4 ms·

Ah, a Mises Institute article, definitely a non-biased source not trying to push a certain socioeconomic agenda. </sarcasm>

• jgmmo 14y ago
  Ah, a personal attack against the organization whom hosts the article and yet complete avoidance of any consideration of the points made in the article, so refreshing. </sarcasm>
  • meh01 14y ago
    The problem is that the article isn't worth even reading because of the source. It's like linking to the AEI or Heritage Foundation or some US Chamber of Commerce stuff. You know what you're going to get, and there's no point wasting cycles.
    • msellout 14y ago
      Regardless of the source (I didn't read it), there are some good arguments for buying non-local, non-organic being better for the environment. Efficient farms use less land to produce the same amount of food. Taxing carbon and pollution appropriately would allow lowest price to correctly indicate what is best for society, including environmental concerns.