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

The crash of the global flower trade

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 137 posts

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#41

Post by [deleted] »

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.)

[deleted]

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#42

Post by tonyedgecombe »

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.

Slowly, downturns happen quickly and recoveries slowly.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#43

Post by evandijk70 »

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...

As someone from the Netherlands and pro-EU, this kind of thinking is not helpful at all. My knee-jerk response to this statement is to say something like:

We have been saying that to Spain and Italy for years. Spain and Italy have been violating the stability pact for years, during the best economic times. And now, when the crisis hits, they want to use our money, the money we saved by increasing retirement age, increasing taxes, and cutting costs. Money that we really need to stimulate our own economy.

But that would just lead to more arguing which is not going to help anyone. What I will say is that the Dutch government immediately offered help, but offered it in donations and through the Emergency Stability Mechanism, which is precisely what was agreed upon previously. This help comes with conditions to make sure that Italy and Spain do not become dependent on Dutch support, but can actually take care of themselves in the future.

To say that means that 'The Netherlands' (as if everyone in the Netherlands, especially the people in the flower business is represented by our government) didn't care about people dying is an insult to the people hit by this.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#44

Post by lm28469 »

op03 wrote: post #15
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 agree about not essential. If we go there, sooner or later, someone will show up and say Music is not essential, and why can't everyone dress like Zuck etc. But I do agree about local. I mean who doesn't want to walk by something like this everyday - https://scontent-yyz1-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t50.2886-16/93565...

> someone will show up and say Music is not essential

Depends on your definition of essential, I'd argue 100% of the world population would survive just fine without music or flowers. Food is essential, water is essential, medicine is essential, shelter is essential. Some tulips imported for 2000km away aren't. I mean, do we really have to debate this ?

If we go there, sooner or later, someone will show up and say Ketchup is essential.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#45

Post by evandijk70 »

grey-area wrote: post #37
tdons wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Dutch government should take back the part where they accuse entire nations of profligacy and indolence. This happened during the Greek crisis also and it is a tragedy which punishes the poor and the weak. Without mutual support there is no EU. Compassion for others is in your own self interest long term, but I fear this is easily forgotten in a crisis.

'The Dutch' didn't say that. Some Dutch people did.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#46

Post by dandellion »

jsumrall wrote: post #9
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...

Seems like quite a leap from "not wanting to subsidize other countries with Dutch tax payers money" to "not caring about people dying".

Under normal conditions I agree, but when dealing with a pandemic the gap is not really that big.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#47

Post by robocat »

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

If we only live for the essentials, what do we live for?

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#48

Post by TeMPOraL »

aaron695 wrote: post #36
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.

A carrot you eat and turn to literal shit. Flowers like you say lasts a week for multiple people. Also unlike kitschy stuff you buy and just sits there forgotten, you appreciate them, you have to somewhat care for them, they add value to life. To say they are "they are not essential" is saying life itself is not essential, just eat powder and sit in a room if this is the case. I feel like what you are saying is you d…

> A carrot you eat and turn to literal shit.

It sustains their life and thus serves an important purpose.

> Also unlike kitschy stuff you buy and just sits there forgotten, you appreciate them, you have to somewhat care for them, they add value to life.

Kitschy stuff is another ecological disaster, separately from cut flowers. People who appreciate flowers generally buy potted ones and care for them; cut plants are meant as gifts or decorations, and they get thrown away immediately (think of all the decorative flowers on social events) or after they wither (ain't nobody has time to care for the gift roses in the vase, or even notice them).

> I feel like what you are saying is you don't like flowers so no one else should.

I think GP is saying something else. They're taking a systems-level view. Flowers are cool, but we've created a system in which huge amount of energy is used to manufacture and ship around what amounts to reified mating signals, that could be manufactured and shipped locally instead. Now it would be fine in the era of free energy and matter replicators, but we're still in the era of scarcity and looming climate change. So it's fair to ask questions about unnecessary waste in the system.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#49

Post by Mengkudulangsat »

op03 wrote: post #15
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 agree about not essential. If we go there, sooner or later, someone will show up and say Music is not essential, and why can't everyone dress like Zuck etc. But I do agree about local. I mean who doesn't want to walk by something like this everyday - https://scontent-yyz1-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t50.2886-16/93565...

I have no qualms about cut flowers per se.

In my country garlands for hindu ceremonies are big business. I guess that is as essential as it gets for cut flowers. However, these largely depend on local suppliers.

The exporting surely is not essential.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#50

Post by Scapeghost »

easytiger wrote: post #24
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.

It would be nice if you remembered civility before making all your passive-aggressive jabs in the comments here, like calling someone "incel" for, what, saying that destroying flowers might be wrong? (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22943627)

What makes you so angry about arguing against destruction and waste?

Post reply on HN