←back to thread

144 points scubakid | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.205s | source
Show context
profsummergig ◴[] No.44417273[source]
FWIW, China also produces enormous (enormous) quantities of seafood from caged underwater oceanic farms. It's the future of fishing IMHO.

The rich, everywhere in the world, will continue to seek wild-caught though. (While they publicly rail against the poor eating wild-caught. Such is how the wheels turn.).

replies(4): >>44417845 #>>44417940 #>>44418011 #>>44420706 #
Nursie ◴[] No.44418011[source]
Tasmania produces a lot of caged salmon.

It’s bad for the salmon (in terms of animal welfare) and it’s wrecking the local ecosystems. It’s not any sort of panacea.

We need to stop destroying ocean ecosystems, not just shift the damage around. Overfishing of wild stock, habitat destruction through bottom-trawling and intensive fish farming all need to be properly looked at.

replies(2): >>44418196 #>>44424663 #
tedk-42 ◴[] No.44418196[source]
> We need to stop destroying ocean ecosystems, not just shift the damage around. Overfishing of wild stock, habitat destruction through bottom-trawling and intensive fish farming all need to be properly looked at.

You criticise, yet don't provide any suitable recommendations or alternatives.

People like to eat fish and have done so since the beginning of our species.

replies(7): >>44418214 #>>44418562 #>>44418814 #>>44419073 #>>44419637 #>>44420348 #>>44425742 #
abdullahkhalids ◴[] No.44418814[source]
The solution to overfishing, over consumption of fossil fuels, over consumption of beef etc is all the same in the current system. Impose appropriate taxes that adequately capture the impact of the negative externalities.

Living in unsustainable ways is ... well not sustainable.

If people have liked to eat fish since the start, then maybe we should leave some for the next generations.

replies(2): >>44419312 #>>44421003 #
Larrikin ◴[] No.44419312[source]
When should the tax stop being raised? The solution is not to make it so only the rich can eat fish, beef, etc. This idea is only ever proposed by people who think they will always be able to afford it or people who think no one should be able to enjoy animal meat.
replies(2): >>44419462 #>>44419531 #
1. energy123 ◴[] No.44419462[source]
You give the tax back to people so they're no worse off on average, and are better off if they don't overly engage in destroying the commons.

As for the actual tax rate, I will defer to the economic literature on this subject, but the answer will invariably be a pragmatic one.