Greetings Economists,
On Mar 24, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Bill Burgess wrote:
Please be a little more critical and reflective about a campaign
that targets fishers and indigenous people who hunt for a living in
the traditionally-poorest province in the country. I used to work in
a cattle/pork slaughterhouse so I know what tender mercies went into
your meat from the supermarket, notably the veal.
Doyle;
Wearing furs for clothing seems a bit of a stretch for human
consumption anymore. People are not tied to selling furs for making a
living. Traditional living is not tied to commercial fur trade. I
think it questionable to put economic interests of the fur industry in
alignment with indigenous rights. That makes poor people the fig leaf
for using fur as clothing. Providing jobs and a living is the key to
poverty, not the specific occupation of the fur trade.
Uneven development is capitalist patterns of economic activity. Poor
provinces deprived of some heinous activity they make money off of is
not a difficult choice to make. Replace one set of work with another
that merits universal interests.
thanks,
Doyle Saylor
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
