And the guy says, in his most current review, that the church made him feel glad to be a Christian. He also says that he began to drift off to sleep at this service. I see a contradiction…
Re. 1 & 2: no, because a., a church service is a public event (perhaps the public event) and b., if they didn’t make them public the churches would be even more likely to ignore the reports, and c., because they’re quite a laugh to read, and d., some of my deepest sleeps have been on pews (though only one at a time (pew, that is)).
Re. 8: also I expect it would take a lot more men to work a forest with hand saws than it would if they had power saws. (Plus you could have epic struggles across a big saw like in that Norman Maclean story.) This would be a good thing from the point of view of their communities, but a bad thing from the point of view of any employer, or a corporation that owned the forest. Unless the corporation took the long view and figured that acting stewardly towards the forest would produce more good wood eventually.
Is it impossible that hand saws would be a better option?
Now that I think about it, maybe our default setting is to take The Man’s point of view, like a slave mentality.
so he’s in favour of subsidising a product that kills millions annually so that farmers can maintain therir rural life style.The same thing happened in Riwaka (motueka ) for a number of years until commence sense rulled otherwise and it was dropped.
I think the point of the tobacco article was a bit more nuanced than that, Dad. Did you read it? What I read was
– the tobacco programme didn’t cost taxpayers anything
– ending the tobacco programme suddenly would devastate 60,000
families
– killing the Kentucky tobacco industry wouldn’t stop anyone smoking, it would just mean the cigarette companies would buy their tobacoo from overseas
Six years ago … the Burley Tobacco Growers Cooperative Association, which represents Burley tobacco producers in Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, and West Virginia … began an effort to reduce our region’s dependence on tobacco, working with farmers and urban consumers both to diversify farm production and to cultivate local demand for locally grown foods and other products. Though this effort is still in its infancy, it has won many friends, and it has gone a considerable way toward demonstrating the possibility of the change it hopes to make.
And why is this important? Are you saying we shouldn’t listen to Wendell Berry when he says we should be thoughtful about adopting new technologies because everyone knows tobacco is evil?
It was nuanced but flawed
How did 60,000 families come to be growing something the market didn’t want?
Where did the $8 pound come from (the tax payer I guess) so I suppose to say it, the subsidy costs nothing is true balanced against the cost of welfare. Isn’t a 15 year cushion a bit excessive I’d probably go with a couple of years max.
Would Mr Berry argue for subsidized poppy production in Afghanistan?
re 10, I asked because I did not know. I knew he bought a farm in a tobacco growing area many years ago but I do not know what his farm actually produces now.
I am not at all suggesting that WB would destroy the validity of his agrarianism if he still grew tobacco.
…We been spending most our lives
Living in an Amish paradise
I’ve churned butter once or twice
Living in an Amish paradise
It’s hard work and sacrifice
Living in an Amish paradise
We sell quilts at discount price
Living in an Amish paradise…
anyhow………..where did we end up with this thing 1)technology is good if you can do more work for less effort
but bad if it wrecks forests and the atmosphere
2)subsidies are good but are only a stop gap means to an end
3)tobacco kills but only slowly people who are dying anyhow
4)farming is a business and is an example of survival of the fittest but there are probabaly dozens of things that determine’fittest’the enviroment being one
…bearing in mind that it is rare for labour-saving technology to not have detrimental environmental & societal (etc.) effects, and rarer still for these effects to be given due weight.
Some South Island sheep farmers have reverted back to using old-fashioned hand clippers to shear their sheep (esp. merino). On the negative side, the result is increased labour cost and a lower wool yield. On the positive side, it leaves the sheep better prepared for the cold temperatures, and sheep also get cut less. Apparently the positives outweigh the neagtives.
Good idea = Mystery worshippers
Bad idea = Un-asked for from the church involved, and public, rather than an authorised email/letter/meeting.
And the guy says, in his most current review, that the church made him feel glad to be a Christian. He also says that he began to drift off to sleep at this service. I see a contradiction…
I see Berry advocates a return to horse and cart would he also advocate double ended handsaw rather than a chainsaw?
