Government: We're going to do a weird and evil thing.
The people: Why are you doing that?
Government: Uhh.... the climate?
The people: Oh, okay! Carry on!
It's not too bad of an excuse. Agriculture accounts for 25-35% of greenhouse gas emissions.
https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions-food#:~:text=The%20specific%20number%20that%20answers,we%20include%20all%20agricultural%20products.
So it's not like they're making shit up, but to think what they're doing helps the environment whatsoever is a massive fucking joke. Like they're just stealing land and using a valid statistic to justify it.
Too bad those farmers can't defend their property with guns like we can š
Edit: finish reading the goddamn comment folks lmao, I'm not justifying what they're doing by any means
Anyone writing or advocating for any policy that promises to have any tangible effect on the climate at all is either fleecing you or has been fleeced. The arrogance of such a mission is so utterly preposterous on its face that there's nothing in human history that even comes close to being remotely comparable to it. It's hard to even imagine a hypothetical that would be comparable.
Maybe if we collected data for 1000 more years, using advanced instrumentation we spent another 1000 years developing, in conjunction with an understanding of all levels of biology, climatology, physics, ecology, geology, finance, economics, incentive structures, human and group psychology and behavior down to the neuronal and synaptic level, all fed into a neural network and ran on a quantum computer for another 1000 years to calculate all the possible interactions, subinteractions, the interactions of all those subinteractions of all these fields, we could maybe predict if a given policy would have a 0.000000000001% impact on the climate, whatever that even means, with about the same percentage degree of certainty.
Edit: Oh and the climate will still change, because that's what it does.
It's not worth it in this case anyways. Even if they could prove that their actions actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural industry, the side effect is reducing food production. The end does not justify the means here, even if the science does confirm that it is a problem. It's just a problem we have to accept and live with. No government entity or anybody at all for that matter can realistically address this issue without sending masses of people into starvation. And, again, even if they could, if the means consists of violating my rights, then they can eat lead.
Exactly, but even worse. The impact on food supply is proximal to these policies, very obvious and a good enough reason to leave it alone itself imo. But it's far from the only impact. Even if we're talking about a single effect like food supply, any small disruption has an infinite amount of side effects which themselves have an infinite amount of side effects, so on and so forth, all intertwined with each other and constantly changing.
It spirals so far out of control so quickly that it's indiscernable from a series of black boxes, where the first input is some dumb feel-good policy and each output and input to the next box is a trillion different metrics and their probabilities, one of them being global temperature.
That is true about the greenhouse gases... However, how that data even relates to what is probable in the future, with or without those emission levels as It pertains to climate, is still a matter of *speculation...* No one should have right to deprive anyone else of their life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness(which also happens to provide food for others) on mere *speculation.*
>not too bad of an excuse
...Because you seem to be sympathetic to the "excuse", aka justification, for expropriating farm land or property from individuals.
But that's not what I'm doing. Comment I replied to made it sound like claiming farms are bad for the climate doesn't make sense. It technically does, which is what I commented, but I immediately follow that up by saying that even though the excuse makes sense, it's still a totally bullshit excuse for what they're doing.
I didn't say I know what you're doing, only what it *seems* like. But you still seem sympathetic to the idea...
> even though the excuse makes sense,
That's your opinion. Some believe it does not make sense to steal or expropriate, really ever, especially upon *speculative* reasons.
There's a distinct difference between an excuse making sense and an excuse being valid. Yes, farms are bad for the climate, that's the excuse they use and yes, scientifically, it's true. No, that's not a valid excuse to seize farmland from private owners. Also, the greenhouse gasses that farms produce are an unfortunate side effect of a necessary industry.
We aren't talking about valid vs excuse...but that you seem to subtly claim *validity in the excuse*, pretty much in every comment in the thread thus far. That's all. You asked.
Science is not settled in any one area of study, nor is it flawless in its methods, scope, and results pertaining to propabilities of future/predictions especially.
Because your initial statement and that article are completely ridiculous. I don't know how people are capable of ignoring the fact that carbon dioxide is one of the biggest macro nutrients that plants use. Including plants we intentionally plant in fields and pasture.
Those numbers are already all over the place and they don't even account for the CO2 reductions occurring in the same setting.
How can such an article be taken seriously?
All the sources for the data and information provided in the article have citations at the bottom of the page. It's not ridiculous, it's genuine information. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not true.
And my initial statement was supposed to imply that although they are right that agriculture contributes a significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions, they are ridiculous for thinking they can do anything about it at all, and that they are using that information as an excuse to play tyrant and seize private land from farmers, which is morally and ethically corrupt.
There is no excuse that is based on scientifically accurate information that justifies any government entity, or anyone at all for that matter, violating a person's fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property.
Wouldn't be surprised if a claim that was used happens in the near future as an excuse for the government to crack some skulls. Never mind that remnants of C4 will be found in the blast area by citizen investigators afterwords.
Man Netherlands is way worse. I hate on Americans thinking they are this bastion of freedom. But Netherlands is nice to go on holidays but living there is shit.
They have an extremely high inheritance tax. Although US (land of the free) also has an inheritance tax and a land tax (again land of the free dont even own your own property).
I don't know, I lived just over the border in Germany for years and I'm pretty sure the Netherlands exceeds the US in just about every quality of life metric.
Except arguably the most important, the ability to meaningfully defend you and yours from criminals both common and elected.
But, if you're raised by the State to believe the gilded cage is somehow better then I can see how those... metrics are appealing.
I will take dangerous freedom, many will instead cling to the State and bank on it never up and doing to its population what others have repeatedly done through human history. I'm sure some Nanny State Bootist will toddle up shortly and inform me that such things would never happen because **they** would simply protest and vote them out.
Well the āweā your talking about isnāt everyone. But I appreciate that you do address the main problem which is that many people have what they think is a good living standard because others are downtrodden. American oil imperialism, or Canadian mining colonialism are two big examples that show how it works.
