6 ms·

> “Regulatory oversight and validation of good practices are very difficult to document for compliance over the border,” he noted, “They are of course done much

> “Regulatory oversight and validation of good practices are very difficult to document for compliance over the border,” he noted, “They are of course done much better here. And there are validated and official fair market agreements between wholesalers and retailers that require documentation and compliance.” This is such a bullshit excuse (on the industry's part, to be clear, not the person speaking). If we cared to validate supply chains, it would be done, for this and everything else. We don't because the people in power do not want to know. They don't want to know how greenwashed avocados are, they don't want to know how many diamonds come from conflict zones, they don't want to know how much of their lithium was mined by kids, and all the rest. We know how to solve these problems and we're choosing not to, and not only are we maintaining harms done overseas in the process, we're also destroying the ability for domestic producers of... everything, really, to compete in the market too. But the lines gotta go up, so on we go.

SoftTalker 1y ago
I mean, if it bothers you, stop buying avocados. I think the truth is that consumers don't want to know either.
- ToucanLoucan 1y ago
  That's not a solution, it's defeatist horseshit. I want avocados. I don't want avocado growers to be able to hide their environmental impact. I want lithium batteries. I don't want kids mining lithium. I want animal products. I don't want animals needlessly tortured in factory farms. I don't feel like I'm asking for the fucking moon here.
  - chickensong 1y ago
    Amen. Sadly, it seems next to impossible to bring this sort of change and accountability to industry. In the meantime, our only option is pay premiums (both financially and in effort), which the masses are unable or unwilling to do, in order to opt out of the current system (if it's even possible). At least you're thinking about the issues, and seem to care, so thanks for that.
  - EA-3167 1y ago
    It's a classic case of revealed vs declared preferences. People overwhelmingly say they want everything ethically sourced, but they reveal that they don't want to pay more for it, which makes ethically sourced anything a luxury good in the cases where it succeeds at all. People want kids out of At some point IMO people need to grow up and recognize that there's a GULF between the world people say they want, and the one they insist on creating. Assuming that your money follows your stated intentions, you're part of a small minority that truly cares about this to the extent that they're willing to pay for it.
    - cjbgkagh 1y ago
      If revealed preference truly didn’t care there wouldn’t be a need to mark the produce as home grown.
      - EA-3167 1y ago
        It's there for the sub-set of people who truly care, or want to socially signal that they care. It's like... Tony's Chocolonely or any of the fair trade centric chocolates. They exist, they make sales, and you know who blows them out of the water every year? Nestle. Mondelez. For every person who goes to Whole Foods and checks the labels, there are thousands of people who go to Wal-Mart or Costco and the only thing they check is the price.
        cjbgkagh 1y ago
        If you socially signal that you’ll buy it and you buy it then the declared preference equals the revealed preference.
        BobaFloutist 1y ago
        Tony's Chocoloney had to stop marketing their chocolate as the only chocolate that doesn't use slave labor because they couldn't guarantee it. Unless you're literally flying over to vet suppliers yourself, there's practically nothing you can do as a consumer to guarantee you're not being lied to. Frankly, maybe this is an opportunity for an OSINT org. Just as soon as they stop having all these wars of aggression with professional misinformation campaigns to focus on, of course.
  - ipaddr 1y ago
    But you also want to pay what you have always paid
    - Carrok 1y ago
      I'm not OP, but no, I want to pay a fair price for things. I don't mind paying a lot more for avocados if it means no one has to die or be abused to produce them.
  - cindyllm 1y ago
    [dead]
- gedy 1y ago
  I mean we used to have a strong Avocado industry here in the states before NAFTA. Which reminds me I have to go cut one of the dead Avocado trees in my back from those days.
  - tomjakubowski 1y ago
    The US avocado industry is still pretty strong compared to pre-NAFTA. See Figure 4. It looks like domestic production (in lbs. of avocados) actually peaked in 2005/2006, and nearly reached that level again in 2010/2011. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FE1150 https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FE1150
- giantg2 1y ago
  Many consumers don't have the time or luxury to know. We're in the "give them bread" phase. We already heavily subsidize many parts of the food chain to keep people happy. Nobody wants to do anything politically that might cause food prices to go up.
  - lazide 1y ago
