Economist mag takes bold stance against poor, Third World people, because meat and ‘climate change’

27 Aug


Transparodistic times, we live in…

Peak #ClownWorld. Honk, honk!

They want everyone around the world not in the top 1% to eat bugs or beans


14 responses to “Economist mag takes bold stance against poor, Third World people, because meat and ‘climate change’

  1. freemattpodcast

    August 27, 2019 at 2:45 pm

    Only a “honky” would hesitate to honk when the Economists determine the poor shouldn’t eat. Stay honk or else!

  2. Wilbur Hassenfus

    August 27, 2019 at 2:47 pm

    They’re right. Look at projections for the population of Africa. It’s not just bad, it’s cataclysmically bad.

    • Will S.

      August 27, 2019 at 5:11 pm

      I’m sure the earth can handle the increased CO2 load; plants use it for photosynthesis, after all…

  3. Bruce

    August 27, 2019 at 3:18 pm

    I am all for eating meat, but I don’t know about health effects of Western quantities of muscle meat. I don’t mean it’s bad for you – I just don’t know if it’s necessary for good health. Vancouver and Chinese scientists have demonstrated (using indicator amino acid oxidation) that you don’t need large amounts of protein (1-1.2 g/kg ideal BW is about all most people can use -athletes excluded) and that a significant portion of your protein can come from varied plant sources. A lot of traditional cultures don’t eat huge amounts of meat – they incorporate reasonable amounts along with grains, root veggies, legumes, etc. because meat is expensive.
    Animal protein foods do have some excellent and very digestible nutrients – saturated fats and cholesterol for healthy hormone balance (e.g. T-production in men). I think eggs, dairy and organ meats are important along with some muscle meat.
    Again, not against meat – I love a bloody steak as much as the next red-blooded American male and I’d probably kill for bacon and sausage.
    But, of course you’re right on your main point, the elites will eat what they want while signaling their virtue to everyone else. We should eat them.

    • Will S.

      August 27, 2019 at 5:12 pm

      It’s probably true that we North Americans eat far more meat than is absolutely necessary; the Europeans get by on less of it than we do. Oh well!

  4. c matt

    August 27, 2019 at 5:03 pm

    Missing the bigger picture here – the Economist admits meat is good for you!

  5. Gargantua

    August 28, 2019 at 12:32 am

    For years, the global warming/man-bear-piggers have been accusing those who examine the data of being indifferent or hostile to the plight of third world people. Now they’re coming out with this.
    On the bad side, it’s alright when THEY do it. It always is.
    On the good side, at least they’re showing themselves for the anti-human elitists they really are. No more hiding now.
    A little boy with a smile a=on his face as he’s enjoying a tasty, filling meal is a bad thing?

    • Will S.

      August 28, 2019 at 12:34 am

      Pricks they are, indeed, to put it mildly.

  6. feeriker

    August 29, 2019 at 9:41 am

    I think that the mask is slipping off, but the elite, along with their mouthpieces like The Economist, now feel so smug and arrogant and so secure in their positions of power that they don’t even care anymore than they’re “showing their hand.” Another example: the utterly and laughably inept and careless way in which they “suicided” Jeffrey Epstein.

    Expect to see much more of this from here on out.

    • Will S.

      August 29, 2019 at 10:04 am

      After hubris comes nemesis; bring it! 🙂


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s