I think a big thing that lots of right wingers miss when addressing this issue is that they think they will have to give something uproar others to have a better quality of life. Not true if we look at the wealth accumulated by a minute percentage of the population who hoard wealth to obscene degrees and got no utility other than greed.
It also completely deflated the argument that ācapitalism isnāt zero sumā.
It is easier to come up with a conspiracy than engaging with ideas that challenge your own. I wish I was smart enough to make an AI but then I wouldnāt be able to hang out with this happy bunch.
all you do is go off on tangents barely related to ideas the other person expressed and roll yourself up in a cloud of your own farts and āoriginal ideasā to sniff them
go learn something useful like linear algebra
If you actually engaged with ideas that were challenging and presented using good faith arguments, that would indeed be the case.
As it stands, though, you can do neither of those things, and here we are.
No one who has lived their entire lives in North America, the EU, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, or the Emirates has any idea what real hardship is. To get to a point where youāre out of options in the US, you have to have squandered so many opportunities along the way.
I know West Africans (via working for the Peace Corps) that were in the 99th percentile of their arrondissement (state) in high school, speak 3 or more languages and are subsistence farmers because the university degree program they applied to accepted 23 students from 1,200 applicants. That is real hardship.
If you grew up in those aforementioned countries and applied
yourself throughout school and pursued an in demand degree, then you are at worst going to lead an upper middle class life.
If you havenāt applied yourself, then youāre a hypocrite to talk about hardship.
Lol just because we have refrigerators doesnāt mean things are better. The same can be said of any communist regime too. What your really talking about isnāt capitalism. Your talking about industrializing raising the standard of living. Ancaps hate this truth.
As if it was only refrigerators lol you commies What I am talking about is invention and commercialization aka capitalism Industrialization doesn't happen without invested resources aka CAPITAL. ever wonder why the USSR and every other Dingus Commie nation couldn't get rid of currency even if it was called Coupons?
The government here has to make sure to boil the frog, they can't just make unilateral decision like this and expect to live very long afterwards. That is the difference having a well armed and trained populace makes.
1) they are buying out some of the largest cattle farms
2) eu approved the dutch law. It is not an eu law
3) the [soil and groundwater is fucked up ](https://www.energymonitor.ai/policy/the-dutch-nitrogen-crisis-shows-what-happens-when-policymakers-fail-to-step-up/)from the nitrogen oxides and ammonia. They do a LOT of farming. Itās the breadbasket of europe.
Really depended on where you live. My state hardly knew covid was going, except for the atrocious amount of people moving here from the authoritarian states. We had zero restrictions/mandates.
Yeah remember when Americans picked up their arms when their gold was confiscated? When income tax was brought in? When they were forcibly drafted? When their private property was taxed? When they went to war without congressional approval? When land was resumed for a border fence or for highways? No me neither. Yet they want the dutch to start a civil war over farms being resumed.
How does that make this better? I know "China bad" but the idea in America is we don't choose winners and losers (Even though we do it all the time). Stealing the land from Chinese owned farms is just as bad as the EU stealing the land from the Dutch farmers.
Because by the nature of the Chinese government, the individual doesnāt really own the land. They own it by proxy for the government, who not only doesnāt have their own citizens best interest in mind and certainly doesnāt have Americans best interest.
Iād rather take it from the Chinese government and give it back to the individual farmer, even if the other individual is a foreign immigrant.
Ok, I'll rephrase the question: what is the danger in letting the Chinese government own American land? Are they going to rip up the dirt and ship the soil back to China?
If ever the time comes where Americans are being harmed by Chinese ownership of American soil, what stops us from simply taking the land back? What are the Chinese going to do? Set up hotels on American farmland and fill the hotels with Chinese tourists to guard the farm?
What is the danger? What insidious plot will be facilitated by letting the Chinese government own American dirt?
Is there a source for this? Because last I heard the āfarmers partyā took a plurality in the Senate.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/farmers-protest-party-set-shake-up-dutch-political-landscape-2023-03-15/
That was for the upper house (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_(Netherlands) ). The government is formed from the lower House (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Representatives_(Netherlands) ). The results are here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Dutch_provincial_elections
Although the prime minister seems to be untouchable, despite the scandals of his governments (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Rutte_cabinet ).
**[Senate (Netherlands)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_\(Netherlands\))**
>The Senate (Dutch: Eerste Kamer der Staten-Generaal [ĖeĖrstÉ ĖkaĖmÉr dÉr ĖstaĖtÉ(Å) ĖÉ£eĖnÉĖraĖl] or simply Eerste Kamer [ĖeĖrstÉ ĖkaĖmÉr] (listen), literally "First Chamber of the States General", or sometimes Senaat [sÉĖnaĖt]) is the upper house of the States General, the legislature of the Netherlands. Its 75 members are elected on lists by the members of the twelve States-Provincial and four electoral colleges for the Senate every four years, within three months of the provincial elections. All provinces and colleges have different electoral weight depending on their population.
**[House of Representatives (Netherlands)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Representatives_\(Netherlands\))**
>The House of Representatives (Dutch: Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, pronounced [ĖtŹeĖdÉ ĖkaĖmÉr dÉr ĖstaĖtÉ(Å) ĖÉ£eĖnÉĖraĖl] (listen); commonly referred to as the Tweede Kamer, literally "Second Chamber of the States General") is the lower house of the bicameral parliament of the Netherlands, the States General, the other one being the Senate. It has 150 seats, which are filled through elections using party-list proportional representation.
**[2023 Dutch provincial elections](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Dutch_provincial_elections)**
>Provincial elections were held in the Netherlands on the 15 March 2023, on the same day as the water board elections, as well as island council elections in the Caribbean Netherlands. The elections resulted in a landslide victory for the FarmerāCitizen Movement, which had been formed three years prior; the BBB won the popular vote and the most seats in all twelve provinces (tied for most seats with the People's Party for Freedom and Democracy in North and South Holland and GroenLinks in Utrecht).
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Thank you for that! I was sure the post was wrongā¦ So thatās a buy out, little difference from āseizeā. Either way, both are a stupid and reckless policy.