Re. 1 & 2: no, because a., a church service is a public event (perhaps the public event) and b., if they didn’t make them public the churches would be even more likely to ignore the reports, and c., because they’re quite a laugh to read, and d., some of my deepest sleeps have been on pews (though only one at a time (pew, that is)).
Matt totally has a crush.
Re. 3: No, Berry advocates testing each new technology with the question “what will this do to our community?”
No. 5: Yes definitely.
No. 3: Not sold, myself. A good idea that I just don’t agree with the execution of.
wouldn’t handsaws be better for the community
1. more jobs
2.less noise
3.no CO2
4. stronger/fitter work-force ??
Does WB still grow tobacco?
Re. 8: also I expect it would take a lot more men to work a forest with hand saws than it would if they had power saws. (Plus you could have epic struggles across a big saw like in that Norman Maclean story.) This would be a good thing from the point of view of their communities, but a bad thing from the point of view of any employer, or a corporation that owned the forest. Unless the corporation took the long view and figured that acting stewardly towards the forest would produce more good wood eventually.
Is it impossible that hand saws would be a better option?
Now that I think about it, maybe our default setting is to take The Man’s point of view, like a slave mentality.
Re. 9: This I do not know. Why do you ask?
I am sure if he did it would be organic
For the record, some stuff by Wendell Berry on tobacco.
so he’s in favour of subsidising a product that kills millions annually so that farmers can maintain therir rural life style.The same thing happened in Riwaka (motueka ) for a number of years until commence sense rulled otherwise and it was dropped.
I think the point of the tobacco article was a bit more nuanced than that, Dad. Did you read it? What I read was
– the tobacco programme didn’t cost taxpayers anything
– ending the tobacco programme suddenly would devastate 60,000
families
– killing the Kentucky tobacco industry wouldn’t stop anyone smoking, it would just mean the cigarette companies would buy their tobacoo from overseas
And why is this important? Are you saying we shouldn’t listen to Wendell Berry when he says we should be thoughtful about adopting new technologies because everyone knows tobacco is evil?
It was nuanced but flawed
How did 60,000 families come to be growing something the market didn’t want?
Where did the $8 pound come from (the tax payer I guess) so I suppose to say it, the subsidy costs nothing is true balanced against the cost of welfare. Isn’t a 15 year cushion a bit excessive I’d probably go with a couple of years max.
Would Mr Berry argue for subsidized poppy production in Afghanistan?
I don’t feel like your listening.
ditto
perhaps that’s the nature of this medium and instead you could have a real conversation over dinner tonight
re 10, I asked because I did not know. I knew he bought a farm in a tobacco growing area many years ago but I do not know what his farm actually produces now.
I am not at all suggesting that WB would destroy the validity of his agrarianism if he still grew tobacco.
re: 18 it’s absolutely not the medium.
I only understand Matt online.
product of your generation………..should listen to your papa live
re: 6, a song that comes to mind is:
…We been spending most our lives
Living in an Amish paradise
I’ve churned butter once or twice
Living in an Amish paradise
It’s hard work and sacrifice
Living in an Amish paradise
We sell quilts at discount price
Living in an Amish paradise…
re. 19: Sorry to be prickly, Hans.
anyhow………..where did we end up with this thing 1)technology is good if you can do more work for less effort
but bad if it wrecks forests and the atmosphere
2)subsidies are good but are only a stop gap means to an end
3)tobacco kills but only slowly people who are dying anyhow
4)farming is a business and is an example of survival of the fittest but there are probabaly dozens of things that determine’fittest’the enviroment being one
anything else?
…bearing in mind that it is rare for labour-saving technology to not have detrimental environmental & societal (etc.) effects, and rarer still for these effects to be given due weight.
Some South Island sheep farmers have reverted back to using old-fashioned hand clippers to shear their sheep (esp. merino). On the negative side, the result is increased labour cost and a lower wool yield. On the positive side, it leaves the sheep better prepared for the cold temperatures, and sheep also get cut less. Apparently the positives outweigh the neagtives.
A great example of old winning over new.
Re 22. Jono, like usual, makes a timely and compelling comment. I am truly proud to be your groomsman.