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

EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

dw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 184 posts

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#141

Post by dataviz1000 »

gus_massa wrote: post #136
dataviz1000 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean a cheese burger costs $18 USD and I couldn't find cheaper without having to walk 3 miles in Buenos Aries.

I just took a look at a McDonald's three blocks away from my home. A Big Mac with a big soda and big portion of fried potatoes cost AR$14,200 that is US$9.80 at the "blue" exchange rate. For US$18 you can buy a huge and fancy burger.

I flew from Asia to Buenos Aries after on a whim deciding not to return home to the US. I ran out of USD a while ago. Everywhere in the world I can withdraw cash with a small fee and whatever the exchange rate is. In Argentina it was a $10 fee plus the government set exchange rate and max withdraw was 60,000 pesos. So I was paying $10 to get $60 worth of pesos.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#142

Post by Saline9515 »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #134
Saline9515 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private consumer protection groups have no enforcement power and their action is a drop in the ocean. Honey is a good example, authorities don't control, NGOs and beekeeper unions provide tests and data, the EU gives 0 f*cks and allows the swindle to continue.

This is misrepresentation of facts.

Why is fake honey still so commonplace[1] in the EU if controls happen? Tests exists and are straightforward. The EU has been saying that they'll stop it[2], after a more than a decade of abuse, nothing happened because the fraud is so widespread but there are no systematic controls.

[1] https://eng.lsm.lv/article/culture/food-drink/03.02.2025-bee...

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/olaf-report/2023/investigative-activiti...

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#143

Post by jules-jules »

dlisboa wrote: post #117
wiether wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean#Uses

Yes, as you can see, it’s not for cattle.

According to this source, 77% of soy production is used for animal feed. That only a small percentage of it goes to cattle is irrelevant in terms of the damage caused.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#144

Post by dlisboa »

jules-jules wrote: post #143
dlisboa wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, as you can see, it’s not for cattle.

According to this source, 77% of soy production is used for animal feed. That only a small percentage of it goes to cattle is irrelevant in terms of the damage caused.

Which is my point from the beginning. Soybean production is worse than beef production for the environment when it comes to South America.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#145

Post by Saline9515 »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #133
Saline9515 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food safety is ensured by controlling at the production level, with physical inspections. Given the sheer amount of food traded and imported the lab measures are very unreliable and costly. Private consumer protection groups very often find problematic products. Honey is a good example, massive fake honey from China has been being dumped in the EU for the last 20 years, authorities don't care at all and allow it to c…

What do you mean “don’t care at all”? There’s literally a fresh update to EU honey regulation that just came into effect. https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/farming/animal-products/hon...

Yes, the EU complained and regulated it in 2021[1], 2023[2], and nothing has been solved[3] since we don't control the imports nor ban them when importers don't act to reduce fraud and there is no enforcement when fraud happens.

[1] https://www.politico.eu/article/china-honey-xi-jinping-bruss...

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/olaf-report/2023/investigative-activiti...

[3] https://eng.lsm.lv/article/culture/food-drink/03.02.2025-bee...

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#146

Post by gus_massa »

dataviz1000 wrote: post #141
gus_massa wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just took a look at a McDonald's three blocks away from my home. A Big Mac with a big soda and big portion of fried potatoes cost AR$14,200 that is US$9.80 at the "blue" exchange rate. For US$18 you can buy a huge and fancy burger.

I flew from Asia to Buenos Aries after on a whim deciding not to return home to the US. I ran out of USD a while ago. Everywhere in the world I can withdraw cash with a small fee and whatever the exchange rate is. In Argentina it was a $10 fee plus the government set exchange rate and max withdraw was 60,000 pesos. So I was paying $10 to get $60 worth of pesos.

I didn't know that, but it's possible because we still have a lot of weird exchange rules.

You can probably have got better exchange rates in some shady corner, if you don't mind the risk of been scamed by a random guy instead of the bank/goverment.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#147

Post by giacomoforte »

mikaeluman wrote: post #51

The main issue as I see it is that we need food security in the EU. Especially high quality nutrious dense food like beef. And EU farmers are subject to a ridiculous number of regulations and costs. The thing is, these may very well be good for environmental reasons, but it doesn't work if we just start importing from countries that do the opposite.

Beef was literally never a staple food in the EU. There's only a few regions were there is enough pasture land for a local operation but even then it was always too expensive to be a staple. Pork has always been the staple meat and we grow enough of that.

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#148

Post by vemv »

exceptione wrote: post #99
vemv wrote: post #82

At which point the "rest of the world" (everyone but the US) can just threaten Trump with making the US economically irrelevant? That would seem a simple and peaceful solution to the Trump-inflicted bullying - stop messing around or we'll cease all commerce with you. As I see it, just the bluff would suffice. Make the threat credible and the higher powers would remove Trump in a day or two.

> Make the threat credible and the higher powers would remove Trump in a day or two. Maybe, maybe not. Trump is here to distract the public via the media business, while behind the scenes ideologues implement Project 2025. The factions behind the GOP aren't aligned on all parts, so an erratic path is to be expected. What unites them is that their agenda isn't aligned with the electorate. People still try to make sens…

Thanks, interesting, what articles can I read to learn more?

Re: EU and Mercosur countries sign landmark free trade deal

#150

Post by wiether »

dlisboa wrote: post #144
jules-jules wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to this source, 77% of soy production is used for animal feed. That only a small percentage of it goes to cattle is irrelevant in terms of the damage caused.

Which is my point from the beginning. Soybean production is worse than beef production for the environment when it comes to South America.

It depends on what you are talking about exactly.

Does soybean production as a whole, in SA, is worse than beef production as a whole in SA?

Maybe.

Does soybean production for direct human consumption is worse than beef production for direct human consumption?

Not. Even. Close.

https://www.wri.org/insights/truth-about-low-emissions-beef

Basically you're average meat-eater is indirectly eating more soy than someone having scrambled tofu everyday

Post reply on HN