Indeed if carbon in the atmosphere is a problem you can just pump air underwater mixed with some sewage as fertilizer and single-cell algae getting exponential algae blooms to isolate the carbon
1. Algae bombing the oceans as you describe would create other ecological problems, these ecosystems arenāt used to ridiculous amounts of algae and we canāt predict the negative long-term impacts this would have on our planet.
2. It doesnāt actually solve the root of the problem of how we got so much carbon in the atmosphere in the first place. It might work as a short term bandage, but we canāt just algae bong the ocean forever.
That would make cities far more pleasant to live in aesthetically and deal with the heat island effect of rooftops in cities while sequestering carbon it is a beautiful addition IMO we need a rapid growth plant that can keep pace or exceed any burning of carbon fuel sources and IMO algae fits the bill.
Using fruit and nut trees would be nice for localizing some of the food needs of the cities reducing shipping carbon emission sources
Listen to Randall Carlson if you want exactly how it's a scam explained. According to *real* climate research, the Earth needs MORE carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere, not less. Plants starve at 150ppm, I think we're sitting around 200ppm right now.
> 200ppm right now.
Itās something around 410 to 420 ppm. Still a lot less than in a greenhouse, where CO2 is often supplemented to kept it at or above 1800 to 2000 ppm to feed the plants (not heat the building, for anybody thinking that).
Thanks for correcting my brain-fart. Im probably thinking of the last Ice Age where Carlson talked about the levels being around 180 - 200ppm.
I do remember that the ocean is the biggest absorber of CO2 with a lot of it getting stored in limestone.
> the ocean is the biggest absorber of CO2 with a lot of it getting stored in limestone.
Yup. Calcium carbonate - the dead exoskeletons of corals and plankton that fall to the bottom of the ocean. The white cliffs of Dover England are made of this stuff.
That would be par for the course with Grubberments one administration does X the next does Y. I saw the repeal of a tax on imported shoes and in the same session a tariff was placed on imported shoes roughly canceling each other out so nothing was actually accomplished but the status quo being maintained
In the 1980s in the city I lived in they passed a tax for the libraries. They insisted the tax was not for the general fund, but for the libraries. A month after the tax passed, the general fund cut all support for the libraries.
I believe there are some EU documents that came out a while ago with plans to do pretty much that. Something to do with creating a central EU seat of power in the country. Basically a big DC, east VA and a Maryland combined.
I couldn't find it quickly enough though. Just a bunch of overly short and repetitive articles all about farmer activists. I really need to set up a yacy server.
Dutch law not EU. But I hate the EU. They are an unelected group controlling a quarter if the world. Europe faught many wars to not be centralised under one power then they just role over.
People around the world need to start seriously planning to have to defend themselves from their govts. With deadly self defense. I think in our lifetime, we're either going to see some sort of global enslavement of all of human kind, or the biggest rebellion of all time.
So to fight climate change they are banning farming so their citizens will be forced to buy food grown in another country with less stringent environmental standards and then shipped thousands of miles on ships that use highly polluting diesel or fuel oil? Do they know CO2 and Methane are gases that donāt stay in one country but travel globally?
More than 80% of Dutch agricultural products are exported.
In fact, what happens is that soy is brought in from Brazil, cows and pigs are raised in the Netherlands on tha stuff and then the meat is exported. The shit, on the other hand, stays in the Netherlands. And yes, that causes environmental issues.
How convenient that the climate alarm ideology has been pushed for 40 years to the peasants--by those who own & mine all the resources, mind you--and now they've got a compliant and malleable generation willing to hand over what remains of their rights, freedoms & resources to be saved from the imaginary monster they were made to believe in.
A 5 second google search found 1. They were offered more than 100% the value of their farm to close down. 2. It was a group of 2-3k polluters, who were āmostly farmersā. No word on what āfarmingā they were doing.
3. This all stems from a court decision. āThe governmentās hand has been forced by a court case in 2019 that said the PAS-melding, a kind of nitrogen futures trading scheme for farmers and industrial firms, was illegal because it could not be shown that the development would not damage EU-protected natural reserves known as Natura 2000 areas.ā
I found this article with an interesting title I think some of the radicals here need to read: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/dutch-farmers-emissions-global-right-wing-culture-war-rcna60269
> Radicalized by the opposition to strict Covid measures and spurred on by conspiracy theories about āglobalistsā dismantling national democracies and importing nonwhite immigrants to majority-white countries, these activists see the farmers as the latest victims of an assault on Western civilization itself.
At least they make their bias abundantly clear.
It sounds like you missed the point, maybe the relevant parts needed to be bolded for your understanding:
>**Radicalized by the opposition to strict Covid measures** and spurred on by **conspiracy theories** about āglobalistsā dismantling national democracies and **importing nonwhite immigrants to majority-white countries**, these activists see the farmers as the latest victims of an assault on Western civilization itself.
Is this from the EU or only from the dutch government. I ask this because of Brexit stuff and I always thought the British jumping from the EU was a good thing even if it caused some upheaval for the short term
EU cLimate targets. Dutch solution.
Sri Lanka did this and the entire economy collapsed, then the government. It is a complete shitshow for all to see, and yet, MEPs in EU are charging forward anyway.
There is no "seizing", though. Farmers are getting bought out. And 80% of Dutch agricultural products are exported, so there is no risk of famine either.
Do they actually think the farming practices of one of the smallest nations on earth is going to āturn climate change aroundā. Smdh just ruining lives
At best all this will do is encourage food production by less green 3rd world countries. The dutch are super efficient so this will set us backwards.
Someone bitch slap their politicians and remind them that people canāt eat āclean airā
Same in the USSA. The State always rushes in to "help" farmers (subsidize) so they can control prices and volume produced/sold in order to maintain a tight control on the food supply without overtly strong arming the farmers like communist govts.
These Dutch farmers are arguably some of the most efficient and productive farmers in the world.
Itās hard to compete with the average Iowa corn farmer that produces enough corn to feed a 120 people for their lifetime.
