What's really in your Xmas lunch?
Discussion
Plotloss said:
Anyone else see this last night?
Bit of an eye opener to say the least, especially the imported meat stuff.
Supermarkets really do have a lot to answer for.
yep was watching it and rick stein on the other there was quite a bit of difference!!
mind u she annoyed me at the end going on about how many calories etc a christmas day contained...SO WHAT ENJOY YOURSELF LOVE ITS CHRISTMAS
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Basically, lost on most unfortunately.
They had footage of a chap on the street in London in the 60's selling turkeys.
They made the point that at those prices, today would be about £65 a bird.
However a similar size bird today is about a tenner.
Where do people think the margins come from?
Why do people have the belief that they have a right to eat meat whatever the cost to the animal?
Oooooh it winds me up just thinking about it.
Plotloss said:
Basically, lost on most unfortunately.
They had footage of a chap on the street in London in the 60's selling turkeys.
They made the point that at those prices, today would be about £65 a bird.
However a similar size bird today is about a tenner.
Where do people think the margins come from?
Why do people have the belief that they have a right to eat meat whatever the cost to the animal?
Oooooh it winds me up just thinking about it.
Just what I was going to say!
If people want a chicken for £2.99 then they can't expect anything other than mushy crap pumped full of nasty stuff.
Plotloss said:
Why do people have the belief that they have a right to eat meat whatever the cost to the animal?
The problem the butchers wives found was that even if the product said British, where were are supposed to have higher standards, the meat could have come from unregistered sources.
So even if you think your buying food that has come from animals that have been treated well we are being misguided
Cotty said:Our dear, dear friends at a big big mutliple in the UK move their lambs over the Welsh border for about two weeks, just so they can say they're 'Welsh Lamb'...
Why do people have the belief that they have a right to eat meat whatever the cost to the animal?
The problem the butchers wives found was that even if the product said British, where were are supposed to have higher standards, the meat could have come from unregistered sources.
So even if you think your buying food that has come from animals that have been treated well we are being misguided
Quite and I'm right behind those pig farmers wives, it may seem petty what they are doing but it shouldnt have to be the responsibility of the consumer.
We have these husbandry guidlines because it is what is acceptable to us as a nation. To circumvent these by means of importation purely to maintain a price focussed leverage over market share is doing a disservice to their customers and their core UK farm suppliers.
If it costs £6 to raise a chicken, then the price should be cost plus margin. For far too long we have viewed quality produce as a right which has led to a willing to pay - costs model at the cost of animal welfare.
It stinks.
We have these husbandry guidlines because it is what is acceptable to us as a nation. To circumvent these by means of importation purely to maintain a price focussed leverage over market share is doing a disservice to their customers and their core UK farm suppliers.
If it costs £6 to raise a chicken, then the price should be cost plus margin. For far too long we have viewed quality produce as a right which has led to a willing to pay - costs model at the cost of animal welfare.
It stinks.
Plotloss said:
If it costs £6 to raise a chicken, then the price should be cost plus margin. For far too long we have viewed quality produce as a right which has led to a willing to pay - costs model at the cost of animal welfare.
It stinks.
It's a free market, if you want something better pay the extra for a free range chicken; they are more widely available these days.
I've bought a few from Sainsbury's myself, they cost nearly twice as much and the taste is not that much better, but I suppose it's better morally.
I already do, supermarkets supply only cans and cleaning products in my eyes.
I am fully in favour of a free market but when the long term costs of that free market impact everyone in terms of an additional health burden then that market should by all reasonable means be tempered or at the very least effectively controlled.
No one has a right to eat meat at a cost which is less than maintaining a healthy base product. Without doubt this argument has a highly moral stance but it is not an argument based on morality alone.
We're slitting our own throats albeit very very very slowly.
I am fully in favour of a free market but when the long term costs of that free market impact everyone in terms of an additional health burden then that market should by all reasonable means be tempered or at the very least effectively controlled.
No one has a right to eat meat at a cost which is less than maintaining a healthy base product. Without doubt this argument has a highly moral stance but it is not an argument based on morality alone.
We're slitting our own throats albeit very very very slowly.
Plotloss said:
I am fully in favour of a free market but when the long term costs of that free market impact everyone in terms of an additional health burden then that market should by all reasonable means be tempered or at the very least effectively controlled.
No one has a right to eat meat at a cost which is less than maintaining a healthy base product. Without doubt this argument has a highly moral stance but it is not an argument based on morality alone.
And there we disagree, if someone wants to voluntarily eat free-range chicken or eggs and what have you that is their decision. If someone else wants to eat the cheapest chicken they can I have no problem with that, as long as a minimum standard of animal welfare is adhered too.
It should be a matter of choice not government compulsion.
As for health costs, do you favour a complete ban on smoking?, that imposes a greater additional health burden
Jaglover said:
I am fully in favour of a free market but when the long term costs of that free market impact everyone in terms of an additional health burden then that market should by all reasonable means be tempered or at the very least effectively controlled.
No one has a right to eat meat at a cost which is less than maintaining a healthy base product. Without doubt this argument has a highly moral stance but it is not an argument based on morality alone.
And there we disagree, if someone wants to voluntarily eat free-range chicken or eggs and what have you that is their decision. If someone else wants to eat the cheapest chicken they can I have no problem with that, as long as a minimum standard of animal welfare is adhered too.
It should be a matter of choice not government compulsion.
As for health costs, do you favour a complete ban on smoking?, that imposes a greater additional health burden
isnt his point that min standards are not being adhered to though and wont be at that price?
smoking is ure choice the fluffywuffy animals dont get one.
Jaglover said:
If it costs £6 to raise a chicken, then the price should be cost plus margin. For far too long we have viewed quality produce as a right which has led to a willing to pay - costs model at the cost of animal welfare.
It stinks.
It's a free market, if you want something better pay the extra for a free range chicken; they are more widely available these days.
I've bought a few from Sainsbury's myself, they cost nearly twice as much and the taste is not that much better, but I suppose it's better morally.
So is that free range all their lives or free range for 2 weeks? Does it say on the packet?
Fatuous argument, smokers contribute far more than they consume as they pay a huge amount of tax in the way of duty and live shorter lives.
Trouble is, whilst minimal animal welfare standards are being adhered to in the UK the standards are far more relaxed for other EU member states. Importation therefore negates any concept of a morally clean meat and thus creates a stacked deck in favour of the supermarkets when negotiating with UK farmers.
The consumer in all of this is additionally hoodwinked by sharp marketing practice.
Wiltshire Ham - Produce of the EU...
Trouble is, whilst minimal animal welfare standards are being adhered to in the UK the standards are far more relaxed for other EU member states. Importation therefore negates any concept of a morally clean meat and thus creates a stacked deck in favour of the supermarkets when negotiating with UK farmers.
The consumer in all of this is additionally hoodwinked by sharp marketing practice.
Wiltshire Ham - Produce of the EU...
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff