The crash of the global flower trade • Hacker News Board

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#21

Post by smackay » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 8:49 AM UTC

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #4

Mengkudulangsat wrote: post #3

Cut flower export sounds like climate travesty; they are not essential, they are fragile (requiring energy-intensive cold chain logistics and air-freight) and after all that effort... they have a shelf-life of a week. If there is an industry that should be strictly localized, it's this one.

The argument I regularly hear is that there would be more energy spent heating local greenhouses than flying the flowers.

It's likely the place where that energy is expended is not being taken into account. Injecting water vapour and combustion products from burning jet fuel high in the sky is probably a lot more harmful than just the amount of energy is being consumed.

The skies in summer here are criss-crossed with dispersed contrails. It might help a little with global warming by increasing the reflectance of the atmosphere but it's sure ugly.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#22

Post by GrumpyNl » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 8:55 AM UTC

Basic economics, when times goed bad, you skip the things you want and focus on the things you need.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#23

Post by kuu » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 8:56 AM UTC

chewz wrote: post #20

empath75 wrote: post #12

The repercussions of the global economic depression we are entering are going to be long lasting and it’s not going to in any way bounce back in a few months or even a few years. A lot of industries are going to completely collapse.

And a lot of new industries will arise. They already do.

Out of curiosity, can you mention a few you consider are raising?

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#24

Post by easytiger » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 8:57 AM UTC

Mengkudulangsat wrote: post #3

Cut flower export sounds like climate travesty; they are not essential, they are fragile (requiring energy-intensive cold chain logistics and air-freight) and after all that effort... they have a shelf-life of a week. If there is an industry that should be strictly localized, it's this one.

> they are not essential

Welcome to civilisation. We do things than aren't survival focused.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#25

Post by easytiger » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 8:59 AM UTC

bostik wrote: post #7

Mengkudulangsat wrote: post #3

Cut flower export sounds like climate travesty; they are not essential, they are fragile (requiring energy-intensive cold chain logistics and air-freight) and after all that effort... they have a shelf-life of a week. If there is an industry that should be strictly localized, it's this one.

I don't even understand the whole cut flower thing. It's morbid. You cultivate something that is living and beautiful. Then you kill it, and bring the corpse inside, to essentially observe the once-living thing's decay. (And don't get me started on giving cut flowers as gifts. If your host is an animal lover, you don't pick up roadkill on your way over, either.)

I suppose you make all your food look as awful as possible, take no effort with your appearance, live in a room of squalor, for the aesthetic has no value or purpose?

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#26

Post by Razengan » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 9:00 AM UTC

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #11

bostik wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even understand the whole cut flower thing. It's morbid. You cultivate something that is living and beautiful. Then you kill it, and bring the corpse inside, to essentially observe the once-living thing's decay. (And don't get me started on giving cut flowers as gifts. If your host is an animal lover, you don't pick up roadkill on your way over, either.)

Merely using words with shock value isn't going to help your case. Yes when you sneeze often in spring it's because of plant bukkake in your nose and when you eat saffron you are munching on plant dicks. What's your point?

Hiding the facts of something with sugar-coated words isn’t going to help your case. Yes most bizarre and grotesque customs continue as long as agree upon them without questioning their value. It was also perfectly fine to own people as property and throw virgins into volcanoes, once. What’s your point?

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#27

Post by lsb » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 9:00 AM UTC

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #11

bostik wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even understand the whole cut flower thing. It's morbid. You cultivate something that is living and beautiful. Then you kill it, and bring the corpse inside, to essentially observe the once-living thing's decay. (And don't get me started on giving cut flowers as gifts. If your host is an animal lover, you don't pick up roadkill on your way over, either.)

Merely using words with shock value isn't going to help your case. Yes when you sneeze often in spring it's because of plant bukkake in your nose and when you eat saffron you are munching on plant dicks. What's your point?

I'm pretty sure that's a great new botanical OnlyFans

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#28

Post by kuu » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 9:09 AM UTC

tdons wrote: post #19

kuu wrote: post #8

I'm really sorry for the Dutch but their response to the crisis to Italy and Spain has been: "you should have saved some money!". I hope now they realize this crisis affects all in one way or another, either with direct deaths or with indirect sales crash, which can translate also into deaths. It's really hard for me now to feel pity for flowers when they didn't care about people dying...

You should take back the part where you accuse an entire nation of not caring about people dying. It's unbecoming. The Dutch just don't want mutualisation of debt. That's not strange at all.

I'm sorry if you feel offended, but as the saying goes:

"Put your money where your mouth is".

A union without solidarity is not a union...

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#29

Post by crispyporkbites » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 9:09 AM UTC

Razengan wrote: post #26

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Merely using words with shock value isn't going to help your case. Yes when you sneeze often in spring it's because of plant bukkake in your nose and when you eat saffron you are munching on plant dicks. What's your point?

Hiding the facts of something with sugar-coated words isn’t going to help your case. Yes most bizarre and grotesque customs continue as long as agree upon them without questioning their value. It was also perfectly fine to own people as property and throw virgins into volcanoes, once. What’s your point?

When has it ever been fine to throw virgins into volcanoes? And slavery has always been opposed by huge numbers of people, theses things have never been considered "fine" or comparable to having flowers in a vase.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#30

Post by Razengan » Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 9:10 AM UTC

easytiger wrote: post #25

bostik wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even understand the whole cut flower thing. It's morbid. You cultivate something that is living and beautiful. Then you kill it, and bring the corpse inside, to essentially observe the once-living thing's decay. (And don't get me started on giving cut flowers as gifts. If your host is an animal lover, you don't pick up roadkill on your way over, either.)

I suppose you make all your food look as awful as possible, take no effort with your appearance, live in a room of squalor, for the aesthetic has no value or purpose?

All that because they questions the florist trade? What sort of mental gymnastics does one even make to pull that logic:

I suppose you only eat what you kill yourself, adorn yourself with the carcasses of dead animals, live in a house decorated with taxidermy, just for the aesthetic value?