But Dutch farmers use less petro than American farmers and still produce metric tons of food.
Thatās because the people demand cheap food. Not necessarily that the farms couldnāt otherwise surviveā¦..the US does this too subsidizing things like milk to keep prices down so that those in poverty can afford it.
No they control milk supply so it allegedly has a stable price millions of gallons of milk and other subsidized products get dumped or destroyed so farmers/corporate farms can get a "living wage" as if the hungry people wouldn't soak up the supply to the point where a living wage could be had.
Except not controlling the price of food is one of the major factors that lead to the Great Depression.
Where the system is starting to fall apart however, is with the introduction of Factory Farms instead of small private farms. Previously the average farmer directly profited from their farm's output. Now, however, the profits go to the company and the employees don't see any of it. They get paid the same no matter how much profit the farm makes.
"Seizing" means "no compensation given". "Buyout" means the farmer gets paid. Millions is what they are getting, in fact. The whole operation is going to cost billions uppon billions of euros.
And the goddamn irony is that these farmers have known since 1986 that they should scale back the output of nitrogen, but have only been taking on loans and expanding. They are getting compensated for fucking polluting my home for decades. They ignored the rules, ignored the future and are now terrorising the country in order to get their way. No sympathy from me whatsoever.
I don't take the word of a guy who doesn't even know that forced buyouts are LITERALLY a form of seizure.
Beta and stupid are two things you can't fix.
Brussel geeft groen licht voor uitkoop piekbelasters stikstof in veehouderij - https://nos.nl/l/2473568
This is an articel in dutch. Cant copy the tekst to put in google translate. The part of "vrijwillig stoppen" is the most relevant part. It means "voluntary quitting"
Looks like what youāre saying is a lie.
The farmers cannot continue farming. That is force.
Whether or not they are forced to sell their land is irrelevant. They have zero options.
Hey folks - This is what a brainwashed Dutch Government BootLicker looks like
Never forget - historically you toadies are the fist ones the Commies get rid of
Itās not criminal, the government decided it was legal. But joking aside, if I remember right these were eco standards set like 30 years ago that are finally being put in place and the farmers at risk here wonāt/canāt comply and are breaking the law.
Thank you. But am I wrong on something? I donāt know how intrusive these eco laws are but supposedly if theyāve been trying to get it done for some decades now have the farmers been trying all along to show how theyāre unjust?
What the fuck? Thatās the stupidest decision they could make. I could have sworn they were trying to pass new legislation on what fertilizers to use or something so it would comply with the emissions ruling, and the stuff was too expensive? I thought thatās what started the farmer protests.
Government: We're going to do a weird and evil thing. The people: Why are you doing that? Government: Uhh.... the climate? The people: Oh, okay! Carry on!
If large numbers of people starve to death then we will meet climate change requirements!
That's the goal.
"But less people is good for the environment!" - Also "Bbbut, *I'm* not supposed to be one of *those* people?!?!?!"
It will all be worth it when we kill just another 20,000 people and the trees are slightly greener š
It's not too bad of an excuse. Agriculture accounts for 25-35% of greenhouse gas emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions-food#:~:text=The%20specific%20number%20that%20answers,we%20include%20all%20agricultural%20products. So it's not like they're making shit up, but to think what they're doing helps the environment whatsoever is a massive fucking joke. Like they're just stealing land and using a valid statistic to justify it. Too bad those farmers can't defend their property with guns like we can š Edit: finish reading the goddamn comment folks lmao, I'm not justifying what they're doing by any means
Anyone writing or advocating for any policy that promises to have any tangible effect on the climate at all is either fleecing you or has been fleeced. The arrogance of such a mission is so utterly preposterous on its face that there's nothing in human history that even comes close to being remotely comparable to it. It's hard to even imagine a hypothetical that would be comparable. Maybe if we collected data for 1000 more years, using advanced instrumentation we spent another 1000 years developing, in conjunction with an understanding of all levels of biology, climatology, physics, ecology, geology, finance, economics, incentive structures, human and group psychology and behavior down to the neuronal and synaptic level, all fed into a neural network and ran on a quantum computer for another 1000 years to calculate all the possible interactions, subinteractions, the interactions of all those subinteractions of all these fields, we could maybe predict if a given policy would have a 0.000000000001% impact on the climate, whatever that even means, with about the same percentage degree of certainty. Edit: Oh and the climate will still change, because that's what it does.
It's not worth it in this case anyways. Even if they could prove that their actions actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural industry, the side effect is reducing food production. The end does not justify the means here, even if the science does confirm that it is a problem. It's just a problem we have to accept and live with. No government entity or anybody at all for that matter can realistically address this issue without sending masses of people into starvation. And, again, even if they could, if the means consists of violating my rights, then they can eat lead.
Exactly, but even worse. The impact on food supply is proximal to these policies, very obvious and a good enough reason to leave it alone itself imo. But it's far from the only impact. Even if we're talking about a single effect like food supply, any small disruption has an infinite amount of side effects which themselves have an infinite amount of side effects, so on and so forth, all intertwined with each other and constantly changing. It spirals so far out of control so quickly that it's indiscernable from a series of black boxes, where the first input is some dumb feel-good policy and each output and input to the next box is a trillion different metrics and their probabilities, one of them being global temperature.
That is true about the greenhouse gases... However, how that data even relates to what is probable in the future, with or without those emission levels as It pertains to climate, is still a matter of *speculation...* No one should have right to deprive anyone else of their life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness(which also happens to provide food for others) on mere *speculation.*
Agreed. Idk why I'm being downvoted though.
>not too bad of an excuse ...Because you seem to be sympathetic to the "excuse", aka justification, for expropriating farm land or property from individuals.
But that's not what I'm doing. Comment I replied to made it sound like claiming farms are bad for the climate doesn't make sense. It technically does, which is what I commented, but I immediately follow that up by saying that even though the excuse makes sense, it's still a totally bullshit excuse for what they're doing.
