European guy, weird by default.

You dislike what I say, great. Makes the world a more interesting of a place. But try to disagree with me beyond a downvote. Argue your point. Let’s see if we can reach a consensus between our positions.

  • 49 Posts
  • 2.99K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 19th, 2023

help-circle
  • My two takes on this:

    1. food is fuel

    I can and do subsist on a basic and bland diet if necessary. Food is a way to preserve my existence, so I have to eat. And when hungry I will eat anything for the sole sake of keep myself functioning. Some exceptions do apply.

    1. we’re biologically hardwired to seek pleasure from our food

    That is why sugary food and more simply fruits and berries appeal so much to us: it’s sweet, it tastes good, it’s nice.

    We actively seek enjoyement in eating. When this no longer happens, worry yourself. Even old people enjoy eating.





  • Practical example.

    I know this winery that usually exports nearly 95% of their production to the US. The owner spent a few decades there and made some contacts.

    Last year, they had some problem with the american market and were forced to search for other venues.

    They dropped their prices, opted to sell to our national market and did pretty much the same revenue they would have done exporting.

    Exporting to the US is often the thirst for easy profit. Products that sell here for cents can be sold at a premium in the US, as it is the de facto luxury hungry market. Doesn’t really matter if it good; if is it expensive, it means it’s good.

    Portugal mostly exports food goods to the US. I think cork, some clothing and shoes and some other items make up the basket, but in way lower quantities.

    I’ve seen cheese and wine that are considered run of the mill here sold for ten times more in the US market. Which I consider theft.

    This entire situation gets uglier the deeper we dig.





  • I’m not great on economics but the concept of a tariff is that the entity importing something has to pay an extra levy in order to place in a market a given product.

    This follows that an american importer of any trade goods of european origin will have to pay an extra thirty cents for each dollar such goods cost.

    That extra cost will then be passed along the commercial chain, down to the final client.

    So, prices go up for general public.

    Meanwhile, nothing is stopping the country of origin of such products to divert their business to other countries, thus maintaining their normal activities.

    Am I wrong or this whole thing is disastrous for the USA?


  • The EU is very strange. Yes, there is a global unifying policy but countries still have a wide autonomy.

    Portugal has specific trade and travel agreements with individual countries, outside the wide EU policy. Other countries do this.

    In this specific situation, we already know it will be the bloc handling as a whole the issue. Spain has already stated that all commercial tariffs must be addressed to Brussels, as it is part of the common external relations policy. But individual countries can add their twist to end.


  • Formal addressment.

    It is an archaic way to address “officials” in public office, which ends up sounding as a preservation of royal/nobility occupation of positions, regardless living in a democratic regime.

    It is argued as being a way to show respect and maintain dignity of institutions.

    If want to write a letter to my municipal office, there is a template to be followed which starts with “To his/her Excelency, The President of the Municipality, Mr./Mrs. Dr. XXXXXXX”. This is loosely translated, obvioulsy.

    Democracy yet not equality nor accountability.









  • Ambos sabemos que o eucalipto cresce a um ritmo que àrvores autóctones não crescem e por isso é tão cultivado. E não comparemos o cânhamo a uma árvore, quer porque cresce muito mais depressa, porque não requer as extensões de terreno que árvores requerem para produzir a celulose equivalente e porque pode conviver com outras culturas.

    Consigo imaginar com algumas facilidade plantações de cânhamo de norte a sul, com os campos abertos do Ribatejo e Alentejo. Mesmo nas zonas mais montanhosas seria fácil de implementar a cultura em campos menos extensos, devolvendo algum interesse económico a pequenos produtores.

    Quanto a esforços de reflorestação, sérios, não há.

    Como vivemos numa lógica de que não se pode constrangir a livre iniciativa económica (treta!), o plantio de pinheiro não é restringido, porque cresce rápido e é uma madeira apta para o mobiliário e construção civil e com necessidade mínima ou nula de regadio.

    Ignoremos que um pinhal é uma acendalha natural…

    Isto deixa a Serra da Estrela e interior, zonas onde o pinheiro não pertence, à míngua de incentivos e apoio à reflorestação autóctone, que é sabido gera muito mais dinheiro por hectare e de muitas mais formas que a porra do pinhal mas só se pode extrair esse valor numa janela temporal acima dos 50 anos.

    E toda a gente quer dinheiro já. Especialmente quem dele não precisa.


  • Eu vivo em zona de eucaliptais.

    Sim, a árvore é um cancro e o plantio é abusivo, especialmente em zonas com escassez de água (que o último inverno inverteu mas continuemos) mas é uma fonte de rendimento para muita gente.

    Como não temos os tintins para plantar cânhamo para produção de papel, até lá o que podemos forçar é que mais gente faça a devida gestão florestal.