<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cheap Chicken</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html</link>
	<description>A Historian's Take on Food and Food Politics</description>
	<pubDate>Wed,  7 Jan 2009 02:20:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rachel Laudan</title>
		<link>http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html/comment-page-1#comment-351</link>
		<dc:creator>Rachel Laudan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:50:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html#comment-351</guid>
		<description>Hi Linwood, I couldn't agree more with your comments.  I thinkit's incredibly hard for many people who grow up in the US, and are used to spending under 20% of their income on food, to imagine what it is like to have to spend 60 or 70% or more on food.  The plummeting of food costs with the industrialization of food between 1880 and 1920 allowed millions of ordinary Americans and Europeans not only to eat better but to keep their children in school, buy decent clothing, and perhaps even a house or a car, and take an occasional outing to the beach.  Not something to be reversed but to be extended as widely as possible around the world.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Linwood, I couldn&#8217;t agree more with your comments.  I thinkit&#8217;s incredibly hard for many people who grow up in the US, and are used to spending under 20% of their income on food, to imagine what it is like to have to spend 60 or 70% or more on food.  The plummeting of food costs with the industrialization of food between 1880 and 1920 allowed millions of ordinary Americans and Europeans not only to eat better but to keep their children in school, buy decent clothing, and perhaps even a house or a car, and take an occasional outing to the beach.  Not something to be reversed but to be extended as widely as possible around the world.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linwood Boomer</title>
		<link>http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html/comment-page-1#comment-345</link>
		<dc:creator>Linwood Boomer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html#comment-345</guid>
		<description>Adam, the one easy question (for me) you raised was "Is financial freedom intrinsically linked to ethical responsibility?"  Of course it is.  It seems self-evident to me that once you accept the existence of "ethical responsibility" at all, you also accept that greater resources (of money, political freedom, strength, wisdom, etc) convey greater responsibility.  One easy example:  If an eighteen month-old toddler snatches a candy from a baby, no one frets about his ethical state.  If a forty year-old bank president did so, we would.

The thing that always makes me scream is the sanctimony with which Alice Waters proclaims, "Food should be expensive" without having the common decency to add, "for rich people."  I don't think there is anything wrong with expensive, locally grown, organic food.  I'm rich now, and I enjoy the indulgence.  At the same time, there is something very, very wrong with demonizing the existence of cheap, nutritious, easily available food.  When I was poor, I ate that and was happy for it.

Rachel, sorry to hear you're not going to Oxford.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adam, the one easy question (for me) you raised was &#8220;Is financial freedom intrinsically linked to ethical responsibility?&#8221;  Of course it is.  It seems self-evident to me that once you accept the existence of &#8220;ethical responsibility&#8221; at all, you also accept that greater resources (of money, political freedom, strength, wisdom, etc) convey greater responsibility.  One easy example:  If an eighteen month-old toddler snatches a candy from a baby, no one frets about his ethical state.  If a forty year-old bank president did so, we would.</p>
<p>The thing that always makes me scream is the sanctimony with which Alice Waters proclaims, &#8220;Food should be expensive&#8221; without having the common decency to add, &#8220;for rich people.&#8221;  I don&#8217;t think there is anything wrong with expensive, locally grown, organic food.  I&#8217;m rich now, and I enjoy the indulgence.  At the same time, there is something very, very wrong with demonizing the existence of cheap, nutritious, easily available food.  When I was poor, I ate that and was happy for it.</p>
<p>Rachel, sorry to hear you&#8217;re not going to Oxford.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rachel Laudan</title>
		<link>http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html/comment-page-1#comment-343</link>
		<dc:creator>Rachel Laudan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 02:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html#comment-343</guid>
		<description>Kay, You and I are of one mind that chicken and eggs are much, much better in Mexico than in the US. My husband won't eat eggs (except in cakes and puddings and so on) in the US) and orders eggs as soon as he crosses the border.

Adam, all this is very difficult, But I agree with your basic point that there is a huge (and often unacknowledged) amount of class prejudice in these discussions.  I also think, along with you, that there is very little understanding of husbandry practices and a huge bambi-fication of animals.  This deserves a longer response so give me a little time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kay, You and I are of one mind that chicken and eggs are much, much better in Mexico than in the US. My husband won&#8217;t eat eggs (except in cakes and puddings and so on) in the US) and orders eggs as soon as he crosses the border.</p>
<p>Adam, all this is very difficult, But I agree with your basic point that there is a huge (and often unacknowledged) amount of class prejudice in these discussions.  I also think, along with you, that there is very little understanding of husbandry practices and a huge bambi-fication of animals.  This deserves a longer response so give me a little time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Balic</title>
		<link>http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html/comment-page-1#comment-341</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Balic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:09:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html#comment-341</guid>
		<description>I agree with your comments regarding mass production, but in this instance I am concentrating on people's attitudes, rather then the wider ethics.