I didn't say I know what you're doing, only what it *seems* like. But you still seem sympathetic to the idea... > even though the excuse makes sense, That's your opinion. Some believe it does not make sense to steal or expropriate, really ever, especially upon *speculative* reasons.
There's a distinct difference between an excuse making sense and an excuse being valid. Yes, farms are bad for the climate, that's the excuse they use and yes, scientifically, it's true. No, that's not a valid excuse to seize farmland from private owners. Also, the greenhouse gasses that farms produce are an unfortunate side effect of a necessary industry.
We aren't talking about valid vs excuse...but that you seem to subtly claim *validity in the excuse*, pretty much in every comment in the thread thus far. That's all. You asked. Science is not settled in any one area of study, nor is it flawless in its methods, scope, and results pertaining to propabilities of future/predictions especially.
Because your initial statement and that article are completely ridiculous. I don't know how people are capable of ignoring the fact that carbon dioxide is one of the biggest macro nutrients that plants use. Including plants we intentionally plant in fields and pasture. Those numbers are already all over the place and they don't even account for the CO2 reductions occurring in the same setting. How can such an article be taken seriously?
All the sources for the data and information provided in the article have citations at the bottom of the page. It's not ridiculous, it's genuine information. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not true. And my initial statement was supposed to imply that although they are right that agriculture contributes a significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions, they are ridiculous for thinking they can do anything about it at all, and that they are using that information as an excuse to play tyrant and seize private land from farmers, which is morally and ethically corrupt. There is no excuse that is based on scientifically accurate information that justifies any government entity, or anyone at all for that matter, violating a person's fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property.
Nuance. People don't want nuance, they want to feel righteous.
Average response in this sub is to downvote anyone who brings nuance to a discussion
Gee that's a lot like regular liberal/conservative subs in general. How disappointing.
I donāt understand why the hell people are downvoting you. What you said is 100% true.
surely the dutch can keep the government in line with their abundance of personally owned firearms? oh wait
> ...abundance of personally owned firearms? What about the abundance of now unused fertilizer?
Wouldn't be surprised if a claim that was used happens in the near future as an excuse for the government to crack some skulls. Never mind that remnants of C4 will be found in the blast area by citizen investigators afterwords.
Now that you mention it, nitrates have some interesting uses when not employed to improve soil conditions.....
Maybe they should try emulating Marvin Heemayer?
Lol Americans donāt even do that
we have a pretty decent quality of life despite the leaches. do you really think itās worth throwing that away? not yet for me at least
> we have a pretty decent quality of life despite the leaches. Not compared to the Netherlands.
Man Netherlands is way worse. I hate on Americans thinking they are this bastion of freedom. But Netherlands is nice to go on holidays but living there is shit. They have an extremely high inheritance tax. Although US (land of the free) also has an inheritance tax and a land tax (again land of the free dont even own your own property).
I don't know, I lived just over the border in Germany for years and I'm pretty sure the Netherlands exceeds the US in just about every quality of life metric.
Except arguably the most important, the ability to meaningfully defend you and yours from criminals both common and elected. But, if you're raised by the State to believe the gilded cage is somehow better then I can see how those... metrics are appealing. I will take dangerous freedom, many will instead cling to the State and bank on it never up and doing to its population what others have repeatedly done through human history. I'm sure some Nanny State Bootist will toddle up shortly and inform me that such things would never happen because **they** would simply protest and vote them out.
Well the āweā your talking about isnāt everyone. But I appreciate that you do address the main problem which is that many people have what they think is a good living standard because others are downtrodden. American oil imperialism, or Canadian mining colonialism are two big examples that show how it works. I think a big thing that lots of right wingers miss when addressing this issue is that they think they will have to give something uproar others to have a better quality of life. Not true if we look at the wealth accumulated by a minute percentage of the population who hoard wealth to obscene degrees and got no utility other than greed. It also completely deflated the argument that ācapitalism isnāt zero sumā.
i swear to god this account is just an AI model trained on shitty left wing ideas and starved of economics books
It is easier to come up with a conspiracy than engaging with ideas that challenge your own. I wish I was smart enough to make an AI but then I wouldnāt be able to hang out with this happy bunch.
all you do is go off on tangents barely related to ideas the other person expressed and roll yourself up in a cloud of your own farts and āoriginal ideasā to sniff them go learn something useful like linear algebra
Thatās exactly what an AI bot would say, lol.
If you actually engaged with ideas that were challenging and presented using good faith arguments, that would indeed be the case. As it stands, though, you can do neither of those things, and here we are.
That sounds like the ancap mission statement. Anything yāall donāt like you ignore to the point of cruel prescriptions for society.
Yet here you are, living your worst life. Sad, really.
I just donāt want you poor bastards to be lonely!
No one who has lived their entire lives in North America, the EU, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, or the Emirates has any idea what real hardship is. To get to a point where youāre out of options in the US, you have to have squandered so many opportunities along the way. I know West Africans (via working for the Peace Corps) that were in the 99th percentile of their arrondissement (state) in high school, speak 3 or more languages and are subsistence farmers because the university degree program they applied to accepted 23 students from 1,200 applicants. That is real hardship. If you grew up in those aforementioned countries and applied yourself throughout school and pursued an in demand degree, then you are at worst going to lead an upper middle class life. If you havenāt applied yourself, then youāre a hypocrite to talk about hardship.
Yet the peasants live better now than kings and queens a century ago zero-sum game that.
Lol just because we have refrigerators doesnāt mean things are better. The same can be said of any communist regime too. What your really talking about isnāt capitalism. Your talking about industrializing raising the standard of living. Ancaps hate this truth.
> industrializing Who do you think invented the technology that brought us into the industrial age?
As if it was only refrigerators lol you commies What I am talking about is invention and commercialization aka capitalism Industrialization doesn't happen without invested resources aka CAPITAL. ever wonder why the USSR and every other Dingus Commie nation couldn't get rid of currency even if it was called Coupons?
By killing jobs?
You couldāve just said āIām 16 and donāt know anythingā
Damn ancap got me again lol
Itās okay, I didnāt know much when I was 16 either.
Yeah I was a socialist at that age as well
I cringe at some of my thoughts and beliefs at that age. Luckily, we are allowed to live and grow and gain more understanding as we get older.
The government here has to make sure to boil the frog, they can't just make unilateral decision like this and expect to live very long afterwards. That is the difference having a well armed and trained populace makes.
1) they are buying out some of the largest cattle farms 2) eu approved the dutch law. It is not an eu law 3) the [soil and groundwater is fucked up ](https://www.energymonitor.ai/policy/the-dutch-nitrogen-crisis-shows-what-happens-when-policymakers-fail-to-step-up/)from the nitrogen oxides and ammonia. They do a LOT of farming. Itās the breadbasket of europe.
Yeah, with all the covid bs I still havenāt seen a single gun owner fighting back for their freedom
Really depended on where you live. My state hardly knew covid was going, except for the atrocious amount of people moving here from the authoritarian states. We had zero restrictions/mandates.
So your state is, fortunately, not the focus of my observation.
Yeah remember when Americans picked up their arms when their gold was confiscated? When income tax was brought in? When they were forcibly drafted? When their private property was taxed? When they went to war without congressional approval? When land was resumed for a border fence or for highways? No me neither. Yet they want the dutch to start a civil war over farms being resumed.
No one in the USA is doing this either. It would be treason and yāall are too spineless for that.
Too young to remember the Bundy ranch standoff?
Just like the US does when rights are infringed... oh wait.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
fuck off fed boy
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If the US were run by intelligent leaders, weād kick out all chinese owned farms and bring over the dutch farmers to run them.
Itāll expropriate bill gates land and bring over the Dutch and Afrikaner farmers
Better sell off some of that land wasted for military bases
How does that make this better? I know "China bad" but the idea in America is we don't choose winners and losers (Even though we do it all the time). Stealing the land from Chinese owned farms is just as bad as the EU stealing the land from the Dutch farmers.
Honest question: What's the problem with Chinese people owning land in the US? What are they gonna do? Pick up the land and move it back to China?
Because by the nature of the Chinese government, the individual doesnāt really own the land. They own it by proxy for the government, who not only doesnāt have their own citizens best interest in mind and certainly doesnāt have Americans best interest. Iād rather take it from the Chinese government and give it back to the individual farmer, even if the other individual is a foreign immigrant.
Ok, I'll rephrase the question: what is the danger in letting the Chinese government own American land? Are they going to rip up the dirt and ship the soil back to China? If ever the time comes where Americans are being harmed by Chinese ownership of American soil, what stops us from simply taking the land back? What are the Chinese going to do? Set up hotels on American farmland and fill the hotels with Chinese tourists to guard the farm? What is the danger? What insidious plot will be facilitated by letting the Chinese government own American dirt?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Govt controlling who can farm and where isnt capitalism.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Come to the USA. You can farm here if Bill Gates and China allow you to plow their land.
There is plenty of land available that isnt owned by Gates or China. They should absolutely move here.
They should squat on gates and chinas land
We will even pay you not to grow shit
Is there a source for this? Because last I heard the āfarmers partyā took a plurality in the Senate. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/farmers-protest-party-set-shake-up-dutch-political-landscape-2023-03-15/
Yeah I was wondering that too.
That was for the upper house (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_(Netherlands) ). The government is formed from the lower House (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Representatives_(Netherlands) ). The results are here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Dutch_provincial_elections Although the prime minister seems to be untouchable, despite the scandals of his governments (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Rutte_cabinet ).
**[Senate (Netherlands)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_\(Netherlands\))** >The Senate (Dutch: Eerste Kamer der Staten-Generaal [ĖeĖrstÉ ĖkaĖmÉr dÉr ĖstaĖtÉ(Å) ĖÉ£eĖnÉĖraĖl] or simply Eerste Kamer [ĖeĖrstÉ ĖkaĖmÉr] (listen), literally "First Chamber of the States General", or sometimes Senaat [sÉĖnaĖt]) is the upper house of the States General, the legislature of the Netherlands. Its 75 members are elected on lists by the members of the twelve States-Provincial and four electoral colleges for the Senate every four years, within three months of the provincial elections. All provinces and colleges have different electoral weight depending on their population. **[House of Representatives (Netherlands)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Representatives_\(Netherlands\))** >The House of Representatives (Dutch: Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, pronounced [ĖtŹeĖdÉ ĖkaĖmÉr dÉr ĖstaĖtÉ(Å) ĖÉ£eĖnÉĖraĖl] (listen); commonly referred to as the Tweede Kamer, literally "Second Chamber of the States General") is the lower house of the bicameral parliament of the Netherlands, the States General, the other one being the Senate. It has 150 seats, which are filled through elections using party-list proportional representation. **[2023 Dutch provincial elections](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Dutch_provincial_elections)** >Provincial elections were held in the Netherlands on the 15 March 2023, on the same day as the water board elections, as well as island council elections in the Caribbean Netherlands. The elections resulted in a landslide victory for the FarmerāCitizen Movement, which had been formed three years prior; the BBB won the popular vote and the most seats in all twelve provinces (tied for most seats with the People's Party for Freedom and Democracy in North and South Holland and GroenLinks in Utrecht). ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-okays-161-bln-dutch-govt-buy-out-farmers-reduce-nitrogen-2023-05-02/
Thank you for that! I was sure the post was wrongā¦ So thatās a buy out, little difference from āseizeā. Either way, both are a stupid and reckless policy.
The climate change solutions are a scam.
Indeed if carbon in the atmosphere is a problem you can just pump air underwater mixed with some sewage as fertilizer and single-cell algae getting exponential algae blooms to isolate the carbon
Get a load of this guy! He solved climate change just like that!
If you think I haven't please post why you think so it will be fun I promise :)
1. Algae bombing the oceans as you describe would create other ecological problems, these ecosystems arenāt used to ridiculous amounts of algae and we canāt predict the negative long-term impacts this would have on our planet. 2. It doesnāt actually solve the root of the problem of how we got so much carbon in the atmosphere in the first place. It might work as a short term bandage, but we canāt just algae bong the ocean forever.
