The common lands were for everyone, given a few sheep, vast grasslands and a dog you had self sufficient milk, meat, wool etc
People used to be nomadic with their animals, capitalism doesn't work when there's total abundance so the playbook was to kill the animals, install farms, enforce land rights by force
Only when the workers have no other choice can they be forced into the factories
We could return to abundance if we could get rid of the personality types who require attention and power over the rest of us to temporarily satisfy their narcissistic wounds
Reinstate common lands and bring back self sufficiency, capitalism is a squeezing device, innovation happens despite it not because of it
Nevertheless, encouraging cruelty in poultry keepers is a bad thing. Casual cruelty has a corrosive effect on people.
I abhor cruelty towards them and it isn’t justified by any traits they have. The race to the bottom with Chickens is somewhat terrifying.
BUT they do have a mean streak and they are stupid. If they were big they’d be terrifying.
A bit dumb but the neighbour's cat loved herding them, he'd run around them keeping them in the garden, lol. A bit of dog firmware in that one.
they evolved from dinosaurs. i guess they could evolve back...
It made me rethink how great of a signal GDP growth really is on how good things are economically.
I worry sometimes about just how much of our GDP is actually fake productivity like that (see also: the significant multiple more that we pay for most infrastructure compared with peer states). It would help explain why a lot of "poorer" countries reportedly don't feel poorer to live in, for a normal family, than the US.
It's always been a dodgy metric and susceptible to gaming. But now that money is less and less connected to useful value, it's almost a sick joke.
There are many sources for purchasing power parity (PPP) corrected GDP if you're looking for a source on this. PPP-correction does indeed reduce the disparities, but does not eliminate them. It's also tough to judge relative living standards as a tourist or during a short-term stay in a poorer country, as one is generally exposed to 'nice' subset of locales and people.
<screeches about "muh jerbs">
-every medical licensing racket organization
>I worry sometimes about just how much of our GDP is actually fake productivity like thatWay more than anyone wants to admit.
The complaint is about these companies not wanting to reduce their profit margins, but how slowly do the other chickens grow? Are we doubling maturity time or increasing it by 10%? Doubling would probably impact consumer prices beyond what could be absorbed by eliminating the margin.
Most lay opinions I can find online claim the fast growing birds to have inferior meat quality. I wonder if I could distinguish in a blind taste test.
Here in Norway the two largest producers are moving[1][2] from Ross 308 to Rustic Gold[3]. They live roughly 40-50% longer. The third largest has already moved[4] to the hybrid Hubbard JA 878, with similar growth.
However it's also easier to get the slow-growing chickens larger without health issues, roughly 25% according to this[5], so it turns out you might need fewer chickens to produce the same amount of meat. And thus the economics might not be as bad as it looks at first glance.
That's for Norway though, perhaps it's different elsewhere.
[1]: https://www.nortura.no/b%C3%A6rekraft-i-nortura/omsorg-for-m...
[2]: https://kommunikasjon.ntb.no/pressemelding/18709900/coop-tra...
[3]: https://aviagen.com/eu/brands/rowan-range/products/rustic-go...
[4]: https://dyrevern.no/landbruksdyr/kraftig-velferdsloft-for-no...
[5]: https://www.norsklandbruk.no/den-vanskelige-okonomien-i-a-by...
Most I saw in US were running 3.4kilos avg at 51 days. If they make it to 53 days they usually have heart failure due to fast growth. Lots of breeding issues.
It’s easy to distinguish.
The fast growing birds are much larger, breasts at least 2x the size of normal chickens.
The larger breasts you notice when cutting them when raw, they often have a tough texture and meat inside like strands. When cooked and chewing it’ll have a hard chewy texture, sometimes feeling raw/uncooked. This is called woody breast.
If you have a standard small chicken breast, the texture feels much more pleasant when eating, like chicken.
I always try to avoid large chicken breasts and get the smallest possible but it’s virtually impossible now unless you live near high end low volume butcher with their own independent supplier.
I find it genuinely baffling that that would be the point.
No restaurant ever makes it big without being good to begin with. I remember the chicken being on par with any other fast food as a kid, they just fell off hard in the 2000s. I'm really not sure who is still buying their buckets.
Nando’s however is even more despicable. Here in the US they aren’t cheap.
It's overpriced, unhealthy and American. Enough reasons to not go.
The thing is, America is the China of food[0]: we make shittons of unsafe, dangerous product and foist it onto the market by burying the market's pricing mechanism under a mountain of garbage until nobody else can compete and we dictate the price.
People will note that China makes plenty of safe, normal products too. The same applies to American agriculture, but that doesn't matter. The problem is mainly that the industry has absolutely no standards. If they can go a few cents cheaper, they will.
[0] And, prior to this century, we were also China in general - a lot of our manufacturing was stolen from Britain and ran for far cheaper.
What I find most interesting about the USA is the variety; yes, there are low-cost (often unhealthy) options, but there are also a wide variety of wonderful restaurants which are not pinching pennies on their costs, even amongst national chains.