TexasCHLforum.com

I'm sorry. Not enough sleep and too much coffee for me this morning. Maybe someone else can try to translate from my crazy world for me or maybe I'll be able to do better later in the day.

Ha ha ha.

I should have better written what I wrote. I agree with you. When I said "some people try to get the movement to succeed through right- or left-leaning policies" what I meant was hands-off, free market, etc for the right and hands-on governmental involvement for the left. Neither is due to sustainability or fair trade in the first place, though. It is because of individuals' concern for fair trade and sustainability that they want the government to interact (or not) with it according to their political ideology.

As a comparison, logging is not a right or left issue. People on the right and left have opinions on it and want governmental policies that express their views on logging (no government involvement or governmental oversight or what have you). In the same way, fair trade and sustainability initiatives are neither right nor left, but those on either side have opinions on it and want policies that express their views on it (no government involvement or governmental oversight or what have you). So fair trade and sustainability itself are neither right nor left, though you'll hear about it more from one side than the other.

This is contrasted with platform issues that are primarily or only compatible with one ideology. Socialized health care is primarily compatible with left-leaning political ideology. Complete laissez-faire economics is primarily compatible with libertarianism. The responsibility to protect social mores such as the institution of marriage and to restrict access to pornography are primarily compatible with right-leaning political ideology. These issues in themselves are "rightist" or "leftist" or whatever because they arise from the person's view of the role of government. Most issues are themselves neutral (conservation, firearms, health care, etc) and the policies that are proposed is where you see the politics come through. That's the case with fair trade and sustainability in my opinion. They are neutral issues, and people apply their political ideology and desire policies (hands-on, hands-off, supporting, abolishing, whatever) that reflect their ideology and that is where you see the politics come in.

Did I just make myself as clear as mud?

People who care about it tend to be politically left and concerned with workers' rights and stewardship of the environment, but the origin of the concepts themselves is something I don't know. Fair-trade has no government oversight and is a market-driven initiative, so that's actually quite politically right in its methodology. Sustainability is the same, though some who care about sustainability also seek government oversight or protection of it. I don't see anything in either "movement" that in and of itself is right or left, though some people try to get the movement to succeed through right- or left-leaning policies. Does that make sense?

Abraham wrote:Hoi Polloi,

Thanks!

Could you elaborate on sustainable crops?

I still find the term more than a little ambiguous. If crops are properly planted/harvested and fields taken care of in between - isn't that a form of sustainability? Or, is the term "sustainable crops" more narrowly defined?

Would I be wrong in declaring "Fair-trade agreements" a type of price fixing?

Yes, that would be a form of sustainability. In contrast, harvesting rain forests without replanting or at a rate greater than one was replenishing would not be sustainable.

Fair Trade is more of a minimum wage to avoid price fixing below production cost by industrialized nations, thus keeping coffee-buying monopolies from running the farmers from impoverished nations into the ground. That's the theory. It's particularly associated with Ethiopian coffee. There's actually a huge and fascinating economics issue and history with Ethiopian coffee covering famine, drought, stock exchanges, the role of the government, technology access by the people, and more. There are a lot of initiatives that were and are developed to try to avoid another famine like the one they had where there was surplus in one part of the country and famine in another with no knowledge or means of moving those goods.

Here's a program that presents the stock exchange in a positive light. I had several articles that were critical and used a different economic theory, but I can't seem to readily find them.


I took the below definitions from this website as they covered it better than I could.

Fair trade. Promotion of more equitable, less exploitative dealings with producers in developing countries. Sometimes called alternative trade. The fair trade movement is more visible in Europe. In terms of coffee production, fair trade principles stress minimum prices; credit availability; and stable, long-term business relationships directly with farmer cooperatives, avoiding intermediaries or middlemen. Sustainable agricultural practices are of perhaps secondary importance.

Sustainable. Here is another term that does not have a widely-accepted definition. For coffee agriculture and resource development, the term implies concern both for laborers' working conditions and for trading practices and land tenure systems that do not impoverish farmers—as well as sensitivity to the environment, minimization of pollution, and independence from non-renewable energy sources. At the intersection of ecology, economics, and politics, sustainability is concerned with the equitable allocation and consumption of resources, now and in the future.

Abraham wrote:What are ya'll talking about?

I haven't a clue as to what: "shop at small boutique stores with natural and toxic-free toys that were made from sustainable crops under fair-trade agreements"

Was this quote a bit of tongue in cheek wit? If so, color me slow...very slow.

I haven't a clue as to what natural toys are ... carrots as pistols - potatoes as hand grenades or something along those lines?

Aren't all crops sustainable ...if there's enough nutrients and water available for them?

I've yet to hear the definition of "fair-trade agreement". It doesn't ring of the free enterprise system though, but sounds ominously socialist.

Is it?

Can ya'll clear me up on these vexing questions!

Thanks!

No tongue in cheek.
Natural: made from products that can be found naturally occurring in the world. Silk, cotton, wood, metal, etc.
Toxic-free: made from and with products which are not known to contain ingredients that are toxic or potentially hazardous, such as pesticides or chemicals.
Sustainable crops: there is a system in place to replenish the crops that are harvested so that the net effect is not depletion of the resource.
Fair-trade agreements: A voluntary and private certification system that describes a market-based approach that aims to protect farmers in developing countries from the fluctuating prices of agricultural crops by ensuring that their crops are purchased at a base price above the farmer's production cost. Farmers must also prove environmental sustainability by forgoing the use of pesticides and adopting organic methods of farming. The effectiveness relies on people choosing the fair-trade option off the shelf at a store.

Here's an example.

Very few Toys-R-Us products are natural and completely non-toxic, much less from sustainable crops and you might find one fair-trade item in the store. The online Toys-R-Us store at Amazon has a wider selection of such things, though.

anygunanywhere wrote:I'd rather eat Taco Cabana than shop at Toys-r-Us.

I'd rather take a beating than shop at Toys-r-Us.

I'd rather take a beating than shop at most places.

The only time I have been to TrU is with my grandson Eli. If he was not with me I would not have been there. I was packing, btw. Don't care 'bout no siully sign.

bdickens wrote:Taco Cabana ended up removing their semi 30.06 signs after a slew of complaints.

Good point, but not worth much in my world.

I find it difficult to compare TC to TrU as an apples to apples comparison. TC is akin to a stop-n-rob. Eating there is like stopping to get ice or pork rinds somewhere. TrU is totally different. I'd bet many of the snoots who regularly shop at TrU would never set foot in a TC since tofu isn't on their menu and they would cringe at the thought of eating Tex-Mex unless unless it is served with trans-fat free beans and tortillas.

The TrU management looks on life in a whole different way than the TC folks, and I'll bet a dollar to donuts that most of the upper echelon of TrU would look down their nose at us freedom loving second amendment hugging gun toters that cling to our religion and hang tea bags from our mirrors and wave our flags.

Just my take on it.

Anygun

Taco Cabana's black bean tacos and burritos are vegan.

I know a large number of local, grass-fed, sustainable food types who are politically very conservative and who attend Tea Party rallies but who won't step foot in a McDonald's. The kinds of people you're lambasting shop at small boutique stores with natural and toxic-free toys that were made from sustainable crops under fair-trade agreements and they wouldn't consider shopping at Toys-R-Us. The rest of the non-snooty vegan and vegetarian world can be found at Babies-R-Us, Taco Cabana, Chili's, numerous churches across the land, and the TexasCHLforum, among many other "normal" places.