to come to these conversations with a lot of extra salt.
  - randomdata 4y ago
    > These people are experts in their fields and have absolutely studied farming, but get talked down to by large agribusiness concerns like they're naive little kids. Presentation is everything. If, say, experts started pushing regulation to require that developers practice TDD, even if we’ll justified, without consultation with the developers to hear out their concerns you'd get the exact same kind of pushback. "try programming alongside me sometime and see what it is really like" There are plenty of exports who are actually out there in the combine, both metaphorically and quite literally. It is not a novel approach to get closely engaged with farmers when your research affects farmers, just as you would expect in any other industry. Those who fail to participate with the actual people their research involved end up looking like they are the ones talking down to others like they are little kids, and that's where you get the emotional reactions.
    - empyrrhicist 4y ago
      I object to your example, since developing with or without TDD 1. Would directly be a free speech issue 2. Doesn't involve the same kind of externalities 3. Doesn't involve a narrow range of powerful industries 4. The primary thing I hear from experts isn't mandating how farmers do things, but rather advocating for regulations on the effects of ag activity. Now, if you wanted to start narrowing it down based on security, safety, and market cap you might get closer, but it's still not a great analogy. Point number 4 is a crucial one - I don't need to know what farming is like to think they shouldn't be given an exception to the point source regulations other industries have to comply with, when their tile lines are dumping nitrates into our waterways. It's especially galling given the sheer magnitude of direct and indirect subsidies that I'm helping to pay for, and the fact that we've been told for years that the voluntary nutrient reduction strategy will get farmers who "know the land best" to "do the right thing". I'm done holding hands - this isn't a question of your friendly neighborhood farmer (I directly support several through CSA, and they're great). We're talking about heavy industry that we're already paying. We should demand more for the money, period.
      - randomdata 4y ago
        > but it's still not a great analogy. It doesn't need to be a realistic hypothetical as the only relevant bit is the reaction, and we all know that is exactly what would happen. Curiously, this emotionally charged attempt to find fault in the comment is rooted in the exact same behaviour of which we speak. If I "rode in your combine" when presenting it the reaction would be quite different, but since I sit in my "ivory tower" a visceral response is prompted. Quite predictable, of course, and a perfect example of how presentation is everything. > this isn't a question of your friendly neighborhood farmer Nobody other than your friendly neighbourhood farmer is prepared to have you in their combine ready to show you what it is like. The people behind faceless big agri business are sitting in office towers in the big city and couldn't care less about what some small time Iowan radio station has to stay. Radio isn't where policy is set and they know it. Not that I'm sure that changes anything as if there is a problem that the friendly neighbourhood farmer is causing it needs to be addressed, but still, presentation is everything. > We're talking about heavy industry that we're already paying. We should demand more for the money, period. Shoulda, woulda, coulda – I guess. Thing is, the feedback loop between consumer want and on-farm results is incredibly tight. Services like CBOT provide farmers updates in real-time about what consumers want of them and any farmers who don't react will have their lunch eaten by those who pay attention. Something is holding you back, and whatever it is that is holding you back may be more significant than you are letting on.

engineer_22 4y ago

> It’s an example of a coordination problem that that darn nanny state is decent at handling. I agree with you, but I think you're being condescending. I agree with you that the industry has changed and certain ways of life wont be sustainable in that context. It's unfortunate.

empyrrhicist 4y ago
> I think you're being condescending. I share some of the attitude, because farming and fishing get weirdly good branding compared to other extractive industries. This thread is full of people opining about how things would be better if only the government would stop pushing regulations they don't understand on hardworking farmers who know better. I live in the US state of Iowa and it's a truly laughable sentiment. There was a recent local public radio call in show where water quality experts and environmental engineers were told by a caller to "try riding along in a combine sometime to see what it's really like out there". These people are experts in their fields and have absolutely studied farming, but get talked down to by large agribusiness concerns like they're naive little kids. It makes me really angry to see, when the environmental harms agriculture in my state commits are so well documented. With that context, I tend to come to these conversations with a lot of extra salt.
- randomdata 4y ago
  > These people are experts in their fields and have absolutely studied farming, but get talked down to by large agribusiness concerns like they're naive little kids. Presentation is everything. If, say, experts started pushing regulation to require that developers practice TDD, even if we’ll justified, without consultation with the developers to hear out their concerns you'd get the exact same kind of pushback. "try programming alongside me sometime and see what it is really like" There are plenty of exports who are actually out there in the combine, both metaphorically and quite literally. It is not a novel approach to get closely engaged with farmers when your research affects farmers, just as you would expect in any other industry. Those who fail to participate with the actual people their research involved end up looking like they are the ones talking down to others like they are little kids, and that's where you get the emotional reactions.
  - empyrrhicist 4y ago
    I object to your example, since developing with or without TDD 1. Would directly be a free speech issue 2. Doesn't involve the same kind of externalities 3. Doesn't involve a narrow range of powerful industries 4. The primary thing I hear from experts isn't mandating how farmers do things, but rather advocating for regulations on the effects of ag activity. Now, if you wanted to start narrowing it down based on security, safety, and market cap you might get closer, but it's still not a great analogy. Point number 4 is a crucial one - I don't need to know what farming is like to think they shouldn't be given an exception to the point source regulations other industries have to comply with, when their tile lines are dumping nitrates into our waterways. It's especially galling given the sheer magnitude of direct and indirect subsidies that I'm helping to pay for, and the fact that we've been told for years that the voluntary nutrient reduction strategy will get farmers who "know the land best" to "do the right thing". I'm done holding hands - this isn't a question of your friendly neighborhood farmer (I directly support several through CSA, and they're great). We're talking about heavy industry that we're already paying. We should demand more for the money, period.
    - randomdata 4y ago
      > but it's still not a great analogy. It doesn't need to be a realistic hypothetical as the only relevant bit is the reaction, and we all know that is exactly what would happen. Curiously, this emotionally charged attempt to find fault in the comment is rooted in the exact same behaviour of which we speak. If I "rode in your combine" when presenting it the reaction would be quite different, but since I sit in my "ivory tower" a visceral response is prompted. Quite predictable, of course, and a perfect example of how presentation is everything. > this isn't a question of your friendly neighborhood farmer Nobody other than your friendly neighbourhood farmer is prepared to have you in their combine ready to show you what it is like. The people behind faceless big agri business are sitting in office towers in the big city and couldn't care less about what some small time Iowan radio station has to stay. Radio isn't where policy is set and they know it. Not that I'm sure that changes anything as if there is a problem that the friendly neighbourhood farmer is causing it needs to be addressed, but still, presentation is everything. > We're talking about heavy industry that we're already paying. We should demand more for the money, period. Shoulda, woulda, coulda – I guess. Thing is, the feedback loop between consumer want and on-farm results is incredibly tight. Services like CBOT provide farmers updates in real-time about what consumers want of them and any farmers who don't react will have their lunch eaten by those who pay attention. Something is holding you back, and whatever it is that is holding you back may be more significant than you are letting on.