Comments on: ‘Chicken Madness’ – studio discussion

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:23 +0000

“You don’t need any …
“You don’t need any government to control, check… If the chicken is not good, you don’t buy it.” What? And I suppose if they buy “local” eggs, they’ll never get salmonella. And if they but “local” water, they’ll never get dysentery. «That’s ok, honey, it’s “local”» Please. “Control costs money?” Guess what else costs money (and lives)? FOOD POISONING, that’s what. This guy can’t be for real…

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:22 +0000

Oh, and the …
Oh, and the Cameroonians are discovering the joys of an open economy. Good for them.

I also enjoyed the talk about a “compassionate” free market. If Mister Green from Sweden thinks that opening up our borders is going to benefit Ma and Pa businesses in countries like Cameroon he is even more naive that I think. Big companies are looking for ways to lower their production costs…

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:21 +0000

…and exporting …
…and exporting the production to Third World countries is of course a solution, as long as trade tariffs don’t stand in the way. Once the Mendelsons of Europe have had it their way, Joe Cameroon can expect to lose his small business and start working in a European-owned chicken plant growing delicious “local” poultry which poor Europeans (fresh out of work) will consume.

By: Midsten

Midsten — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:20 +0000

The thing is that …
The thing is that making local chicken does improve quality, economy and of course – Makes it easier to control on the spot. Do you honestly think a local company would make more poisonious food than food from imports?

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:19 +0000

You are too wrong …
You are too wrong on too many levels and I have too little patience to give you a comprehensive answer.

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:18 +0000

Ok, I’ll give it a …
Ok, I’ll give it a try…

“making local chicken does improve quality, economy”

What do you mean by ‘local chicken’? Chickens need to be raised somewhere, and in that sense they are always “local”. Do you mean to say that small chicken producers achieve a better quality product and are more beneficial to the local economy than big time chicken farms?

This is not necessarily true, on both accounts.

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:17 +0000

Small chicken …
Small chicken producers can and do raise ’sub-par’ chickens, whether because they feed them poor quality or inadequate rations, or because they keep the poultry in abject conditions — as it happens in Africa. As to the impact on the local economy, a chicken production unit employing 100 people will generate more jobs and wealth than 100 chicken farmers working on their own. (They discovered this back in the XVIIIth century, but apparently some people still haven’t got the memo).

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:16 +0000

“and of course – …
“and of course – Makes it easier to control on the spot.”

Actually, the multiplication of small chicken farms and the informal nature of such enterprises make it more difficult for the sanitary authorities to do their job.

“Do you honestly think a local company would make more poisonious food than food from imports?”

That’s exactly right. Because trade between nations is well regulated, sanitary regulations are more often than not well enforced.

By: MarquisdeBarrabas

MarquisdeBarrabas — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:21:15 +0000

…When local …
…When local producers are not made to comply with such regulations, the consumer has no means of knowing if the food he /she is consuming is safe.

Common sense tells us that the African producers need to raise the quality and safety of their products before they even think of exporting them to Europe.