In Political Theory 101, Socialism is part of the Democracy model, the left side of it (classical Liberalism is dead in the middle, and to the left means less Government power, to the Right more). There are three cores in the model, the Political, Moral, and Economic. In the Political, there is a lot of citizens voting. This is where you hear the phrase “direct democracy.” In the Moral, government stays out of our lives (does that sound like today’s self style Socialists?). It’s the Economic that defines it, though, with the Government controlling massive amounts of the economy, up to and including owning the means of production. Obviously, today’s Socialists are not, except for that last part. Hence why I call them Modern Socialists, because they are really way to the right, in the Authoritarian model
Greenhouse gas in food purchasing cuts proposed
New York’s food purchasing system could be going on a strict diet.
State Sen. Alessandra Biaggi, D-Bronx, has introduced S.9082 in the state Senate to requiring the Office of General Services, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Conservation, to establish a way to estimate the greenhouse gas emissions of food and beverages purchased by state agencies to reduce the overall greenhouse gas emissions associated with state food and beverage procurement by 10% by 2024, 18% by 2027, and 25% by 2030. If approved, the legislation would only affect food purchased by state agencies, and not the shopping habits of state residents.
Well, for now. But, in doing this, it would force food producers to reduce their own (mythical) carbon footprints, meaning higher prices for non-government consumers.
“Modeled after legislation introduced in Maryland, this bill builds on New York’s environmental goals by requiring the Office of General Services, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Conservation, to track emissions from the State’s food and beverage procurement, and to reduce these emissions by 25% by 2030. This target is in alignment with the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Resources Institute,â€Â Biaggi wrote in her legislative justification.
The Maryland legislation was introduced after the release of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that reportedly showed the entire food production system, with transportation and packaging included, accounts for as much as 37% of total greenhouse gas emissions. It calls for changes to land use practices, a change to diets with less meat, and elimination of food waste as areas that should be global priorities to combat climate change. The report also calls and end to deforestation, limiting greenhouse-gas-emitting fertilizers and raising crops in ways that add carbon to the soil.
So, if modeled on Maryland’s, sure looks like it would mandate all sorts of economic business practices, eh? Who wants Government controlling our food? You idiot climate cultists never seem to see the downsides of your cult. Even if the current warm period is caused mostly/solely by mankind’s greenhouse gas output, do these solutions seem good or authoritarian?
Who wants to bet that Biaggi hasn’t reduced her own carbon footprint?