What I find disturbing about the debate in the UK is that is very quickly becomes about "class" (from both perspectives) and the lack of will to attempt to see the other sides point of view. In 2008 there is still a great "them and us" divide in the UK.

In terms of the actual details of the debate on ethics of eating animals, I think that I am too pedantic. I loose interest whenever I see yet another discussion on how to kill a crab/lobster (where there is no evidence that they experience pain) and not a second thought about buying fish fillets (fish are known to feel pain and show avoidence behaviour). Or the "free-range" chicken debate as I discussed before. Or not eating veal as that is "wrong", but using dairy produce is fine (which is ultimately why there is veal on the market). Etc.

I find it difficult to get past contradictory views and I have a few of my own. I all so don't really have the moral/ethical skills to weight up different parts of the  debate. What is worse, for instance, eating intensively reared chicken or wild-caught fish? Why is it wrong for middle-class me to eat intensively reared chicken, but not a poor person in a developing country? Is finacial freedom intrinsically liked to ethical responsibility?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with your comments regarding mass production, but in this instance I am concentrating on people&#8217;s attitudes, rather then the wider ethics.</p>
<p>What I find disturbing about the debate in the UK is that is very quickly becomes about &#8220;class&#8221; (from both perspectives) and the lack of will to attempt to see the other sides point of view. In 2008 there is still a great &#8220;them and us&#8221; divide in the UK.</p>
<p>In terms of the actual details of the debate on ethics of eating animals, I think that I am too pedantic. I loose interest whenever I see yet another discussion on how to kill a crab/lobster (where there is no evidence that they experience pain) and not a second thought about buying fish fillets (fish are known to feel pain and show avoidence behaviour). Or the &#8220;free-range&#8221; chicken debate as I discussed before. Or not eating veal as that is &#8220;wrong&#8221;, but using dairy produce is fine (which is ultimately why there is veal on the market). Etc.</p>
<p>I find it difficult to get past contradictory views and I have a few of my own. I all so don&#8217;t really have the moral/ethical skills to weight up different parts of the  debate. What is worse, for instance, eating intensively reared chicken or wild-caught fish? Why is it wrong for middle-class me to eat intensively reared chicken, but not a poor person in a developing country? Is finacial freedom intrinsically liked to ethical responsibility?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kay Curtis</title>
		<link>http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html/comment-page-1#comment-339</link>
		<dc:creator>Kay Curtis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 14:21:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rachellaudan.com/2008/02/cheap-chicken.html#comment-339</guid>
		<description>..... and the chicken and eggs are GOOD! For seven years I lived in Baja CA -- about 40 miles south of San Diego and crossed the border several times a month for business/family obligations. I got so that I bought whatever was cheapest or best on the 'right' side of the border. Especially, I bought beef and cottage cheese in USA but always bought chicken and eggs and pork in Mexico. Three or four years ago there was an article in the newspapers (both sides) about a truck load of eggs going south that were turned back from Mexico to the USA because they didn't meet standards. Though this could have been a bureaucratic thing, it was a real eye-opener to Americans who think they are clean and Mexican's are dirty. I had quite a few neighbors who would never, after 10 or 12 years living there, buy food in Mexican grocery stores. They were really shocked by this story.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;.. and the chicken and eggs are GOOD! For seven years I lived in Baja CA &#8212; about 40 miles south of San Diego and crossed the border several times a month for business/family obligations. I got so that I bought whatever was cheapest or best on the &#8216;right&#8217; side of the border. Especially, I bought beef and cottage cheese in USA but always bought chicken and eggs and pork in Mexico. Three or four years ago there was an article in the newspapers (both sides) about a truck load of eggs going south that were turned back from Mexico to the USA because they didn&#8217;t meet standards. Though this could have been a bureaucratic thing, it was a real eye-opener to Americans who think they are clean and Mexican&#8217;s are dirty. I had quite a few neighbors who would never, after 10 or 12 years living there, buy food in Mexican grocery stores. They were really shocked by this story.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