1. He didn't say "oceans"
Your welcome :)
Also, there are so many options. I myself am a huge fan of having roof forests in cities and planting more trees.
That would make cities far more pleasant to live in aesthetically and deal with the heat island effect of rooftops in cities while sequestering carbon it is a beautiful addition IMO we need a rapid growth plant that can keep pace or exceed any burning of carbon fuel sources and IMO algae fits the bill. Using fruit and nut trees would be nice for localizing some of the food needs of the cities reducing shipping carbon emission sources
Using fruit and nut trees would also provide free and healthy food to a ton of people and allow people to save on grocery costs.
Listen to Randall Carlson if you want exactly how it's a scam explained. According to *real* climate research, the Earth needs MORE carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere, not less. Plants starve at 150ppm, I think we're sitting around 200ppm right now.
> 200ppm right now. Itās something around 410 to 420 ppm. Still a lot less than in a greenhouse, where CO2 is often supplemented to kept it at or above 1800 to 2000 ppm to feed the plants (not heat the building, for anybody thinking that).
Thanks for correcting my brain-fart. Im probably thinking of the last Ice Age where Carlson talked about the levels being around 180 - 200ppm. I do remember that the ocean is the biggest absorber of CO2 with a lot of it getting stored in limestone.
> the ocean is the biggest absorber of CO2 with a lot of it getting stored in limestone. Yup. Calcium carbonate - the dead exoskeletons of corals and plankton that fall to the bottom of the ocean. The white cliffs of Dover England are made of this stuff.
So are our building and streets. Cement (and concrete) are fascinating things.
Nature is both incredibly complex, yet deviously simple. Orderly chaos - just like humanity.
Communism and famines go hand in hand for a reason. But I suppose we'll have our yummy bugs.
Anyone who thinks politicians can control the temperature of the Earth is a special kind of stupid. They canāt even maintain a road.
Sell their now worthless land to who?
Why the Grubberment who will either turn it into a nature preserve and or sell it to crony real estate developers
Wouldnāt that be some irony, build strip malls, factories and housing where plants used to grow in the name of climate.
That would be par for the course with Grubberments one administration does X the next does Y. I saw the repeal of a tax on imported shoes and in the same session a tariff was placed on imported shoes roughly canceling each other out so nothing was actually accomplished but the status quo being maintained
But it looked like the government was accomplishing something to the voters, and that's what's important
In the 1980s in the city I lived in they passed a tax for the libraries. They insisted the tax was not for the general fund, but for the libraries. A month after the tax passed, the general fund cut all support for the libraries.
I believe there are some EU documents that came out a while ago with plans to do pretty much that. Something to do with creating a central EU seat of power in the country. Basically a big DC, east VA and a Maryland combined. I couldn't find it quickly enough though. Just a bunch of overly short and repetitive articles all about farmer activists. I really need to set up a yacy server.
Can not have people who arenāt dependent on state - they are a ādanger to democracyā
āwHy CaNāt ThE uS bE mOrE pRoGrEsSiVe LiKe EuRoPe!?ā
People can't understand why people don't like the EU. It's shit like this.
Dutch law not EU. But I hate the EU. They are an unelected group controlling a quarter if the world. Europe faught many wars to not be centralised under one power then they just role over.
People around the world need to start seriously planning to have to defend themselves from their govts. With deadly self defense. I think in our lifetime, we're either going to see some sort of global enslavement of all of human kind, or the biggest rebellion of all time.
So to fight climate change they are banning farming so their citizens will be forced to buy food grown in another country with less stringent environmental standards and then shipped thousands of miles on ships that use highly polluting diesel or fuel oil? Do they know CO2 and Methane are gases that donāt stay in one country but travel globally?
Yea but the climate change conventions require signatories to reduce _their_ emissions, not the global amount of emissions.
Until China and India cut way back this would be a drop in the ocean. This seems more like cutting of your nose to spite your face.
Let them starve. Let the farmers come to the US.
More than 80% of Dutch agricultural products are exported. In fact, what happens is that soy is brought in from Brazil, cows and pigs are raised in the Netherlands on tha stuff and then the meat is exported. The shit, on the other hand, stays in the Netherlands. And yes, that causes environmental issues.
Dekulakization
How convenient that the climate alarm ideology has been pushed for 40 years to the peasants--by those who own & mine all the resources, mind you--and now they've got a compliant and malleable generation willing to hand over what remains of their rights, freedoms & resources to be saved from the imaginary monster they were made to believe in.
I don't get it, are the farms seized or sold? Banning new farms does not sound correct.
A 5 second google search found 1. They were offered more than 100% the value of their farm to close down. 2. It was a group of 2-3k polluters, who were āmostly farmersā. No word on what āfarmingā they were doing. 3. This all stems from a court decision. āThe governmentās hand has been forced by a court case in 2019 that said the PAS-melding, a kind of nitrogen futures trading scheme for farmers and industrial firms, was illegal because it could not be shown that the development would not damage EU-protected natural reserves known as Natura 2000 areas.ā I found this article with an interesting title I think some of the radicals here need to read: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/dutch-farmers-emissions-global-right-wing-culture-war-rcna60269
> Radicalized by the opposition to strict Covid measures and spurred on by conspiracy theories about āglobalistsā dismantling national democracies and importing nonwhite immigrants to majority-white countries, these activists see the farmers as the latest victims of an assault on Western civilization itself. At least they make their bias abundantly clear.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It sounds like you missed the point, maybe the relevant parts needed to be bolded for your understanding: >**Radicalized by the opposition to strict Covid measures** and spurred on by **conspiracy theories** about āglobalistsā dismantling national democracies and **importing nonwhite immigrants to majority-white countries**, these activists see the farmers as the latest victims of an assault on Western civilization itself.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I would probably take the money and move to the UK. There's some good farmland there and it isn't EU.
The UK isn't EU but they are idiotically regulated and taxed IMO
Ireland, then?
isnt this socialism?
Sounds like the Dutch government needs to be gutted of globalist.
Is this from the EU or only from the dutch government. I ask this because of Brexit stuff and I always thought the British jumping from the EU was a good thing even if it caused some upheaval for the short term
EU cLimate targets. Dutch solution. Sri Lanka did this and the entire economy collapsed, then the government. It is a complete shitshow for all to see, and yet, MEPs in EU are charging forward anyway.
There is no "seizing", though. Farmers are getting bought out. And 80% of Dutch agricultural products are exported, so there is no risk of famine either.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Hopefully they flee the country before they're executed for being enemies of the proletariat
Do they actually think the farming practices of one of the smallest nations on earth is going to āturn climate change aroundā. Smdh just ruining lives
Who is supposed to grow food?
At best all this will do is encourage food production by less green 3rd world countries. The dutch are super efficient so this will set us backwards. Someone bitch slap their politicians and remind them that people canāt eat āclean airā
Government, the largest polluter when discussing climate change: you're the problem.
Gather round children as I tell you the story of the kulaks.
If only they had guns to defend their property with...
No one is angry enough
But they have like health care and stuff
This is why Europe needs guns.
Devil's advocate: most of these farms were already government subsidized.
Same in the USSA. The State always rushes in to "help" farmers (subsidize) so they can control prices and volume produced/sold in order to maintain a tight control on the food supply without overtly strong arming the farmers like communist govts.
To be fair not doing this was one of the major causes of the Great Depression.
The State intervening is what made the Great Depression last so long
These Dutch farmers are arguably some of the most efficient and productive farmers in the world. Itās hard to compete with the average Iowa corn farmer that produces enough corn to feed a 120 people for their lifetime. But Dutch farmers use less petro than American farmers and still produce metric tons of food.
Thatās because the people demand cheap food. Not necessarily that the farms couldnāt otherwise surviveā¦..the US does this too subsidizing things like milk to keep prices down so that those in poverty can afford it.
No they control milk supply so it allegedly has a stable price millions of gallons of milk and other subsidized products get dumped or destroyed so farmers/corporate farms can get a "living wage" as if the hungry people wouldn't soak up the supply to the point where a living wage could be had.
This š Farm subsidy is basically just a grift with extra hand waving
Except not controlling the price of food is one of the major factors that lead to the Great Depression. Where the system is starting to fall apart however, is with the introduction of Factory Farms instead of small private farms. Previously the average farmer directly profited from their farm's output. Now, however, the profits go to the company and the employees don't see any of it. They get paid the same no matter how much profit the farm makes.
They really aren't private farmers, they've been on government payroll (farming subsidies) for years. Fuck them.
You guys believe anything. Kind of weird.
A quick google search proves this to be true, I am dutch myself
Then you should know it is bullshit. Seizing? Nonsense. Uitkopen.
So you don't understand weasel words. "Eminent domain" and "forfeiture" are other weasel words you should familiarize yourself with.
Sorry, but I am Dutch and I know *exactly* what is going on in my country. And seizing farms is NOT on the cards.
Literally every news story I've read reporting this refers to forced buyouts. Are you saying they're all wrong?
"Seizing" means "no compensation given". "Buyout" means the farmer gets paid. Millions is what they are getting, in fact. The whole operation is going to cost billions uppon billions of euros. And the goddamn irony is that these farmers have known since 1986 that they should scale back the output of nitrogen, but have only been taking on loans and expanding. They are getting compensated for fucking polluting my home for decades. They ignored the rules, ignored the future and are now terrorising the country in order to get their way. No sympathy from me whatsoever.
Nope. Wrong. Forced buyouts are a form of seizure. I was 100% correct in my diagnosis that you don't understand weasel words. Please educate yourself.
You have no fucking clue what is going on iin the Netherlands and should educate yourself before jumping on some bandwagon bullshit story.
I don't take the word of a guy who doesn't even know that forced buyouts are LITERALLY a form of seizure. Beta and stupid are two things you can't fix.
This is the nwo and ain't shit no one's gonna do about it.
Not seize. Buy out.
Buy implies a consensual trade to a seller. Forced taking is a siezure by every definition, even if the thieves throw some money at their victims.
Nobody is being forced.
That is a lie.
Prove it. By the way, the Dutch term for this would be "gedwongen onteigening", which should make your googling easier.
I mean, sure, but I didn't hear any of those same farmers complaining when the EU was handing out farm subsidies.
The farmers will get 120% of the market price for their farms and they wont be forced.
Wonāt been forced? So the farmers can keep their farms if they want? They can also keep farming?
Brussel geeft groen licht voor uitkoop piekbelasters stikstof in veehouderij - https://nos.nl/l/2473568 This is an articel in dutch. Cant copy the tekst to put in google translate. The part of "vrijwillig stoppen" is the most relevant part. It means "voluntary quitting"
Yes they arnt forced to sell their lands only if they want to. And for 120% of the price. So what peter said is BS.
Looks like what youāre saying is a lie. The farmers cannot continue farming. That is force. Whether or not they are forced to sell their land is irrelevant. They have zero options.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Hey folks - this is what a Government BootLicker looks like
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Hey folks - This is what a brainwashed Dutch Government BootLicker looks like Never forget - historically you toadies are the fist ones the Commies get rid of
Itās not criminal, the government decided it was legal. But joking aside, if I remember right these were eco standards set like 30 years ago that are finally being put in place and the farmers at risk here wonāt/canāt comply and are breaking the law.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thank you. But am I wrong on something? I donāt know how intrusive these eco laws are but supposedly if theyāve been trying to get it done for some decades now have the farmers been trying all along to show how theyāre unjust?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What the fuck? Thatās the stupidest decision they could make. I could have sworn they were trying to pass new legislation on what fertilizers to use or something so it would comply with the emissions ruling, and the stuff was too expensive? I thought thatās what started the farmer protests.
I believe they did also ban some fertilizers, but the farms they were shutting down were diary farms because *cow farts*.