No More Bacon for Californians

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Trueman

AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

And the leftists voted for these people!

AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

From the perspective of a leftist this is seen as being a good thing. They support measures like this just as conservatives support lower taxes and increased second amendment rights.

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
a reply to: Trueman

I look forward to the state self correcting as the folks who voted for this realize their mistake and move away.

Because all of those vegans will hate this so much that they will flee the state.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Phage

I'm not arguing against meat Phage , if we are to eat an animal we should at least give that animal the freedom to do what they do in nature not lock them indoors in crowded pens all their lives and pump them full of antibiotics to mitigate the problems that causes.

Cheap meat = animal cruelty.

I agree Gort. Also, the meat of happy animals taste better. Don't ask me scientific evidence, just something I heard from old school farmers.

In other countries for example, they treat the turkey like a king until Christmas and before killing it, the breeder gives him bread soaked in sweet wine and even drink together.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Abortion is a different subject and im arguing off my own opinions on animal cruelty.

But i guess all you have to offer is; "durrrr i bet you a dummy Democrat and believe in abortion. Hypocrite. LULZ".

Try to stay on subject.

originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: Trueman

the law was approved in 2018.

Well I mean, then march of 2019 happened and welp. LoL! Hah more people are headed to Texas.

oh my, that is the most beautiful thing I have ever seen. It's perfect.

a reply to: Trueman

Also, the meat of happy animals taste better. Don't ask me scientific evidence, just something I heard from old school farmers.

I've read the same , the difference is probably due the lack of exercise and stress the factory farmed animals suffer through their short lives.

We should support our small farmers who raise their animals the traditional way , many here have farm shops I assume the same applies over there , it may cost a little more but the benefits of quality and peace of mind outweigh the extra cost.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Trueman

Also, the meat of happy animals taste better. Don't ask me scientific evidence, just something I heard from old school farmers.

I've read the same , the difference is probably due the lack of exercise and stress the factory farmed animals suffer through their short lives.

We should support our small farmers who raise their animals the traditional way , many here have farm shops I assume the same applies over there , it may cost a little more but the benefits of quality and peace of mind outweigh the extra cost.

I carry with me some cash when I go to the forest, always find those farmer stands near the road offering what they grow. I love that part of my trips.

a reply to: gortex

Thing is that you can stress a formerly happy animal so much just prior to its dying that how it was raised won't matter.

That's why you don't want to take home your roadkill. The animal often dies in a lot of pain and distress and the stress hormones will make it tough to deal with. It just plain won't taste any good.

My dad asked about this the one time a steer got out of its pasture and he hit it. It was a premium Angus, and it being black and him driving at night ... things happened. He asked if he could take any of it if the farmer didn't want any, and they both (farmer and highway patrol) told him that there wouldn't be anything worth having because of how it died.

Nothing about a grass fed, pasture raised Angus steer is unhappy. This would be prior to any attempt at grain finishing at a feed lot of course.

So before we talk about how much better conditions the animal is raised in, you need to talk about how they are finished off. If you walk a happy animal into an unhappy place to go down, then the fear and stress will undo anything you did prior. And since animals themselves live in the moment, that's a very important component.

This will just mean pork is more expensive to raise locally. The lack of locally raised pork will lead to an increase in pork being raised in an adjacent area to meet demands. The price will probably go up but California can easily afford it.

For folks who constantly bad mouth the mainstream media it seems a lot of trust and validity is put on whatever view points are espoused by them.

originally posted by: nemonimity
This will just mean pork is more expensive to raise locally. The lack of locally raised pork will lead to an increase in pork being raised in an adjacent area to meet demands. The price will probably go up but California can easily afford it.

For folks who constantly bad mouth the mainstream media it seems a lot of trust and validity is put on whatever view points are espoused by them.

Well don't worry. Thanks to the extra unemployment money constantly be paid, the minimum wage is artificially being forced to $15 an hour anyhow through sneaky means, so they can all afford it now. Right?

Btw, it's stuff like this that will rapidly make any minimum wage increase quickly irrelevant.

I constantly hear, "Oh, it's only a few dollars more ..." but people who say that never stop to think that it's only a few dollars more ... FOR EVERYTHING ... across the board, and that rapidly adds up to negate or go beyond any perceived increase they think they got.

a reply to: CptGreenTea

What they are actually doing is making people pay far more for the food they can't afford in an inflationary environment that is out of control.

You talk about empathy where's the empathy for poor Californians already being squeezed by their government to the breaking point?

They might as well ban pork because that's what these regulations are doing.

a reply to: projectvxn

Have a heart, man. China needs all that pork. What will those starving Chinese kids do?

a reply to: ketsuko The increase in minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour isn't a problem. It still isn't even parallel to the rate of inflation in the last 50 years. The problem is the out of control corpratocracy which pits short term quarterly gains over long term stability based on supply and demand. And that in turn is enabled by consumerism and american laziness where disposability and ease is prized over functionality and repairability.

California changing standards for livestock and another state reaping the benefits of being able to raise livestock outside of those standards and undercut the costs incurred in California is the exact kind of healthy supply and demand interactions that allow for a 15$ an hour minimum wage in the state that raises the live stock.

a reply to: nemonimity

Have you compared the cost of living in California to other states? People are leaving places like California because they cannot afford to live there, but hey! bright idea! if we make it the same expense to live in everywhere else that it costs to live in Cali, I'm sure it'll be great ...

Why do you think they're leaving Cali again?

Study some economics. The wage floor is the wage floor. If you artificially raise it, it doesn't mean that it happens in a vacuum, everything else has to likewise adjust. For some, it means going out of business. We're seeing that here with businesses, mostly small local ones that cannot raise their price of labor (some of them are very good businesses that have been cornerstones for years). For others, it means raising their price of goods. For even more it means figuring out how to do more with less meaning overworked workers (that's where I am at; I work a good salaried position with full benefits offered, but we're working chronically short-handed and have been for months - we're trying to hire, but we're having trouble getting applications). And for those who can, it means cutting manned positions in favor of technology meaning "do you want fries with that" is a kiosk order, not a person so someone is missing a job.

But hey, I guess if you can get your $15, you'll quickly realize that a few dollars more here and a few dollars more there means you'll quickly be whining that no one can possibly raise a family on minimum and pretty soon, you'll be crying for $20 an hour and we'll see all this crap again because you won't learn a thing and make yourself more useful. It's easier, of course, to think you're entitled and whine to be handed rather than earn.

a reply to: ketsuko

So before we talk about how much better conditions the animal is raised in, you need to talk about how they are finished off.

I disagree.

a reply to: ketsuko

The wage floor isn't a concrete construction, it's directly related to economic health and the price of goods and services. It' either set by the government or by an hiring institution. It's literally an artificial construct determined by governing bodies. The prices of goods and services have been artificially inflated for years without workers being fairly compensated by appropriate cost of living increases which include the wage floor being raised.

Small businesses are suffering not from having to pay people $15 an hour, they are suffering from back end and supply chain gouging by corporations that are driven by year over year profit. The idea that the US can compete with China or fix the economy by limiting the earning power of blue collar workers is absolutely wrong. Corporations will not give up profits because the people they pay to work for them can't afford their products. They will just find alternate revenue streams
and the race to cheaper and cheaper labor will widen the disparity between the rich and poor as a complete underclass of workers will be created because it will be cheaper to throw away humans in sweat shops then to automate and innovate production lines.

a reply to: nemonimity

There is always a wage floor.

It doesn't matter how it happens; it happens.

A wage floor is the lowest someone will accept for the job. If I am paying someone to sweep my floors, in an environment absent any regulations or laws to say otherwise, the job is worth either what I say it is (I tell my son I will give him a quarter to sweep the floors), or it's what I can hire someone to do it for (there are 50 people who can sweep the floor, and finally one of them say they will do it for a quarter and they're the lowest bidder or the one who will take my offer of labor for a quarter - one way or the other).

When you have a job so simple, you can train someone to do it in an afternoon, and it's often something just about anyone in society can be trained to do in that afternoon, it's not worth a whole lot of money because you can almost always find someone to do it for not a whole lot. That's setting the wage floor.

When government decides to decree that it must be this or that - artificially setting it - everything around it adjusts to reflect it. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

In this case, the minimums haven't been adjusted, but by giving people enough in unemployment because of COVID, they've found a way to make people just comfortable enough that they don't feel any pressure to get a job. They are happy being at home doing nothing and getting paid. If these are the people who are sitting at home squeaking by on unemployment now and they're the same ones who moan about working hard and not making enough, I feel they were likely the ones who did the absolute minimum at every job they worked and resented it.

They had little interest in getting ahead or excelling. They just wanted to be paid handsomely for a mediocre effort.

a reply to: ketsuko

You're talking about a price floor not a wage floor. A wage floor is a specific limit set by a body.

Blue collar skilled workers can tell you what happens when you bid work based on who will do it cheapest. Of course things adjust to increase in worker pay rates, that's a defining point in American capitalism and what it shows is that just like during the industrial, materials and silicon revolutions, the needs for cheaper supply chains and goods lead to automation, innovation and across the board increase of standards of living.

Change is the backbone of American industry and an appeal to keep things the same because it feels safer and is less impactful on persons on the short term goes against American economic stability and American economic supremacy. It's everybit as shortsighted and backwards as industry based on short-term quarterly gains.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit
I wonder what the penalty is for smuggling bacon from Arizona?

Nothing. The law only applies to producers in CA.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

US meat is so bad that it's not considered fit for human consumption in half the world.

EXACTLY!