    That counts as ‘consumers don’t want to know’, considering how obviously grocery stores prices were an issue in the last election.
    - giantg2 1y ago
      Assigning a motive where there isn't any is not a great argument.
      - lazide 1y ago
        Pretending there is no motive when there is a plausible one right there isn’t a great argument either.
        giantg2 1y ago
        Yet it's still a better one. It's much more plausible consumers haven't had the exposure and time to form a decision on this than it is to conclude that they don't care.
- BobaFloutist 1y ago
  Oh, ok. Remind me, what food staples are ethical and healthy?
  - SoftTalker 1y ago
    You can find ethical concerns with anything if you look hard enough. Supermarket foods are not on my list of things I get too wound up about. Yes, the farming practices of developing economies are not congruent with what we in our place of economic dominance and comfort expect, but that's part of "developing." Look at our own, or any first-world country's history. Feel free to go to the Farmers Market on Saturday and pick up an $8 head of lettuce and some $4/ea heirloom tomatoes if it bothers you.
elpakal 1y ago
The coffee supply chain is one exception imho. There's a market for value-add in the supply chain, I've been amazed to watch the price of specialty coffee keep rising at my favorite roaster.
nickff 1y ago
You seem to have a very cynical view, but I think the reason nobody is verifying these things is that they're hard to actually check, and nobody wants to pay for the cost of verification. My only experience with this sort of tracking is compliance with "Conflict Minerals" reporting, and from that I can tell you that tracking and verifying the origin of any commodity or bulk good is nearly impossible to accomplish reliably. There is no real way to know where a refined metal came from, other than accepting a supplier's assurance, and maybe looking through some documents, looking for obvious mistakes. I have to imagine that avocados are similar.
- ToucanLoucan 1y ago
  > My only experience with this sort of tracking is compliance with "Conflict Minerals" reporting, and from that I can tell you that tracking and verifying the origin of any commodity or bulk good is nearly impossible to accomplish reliably. This is a better written and more eloquent version of the same excuse I was ranting about in my comment. And I'm afraid my response is not as eloquent: Bull. Shit. This is an eminently solvable issue. Make the executives of whatever corporation personally, criminally responsible for the slavery found in their supply chain, and then: Watch the problem be solved. No, I don't know the specifics of how you do it. That's not my job. But we put men on the moon, for Christ's sake. We, creatures not gifted by nature with wings, have the ability to fly at (mostly) reasonable cost, to such a degree where the inconveniences involved in it make it boring to discuss. Everyone in the west moves around in metal boxes with smaller metal boxes within them in which we blow up fuel and air in precise mixes to travel upwards of 80 mph, largely safely. You're telling me the collected knowledge of our species cannot be leveraged to make sure that little kids aren't doing resource extraction!? > and nobody wants to pay for the cost of verification. THAT is the real problem, and that's also solvable by the above. I bet the executives at these companies will open the business's purse REAL FAST when it's their, actual physical ass on the line, and not just a paltry fine and firm finger-wagging from the Government. In reply to the comment below: > But how do you actually verify the source? Let’s assume that some amount of conflict metals are laundered through other countries, and commingled with ‘clean’ material (which is usually how it happens); how do you figure out whether your supplier is using this material? Do you just trust any documentation they provide? If not, what is it that you’d do? I mean this is actually one application of crypto that I didn't think was brain-dead stupid. I read a paper about the potential of using blockchains to verify the integrity of materials in supply chains. More to the point though: I said, I don't know how it's done. But I guaran-damn-tee you that if the corpos will be charged, legally, personally, for the finding of slavery in supply chains, that they will figure it out and fucking quick. And, even moreso, once you raise the consequences of those "lapses" in ethics to such a degree, it's highly probable that the dubious sources will either improve or shut down entirely, because there will be no corporation in the West ready to do business with them anymore. The risk is simply too high for those in charge of said corporations. They will pay whatever it costs to have materials that are from properly vetted sources. And of course, I'm not a child, there will still be issues, none of this is a silver bullet for any of it, and there will always be bad actors acting badly. However we still have murders, and we don't just... fine murderers $500 and tell them they better not do it again, despite the fact that we can't catch them all. We catch them and we punish them.

