Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Food security and the coming storm

eurasiagroup.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 427 posts

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#241

Post by lotusmars »

thriftwy wrote: post #203
lotusmars wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If both countries were to be compensated 'fairly' for the wheat, maybe there would be no war right now. Wow. Now this is the Putin apologist take I've never heard before, and I've heard a lot of them watching Russian TV.

Ukraine has failed to become economically solvent - it did not even grow to 1991 levels. So it had to cling to somebody else and eventually it tore apart (in 2014)

Ukraine did not "tore apart" in 2014.

Putin's army and mercenaries invaded its eastern regions, downed a passenger jet, weaponized criminal gangs, occupied cities and turned them into criminal neo-Stalinist enclaves with executions and torture.

He did it to teach Ukrainians a lesson after they've overthrown a corrupt pro-Putin president who built himself outrageously lavish palaces with golden toilets and private zoos.[1] In the end Yanukovich blocked Ukraine's integration with EU which sparked mass protests. Yanukovich or FSB snipers opened fire on protesters and he fled the country to Russia on a private jet.

[1] https://theworld.org/stories/2014-02-22/26-things-found-yanu...

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#242

Post by pandemicsyn »

sebmellen wrote: post #49
pharmakom wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time for me is by far the limiting factor. Short of a personal chef (too expensive) all the quick options are unhealthy. Edit: Loads of people suggesting cooking - I know how to cook, I just don’t have the time or energy. It’s not just preparation time but also the planning aspect. Meal prep delivery services suggestions are interesting. I have tried a few and found them expensive and low quality. Open to trying more…

I would highly recommend https://factor75.com . A bit pricey, but the food is worth it.

I was huge fan of Factor but at least at the time (before the pandemic) their packaging was iffy and I'd often get a delivery where more than half of the meal trays where busted. I did Trifecta for a bit after, they've got robust packaging but the food wasn't nearly as good as Factor's.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#243

Post by lotusmars »

stefan_ wrote: post #201
lotusmars wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually a lot of Moscow tech workers came back after fleeing initialy to Yerevan, Tbilisi, Baku and Istanbul. Most bought Bloomberg propaganda and were expecting a crash. It never came. On the other hand Moscow feels great, restaurants are packed and most of people I know are back to their consumerist habits (sans some Western clothing brands). Russian consumer exhaled and watches Ukrainian war like a soap opera on…

I don't understand, please read the comment, do not just press "next 100 words" on a Markov chain.

I don't know what reply did you expect me to give to "try to board a plane to Moscow then".

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#244

Post by strombofulous »

stefan_ wrote: post #201
lotusmars wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually a lot of Moscow tech workers came back after fleeing initialy to Yerevan, Tbilisi, Baku and Istanbul. Most bought Bloomberg propaganda and were expecting a crash. It never came. On the other hand Moscow feels great, restaurants are packed and most of people I know are back to their consumerist habits (sans some Western clothing brands). Russian consumer exhaled and watches Ukrainian war like a soap opera on…

I don't understand, please read the comment, do not just press "next 100 words" on a Markov chain.

Which part is confusing, it made sense to me

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#245

Post by joshuahaglund »

joenathanone wrote: post #70
atq2119 wrote: post #24

This is why, in normal times, food waste is a good thing. It means there's some slack in the system for when times get worse. Not that that helps people in poorer countries, unfortunately.

Such a short sighted comment, no, it would be best to have an efficient system where excess food could either be stored or delivered to those with food insecurities.

We might agree -- because it's not excess if people still aren't having their needs met. But producing exactly enough is a recipe for not enough when something unexpected happens. There should be waste (or unused capacity, that can hopefully be somehow reclaimed as compost/bio-char/chemical feedstock/fuel/etc) in such an essential system.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#246

Post by colechristensen »

vkou wrote: post #240
colechristensen wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you sold futures for your outputs and didn’t buy futures for your inputs, the results are on you. These are the kind of complaints you get from people who make market bets and end up wrong. You can use futures like insurance to insulate yourself from market fluctuations or you can use them like a casino.

In theory, you are correct. In practice, hedging for increases in fuel prices means buying something like oil futures. Which requires you to be at terminal at some port city 6 months down the line to physically collect the oil/gasoline/whatever that you bought. And then store it for the months before you use it.

It really doesn’t, you don’t buy fuel on the futures market, you buy it locally from the coop or whatever local purveyor you use for future delivery, hundreds of gallons at a time.

The same for your other inputs, you have contacts to buy them well into the future, you don’t just pay the market rate when you need it.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#247

Post by ALittleLight »

giantrobot wrote: post #139
ALittleLight wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all the more reason to publish and promote good instructions.

Good instructions to a lay populace aren't necessarily helpful. Babies are pretty fragile. Slightly undercooked ingredients, slightly improper ratios, or just substitutions made out of ignorance can kill them. It's not DIY chocolate milk powder. A slightly off recipe or preparation won't just taste funny while being otherwise safe.

I think people would trust the government and authorities generally more, if those authorities weren't constantly lying to them. The authorities could say "Here is a rigorous procedure for DIY formula. We strongly recommend against using this, except in an emergency, because slight deviations could result in harm or death for the baby." Instead, they seem to give the impression that DIY formula is never advisable or borderline impossible - which is probably wrong, and that misrepresentation makes people distrust authorities more generally.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#248

Post by colechristensen »

DarylZero wrote: post #234
colechristensen wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you sold futures for your outputs and didn’t buy futures for your inputs, the results are on you. These are the kind of complaints you get from people who make market bets and end up wrong. You can use futures like insurance to insulate yourself from market fluctuations or you can use them like a casino.

You're spinning it like a matter of choice, but I would doubt that it is. The farmers probably can't sell their product any other way than as futures; and can't buy energy any other way than at the current market price. That would mean the actual choice involved is just the choice to go into the farming business. Not exactly fair to compare that to casino betting.

Untrue on both counts. Source: generational small farmer in exile.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#249

Post by mensetmanusman »

DarylZero wrote: post #234
colechristensen wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you sold futures for your outputs and didn’t buy futures for your inputs, the results are on you. These are the kind of complaints you get from people who make market bets and end up wrong. You can use futures like insurance to insulate yourself from market fluctuations or you can use them like a casino.

You're spinning it like a matter of choice, but I would doubt that it is. The farmers probably can't sell their product any other way than as futures; and can't buy energy any other way than at the current market price. That would mean the actual choice involved is just the choice to go into the farming business. Not exactly fair to compare that to casino betting.

Does that mean this market is missing an entity that helps farmers buy energy futures?

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#250

Post by [deleted] »

lotusmars wrote: post #10

Putin already hinted that in exchange of lifting sanctions he will ship grain from occupied Ukraine. I'm pretty sure that Western politicans will scream "no way" initially but will quietly give in later. Just they way they gave in to Putin's demands to pay for gas in rubles. Whole rush on occopying south Ukraine (and levelling cities like Mariupol) was for Putin to have grains shortage as yet another leverage on Euro…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN