What is Reddit's opinion of Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal: War Stories from the Local Food Front?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

>what would be an acceptable change in our economic structure, such that a small collection of sultans who don't work can no longer force the CEO of a successful company to make decisions based on their narrow interests, so the company's decisions can be based on employee or consumer interest, and how can we change our system of retirement, so that an investment in the occasionally very unstable stock market isn't so much of a risk for ordinary working people?

We should stop making alternatives illegal.

Currently we have a regulatory system that locks in the current form of corporate arrangements and makes sure that there are plenty of roadblocks in front of the small guy. Then it makes sure that only the ~~wealthy~~ accredited investors have access to alternative forms of investing.

After spending some time as a broker I had a Joel Salatin moment; everything I wanted to do was illegal (or else needlessly complex & expensive).

Sounds like something I read in this book a few years ago, though I think they were on a larger more automated scale

Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal: War Stories from the Local Food Front https://smile.amazon.com/dp/0963810952/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apan_glt_fabc_9S0T8TSFF60T3BRPZA0B

>This is why these markets are heavily regulated.

For the most part the exact opposite is true. These markets are heavily regulated because free entry of competition threatened larger players.

I know the history of food better than the other segments and in food regulation exists to defend against a robust market, not to protect people from monopolies. This started pretty much from day 1 of America but the modern version started under Nixon, his sec of ag straight up told farmers to get big or get out. It is currently either illegal or absurdly difficult/costly to provide small, local, competition to the large Ag companies.

Joel Salatin has a good book on why everything he wants to do is illegal.

Healthcare has a similar story with low-cost alternatives being regulated away and supply being constrained to keep prices high.
I don't know as much about ISP's but I know other countries have more competition in the space, so either way our regulations are not working here.

And so on...

>This is why these markets are heavily regulated.

For the most part the exact opposite is true. These markets are heavily regulated because free entry of competition threatened larger players.

I know the history of food better than the other segments and in food regulation exists to defend against a robust market, not to protect people from monopolies. This started pretty much from day 1 of America but the modern version started under Nixon, his sec of ag straight up told farmers to get big or get out. It is currently either illegal or absurdly difficult/costly to provide small, local, competition to the large Ag companies.

Joel Salatin has a good book on why everything he wants to do is illegal.

Healthcare has a similar story with low-cost alternatives being regulated away and supply being constrained to keep prices high.
I don't know as much about ISP's but I know other countries have more competition in the space, so either way our regulations are not working here.

And so on...

>This is why these markets are heavily regulated.

For the most part the exact opposite is true. These markets are heavily regulated because free entry of competition threatened larger players.

I know the history of food better than the other segments and in food regulation exists to defend against a robust market, not to protect people from monopolies. This started pretty much from day 1 of America but the modern version started under Nixon, his sec of ag straight up told farmers to get big or get out. It is currently either illegal or absurdly difficult/costly to provide small, local, competition to the large Ag companies.

Joel Salatin has a good book on why everything he wants to do is illegal.

Healthcare has a similar story with low-cost alternatives being regulated away and supply being constrained to keep prices high.
I don't know as much about ISP's but I know other countries have more competition in the space, so either way our regulations are not working here.

And so on...

At first I thought you implied that this book is about bestiality.

Then the Amazon page reconfirmed that it's about big-business laws.

I don't ever want to be shocked like that again

Food Inc. contained interviews with (farmer) Joel Salatin. Look up some of his books, and/or search for more footage of his on Youtube.

TL;DR: Don't care about regulations as long as you (and your local farmer) can opt out of them.

Jefferson owned slaves. "Living wage" is not a concept that existed in 1776.

>the ability of people to provide for themselves

This ability does not include the right to employment at a wage that you deem acceptable. Given Jefferson's agrarian predilections, it was about the ability to grow your own food and sell it to make a living (thanks to the government, this has become very difficult). It was not about the ability to work less than x hours per week and still earn a living that meets your standards.

>If a government or other institution of men works against all people securing those things then it is a bad government or other institution of men and should be dissolved.