SoftTalker 1y ago

I mean, if it bothers you, stop buying avocados. I think the truth is that consumers don't want to know either.

ToucanLoucan 1y ago
That's not a solution, it's defeatist horseshit. I want avocados. I don't want avocado growers to be able to hide their environmental impact. I want lithium batteries. I don't want kids mining lithium. I want animal products. I don't want animals needlessly tortured in factory farms. I don't feel like I'm asking for the fucking moon here.
- chickensong 1y ago
  Amen. Sadly, it seems next to impossible to bring this sort of change and accountability to industry. In the meantime, our only option is pay premiums (both financially and in effort), which the masses are unable or unwilling to do, in order to opt out of the current system (if it's even possible). At least you're thinking about the issues, and seem to care, so thanks for that.
- EA-3167 1y ago
  It's a classic case of revealed vs declared preferences. People overwhelmingly say they want everything ethically sourced, but they reveal that they don't want to pay more for it, which makes ethically sourced anything a luxury good in the cases where it succeeds at all. People want kids out of At some point IMO people need to grow up and recognize that there's a GULF between the world people say they want, and the one they insist on creating. Assuming that your money follows your stated intentions, you're part of a small minority that truly cares about this to the extent that they're willing to pay for it.
  - cjbgkagh 1y ago
    If revealed preference truly didn’t care there wouldn’t be a need to mark the produce as home grown.
    - EA-3167 1y ago
      It's there for the sub-set of people who truly care, or want to socially signal that they care. It's like... Tony's Chocolonely or any of the fair trade centric chocolates. They exist, they make sales, and you know who blows them out of the water every year? Nestle. Mondelez. For every person who goes to Whole Foods and checks the labels, there are thousands of people who go to Wal-Mart or Costco and the only thing they check is the price.
      - cjbgkagh 1y ago
        If you socially signal that you’ll buy it and you buy it then the declared preference equals the revealed preference.
      - BobaFloutist 1y ago
        Tony's Chocoloney had to stop marketing their chocolate as the only chocolate that doesn't use slave labor because they couldn't guarantee it. Unless you're literally flying over to vet suppliers yourself, there's practically nothing you can do as a consumer to guarantee you're not being lied to. Frankly, maybe this is an opportunity for an OSINT org. Just as soon as they stop having all these wars of aggression with professional misinformation campaigns to focus on, of course.
- ipaddr 1y ago
  But you also want to pay what you have always paid
  - Carrok 1y ago
    I'm not OP, but no, I want to pay a fair price for things. I don't mind paying a lot more for avocados if it means no one has to die or be abused to produce them.
- cindyllm 1y ago
  [dead]
gedy 1y ago
I mean we used to have a strong Avocado industry here in the states before NAFTA. Which reminds me I have to go cut one of the dead Avocado trees in my back from those days.
- tomjakubowski 1y ago
  The US avocado industry is still pretty strong compared to pre-NAFTA. See Figure 4. It looks like domestic production (in lbs. of avocados) actually peaked in 2005/2006, and nearly reached that level again in 2010/2011. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FE1150 https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FE1150
giantg2 1y ago
Many consumers don't have the time or luxury to know. We're in the "give them bread" phase. We already heavily subsidize many parts of the food chain to keep people happy. Nobody wants to do anything politically that might cause food prices to go up.
- lazide 1y ago
  That counts as ‘consumers don’t want to know’, considering how obviously grocery stores prices were an issue in the last election.
  - giantg2 1y ago
    Assigning a motive where there isn't any is not a great argument.
    - lazide 1y ago
      Pretending there is no motive when there is a plausible one right there isn’t a great argument either.
      - giantg2 1y ago
        Yet it's still a better one. It's much more plausible consumers haven't had the exposure and time to form a decision on this than it is to conclude that they don't care.
BobaFloutist 1y ago
Oh, ok. Remind me, what food staples are ethical and healthy?
- SoftTalker 1y ago
  You can find ethical concerns with anything if you look hard enough. Supermarket foods are not on my list of things I get too wound up about. Yes, the farming practices of developing economies are not congruent with what we in our place of economic dominance and comfort expect, but that's part of "developing." Look at our own, or any first-world country's history. Feel free to go to the Farmers Market on Saturday and pick up an $8 head of lettuce and some $4/ea heirloom tomatoes if it bothers you.

elpakal 1y ago

The coffee supply chain is one exception imho. There's a market for value-add in the supply chain, I've been amazed to watch the price of specialty coffee keep rising at my favorite roaster.

nickff 1y ago

You seem to have a very cynical view, but I think the reason nobody is verifying these things is that they're hard to actually check, and nobody wants to pay for the cost of verification. My only experience with this sort of tracking is compliance with "Conflict Minerals" reporting, and from that I can tell you that tracking and verifying the origin of any commodity or bulk good is nearly impossible to accomplish reliably. There is no real way to know where a refined metal came from, other than accepting a supplier's assurance, and maybe looking through some documents, looking for obvious mistakes. I have to imagine that avocados are similar.

ToucanLoucan 1y ago
> My only experience with this sort of tracking is compliance with "Conflict Minerals" reporting, and from that I can tell you that tracking and verifying the origin of any commodity or bulk good is nearly impossible to accomplish reliably. This is a better written and more eloquent version of the same excuse I was ranting about in my comment. And I'm afraid my response is not as eloquent: Bull. Shit. This is an eminently solvable issue. Make the executives of whatever corporation personally, criminally responsible for the slavery found in their supply chain, and then: Watch the problem be solved. No, I don't know the specifics of how you do it. That's not my job. But we put men on the moon, for Christ's sake. We, creatures not gifted by nature with wings, have the ability to fly at (mostly) reasonable cost, to such a degree where the inconveniences involved in it make it boring to discuss. Everyone in the west moves around in metal boxes with smaller metal boxes within them in which we blow up fuel and air in precise mixes to travel upwards of 80 mph, largely safely. You're telling me the collected knowledge of our species cannot be leveraged to make sure that little kids aren't doing resource extraction!? > and nobody wants to pay for the cost of verification. THAT is the real problem, and that's also solvable by the above. I bet the executives at these companies will open the business's purse REAL FAST when it's their, actual physical ass on the line, and not just a paltry fine and firm finger-wagging from the Government. In reply to the comment below: > But how do you actually verify the source? Let’s assume that some amount of conflict metals are laundered through other countries, and commingled with ‘clean’ material (which is usually how it happens); how do you figure out whether your supplier is using this material? Do you just trust any documentation they provide? If not, what is it that you’d do? I mean this is actually one application of crypto that I didn't think was brain-dead stupid. I read a paper about the potential of using blockchains to verify the integrity of materials in supply chains. More to the point though: I said, I don't know how it's done. But I guaran-damn-tee you that if the corpos will be charged, legally, personally, for the finding of slavery in supply chains, that they will figure it out and fucking quick. And, even moreso, once you raise the consequences of those "lapses" in ethics to such a degree, it's highly probable that the dubious sources will either improve or shut down entirely, because there will be no corporation in the West ready to do business with them anymore. The risk is simply too high for those in charge of said corporations. They will pay whatever it costs to have materials that are from properly vetted sources. And of course, I'm not a child, there will still be issues, none of this is a silver bullet for any of it, and there will always be bad actors acting badly. However we still have murders, and we don't just... fine murderers $500 and tell them they better not do it again, despite the fact that we can't catch them all. We catch them and we punish them.