I agree. And threatening my employer's livelihood if he does not pay me an above-market wage is an oppression that works against his safety and happiness. I don't need the government to step in and decide how much my labor may or may not be worth.

>More likely that people in the 3rd world would take offense to the suggestion that they don't need electricity or clean water even though standard of living and life expectancy totally rise with increased access to either.

Have you ever met or talked with anyone from the third world? I have, and some are highly stressed by modern American life even though they have all those things. You're projecting your values onto them.

Not to mention that nobody arguing for a living wage is talking about having just enough money for clean water and electricity. Those are infrastructure issues and have very little to do with affordable living.

local farms have to use the same facilities per federal regulatory laws. Read "Everything I Want to do is Illegal." It explains the problems that modern super-crunchy organic farmers are forced to deal with.

Amazon Link for those interested

There certainly needs to be a lot more publicized information, independent testing, etc., but be careful what you wish for with regards to food regulation. In many places inflexible regulations has rid us of traditional foods and created monocultures and homogenized products.

Some recommended resources on this topic:

https://www.slowfood.com

https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952

Based and Everything I want to do is Illegal Pilled

https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952

 

^Item Info | Bot Info | Trigger

 

^Item Info | Bot Info | Trigger

 

^Item Info | Bot Info | Trigger

Another childhood classic:

Everything I want to do is illegal

​

https://smile.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952?sa-no-redirect=1

>No, and I'm confused how you could infer that from what I asked.

Because your clarification is something that exactly zero people claim.

>We are currently in an opioid epidemic. According to Ancaps this type of issue is supposed to be avoided through market forces...

There are zero people who claim that under an AnCap style system there would never be problems with addiction. If some edge lord on Reddit is claiming this I join you in pointing out how dumb they are being.

However, it is equally as silly to try and create an argument out of a single data point. A single data point created in the midst of a system that is totally opposed to what an AnCap would want.

Your claim that "government regulation doesn't stop any of the things you listed" is absurd. Of course it does, you don't even need to understand very much about how the medical system works to understand that.

Someone needs to write an Everything I Want To Do is Illegal book for the medical system. I need a single resource to point you all to when it is obvious you haven't started doing your research yet.

Death By Regulation would be an OK start.

Indeed, thanks I was curious too... https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952

nada que ver pero me hiciste acordar a un libro https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952

Everything I want to do is Illegal, Industrial Society and it's Future, Basic Economics.

If this isn't enough, you should check out some of the foundational books and writings of early US History. The Federalist Papers, Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography, Leviathan...

Also, many famous economists are somewhat libertarian though not the way many people see online. They're a flavor called Libertarian Paternalists. Recently a book won the Nobel prize called Nudge That's worth a read.

>So, I believe we are deep enough into COVID now that it is time to begin discussion of prevention of future pandemics and disease emergence.

You discuss one measure, which boils down to "the poor should eat less meat". Why does that have to be the first thing we try? Why not (and this is also good environmentally) "the rich should travel less internationally" Maybe instead of a campaign to shame people for eating meat we have campaigns to shame people for flying for vacations, or owning private jets?

​

>There are a number of practices that need reform - the most obvious is the practice of keeping live animals in unsanitary conditions

I don't think that's the most obvious at all. In fact if you had walked up to me on the street and asked me to list all the causes of the current bad COVID situation, I can safely say I'd talk to you all day, and I still wouldn't get around to "And of course, poor people eat too much meat". I'd say the four most obvious are

(a) Get better at instantly halting all international travel when an outbreak occurs. This would be very expensive.

(b) Encourage mask usage *all the damn time* when out in public (seriously, with how our family has literally not gotten sick once these past months I think I'll just always wear a mask when I go out grocery shopping). This is basically cost free

(c) Mandate that stores/etc do a much better job of hygiene/sanitation. why don't we see workers wiping down touch pads/elevator buttons/cart handles all the time? This is not cost free but very minor in cost compared to point a.

(d) Have a better method for removing regulatory nonsense in an emergency like the regulations that kept private testers from creating tests, instead relying on the (broken) official test the FDA/CDC created. This seems like it would be inexpensive financially, but cutting safety red tape in cases of emergency does have a cost associated with it.

These have the advantage in that they are useful in a pandemic no matter where it originated from, and also that they don't depend on other countries not defecting. It harms you if you impose rigorously followed safety standards on your own beef industry but another country just pretends to follow them and doesn't pay the compliance cost, and then a disease originates from them and you get it anyway despite your precautions.

​

>The cost of setting global standards for domesticated animals in order to alleviate disease spread is not as low as abating the emissions of CFCs, but is very low in comparison to climate change.

Is it? Well, I guess the cost of 'setting' standards is very small, it's the cost of 'enforcing' standards that really counts. And I don't think the costs of monitoring/inspecting/enforcing some sort of global standards for domesticated animals would be low at all, and furthermore it would predominantly fall on small farmers/poorer rural people who own animals. And for what? How many pandemics have arisen from bad animal practices in the United States? This seems like a very costly initiative (deploying legions of officious busybodies to every tiny homestead and farm across rural America) for almost zero gain.

I don't know if you are involved in any kind of farming/homesteading community at all, but there is already a strong complaint that ruinous regulations are enacted which can only be borne by gigantic mega conglomerates, and small/independent farms are slowly and steadily crushed. This idea of yours would only supercharge this trend.

I highly recommend this book https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952 to anyone who thinks any kind of new farming regulation would be 'low cost'. Or you can read more about the war on 'raw' milk and its products, of which this book covers only a single facet : https://www.amazon.com/Ending-War-Artisan-Cheese-Cheesemakers/dp/1603587853

I challenge you to read those two books and then tell me if you still believe some sort of all encompassing global standards on all things domesticated animals would be sensible, practical, and affordable.

If anyone wants purchase this fine book here an amazon link

You can always buy a copy

>In order to make capitalism competitive, the state has to intervene on behalf of consumers, with things like anti-trust laws and other industry regulations which keep them competitive.

Many capitalists would argue that it is the state itself that causes markets to become non-competitive. Most industry regulations do little to protect consumers but often keep new completion out of the market and protect the establishment powers. If you didn't have a state saying that hairdressers need between 1500 and 2100 hours of training to cut someones hair, how much more competitive would the market be? I could very cheaply produce bread and sell it at a very competitive price except for the fact that I need to have a state certified commercial kitchen that is regularly inspected and licensed, despite the fact that there is virtually no health risk to producing baked goods in non-commercial kitchens. If I want to start a farm to provide organic free range eggs and chickens to my local community, I have to put in place all sorts of "safety" measure that really are only needed for large scale industrial farms and the regulations make it nearly impossible for the small farmer to overcome and get started. There are countless examples of state enacted regulations that do little more than provide near monopoly protection to big industries.

State capitalism is as oppressive as state socialism. As annoying as it is when capitalists conflate stateless, moneyless, and classless communism with Stalin's USSR, it is just as annoying to them when anti-capitalists conflate the oligarchy with a freed-market.

http://www.acresusa.com/toolbox/reprints/Salatin_Sept03.pdf

http://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952

> innovate

https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952

This story would fit right in with countless stories provided by Joel Salatin in his book "Everything I want to do is Illegal"

https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1493743855&sr=8-1&keywords=everything+I+want+to+do+is+illegal

Seems you're both right.

From the Amazon page: >Drawing upon 40 years' experience as an ecological farmer and marketer, Joel Salatin explains with humor and passion why Americans do not have the freedom to choose the food they purchase and eat. From child labor regulations to food inspection, bureaucrats provide themselves sole discretion over what food is available in the local marketplace. Their system favors industrial, global corporate food systems and discourages community-based food commerce, resulting in homogenized selection, mediocre quality, and exposure to non-organic farming practices. Salatin's expert insight explains why local food is expensive and difficult to find and will illuminate for the reader a deeper understanding of the industrial food complex.

Apparently it's one long-ass rant about bureaucracy, and "what he feels is bureaucracy".