Im aware of this.
So sad.

I don't think this guy really knows what he's talking about. To me it sounds like he heard something on the news and kinda ran crazy with it and is talking out of his butt using some real facts and making up the rest.

My source: Nothing, same as that guy.

Also I think the guy who posted the vid, who isn't the same as the guy in the vid, is trying to sell books.

Yeah its kinda like that except instead of a fireman its some random guy on the internet.

There is some truth in what he's saying but it's taking a little sprinkling of the truth and then adding a whole bunch of other stuff that is so much made up nonsense.

Is it true that some farmers are throwing away their product? Absolutely. Specifically I 've heard about milk being dumped...it wasn't being dumped because people were forcing the farmers to, they were dumping it because they didn't have any one to sell the milk to. That's well known infrastructure problem...and overproduction is a common problem in the farming industry as well. Remember when everyone was pulling their hair out some years ago when the government was paying farmers not to grow crops? That was a bailout measure for farmers but people were saying similar stuff because they didn't bother to understand what was actually happening.

Are they being forced at gunpoint to do so in service a plot to depopulate? Excuse me if I'm skeptical on this point.

To continue the metaphor, i think when my house isn't burned down at the end of the day I'll have the satisfaction of not taken this guy seriously.

Speaking of burning stuff down, I actually found the comments more amusing than the video.

Yesterday or whenever I originally was checking out the video, in one comment someone asked the obvious question, paraphrasing "who is asking you to destroy your harvest? Why don't you, you know, just not do it?" Poster replied saying that some guy tried that and the next night his farm mysteriously burned down (how the hell would he know that)

Commenter replied "source?"

It's not there anymore. I'm willing to bet the poster deleted it because he didn't like having to answer a real question.

Also there are serveral comments where people asked "how can I help" and poster was like "buy my book." Can you blame me for not taking him seriously? Like come on, talk about dipping the tip of your thang in the sauce your serving.

I'm a demanding consumer of information. Some commenters give the poster the benefit of the doubt and ask for sources, proof, etc. I'm not that patient. I shouldn't have to ask for sources or do my own research to check to see if what you're saying is true. Especially if you're talking about a super secret plot to lower the US population which apparently the government decided to tell the farmers and this one is speaking out because he's such a swell guy. the burden of proof is on you if you're gonna hit me with some knowledge. I shouldn't just have to trust that you know what you're talking about it cus you got a charming southern drawl and a big ridiculous cowboy hat and plaid shirt. Like GEEZ he looks TOO much like a farmer, that's one of the reasons why I don't trust him. Like he literally looks like someone decided to go to a halloween party as a farmer.

As I freely admit, I don't really take the guy or the video seriously and was hesitant to comment at all but decided to just to give my take on why I don't think this is something to be taken seriously, as I think it's something worth saying.

Something that is interesting to me is how people say things and trying to smell B.S. is something that is a useful skill to have. My personal theory is that the best way to practice this is to find something where you know the person is probably being disingenuous, untruthful, or perhaps even unintentionally untruthful. Then try to decide what the "tells" are. That's really my sole interest here and, as you genuinely seem to believe the video, I don't blame you for being frustrated that my comments are more concerned with HOW things are said and not what is being said. If you don't think what I'm saying is worth responding to as a result, fair enough. I think the post would be more boring, though, if I just said "Absolutely right I'm gonna buy that book and start growing my own food TODAY."

My point about the farmer costume thing is simply that, whether or not this guy actually is a farmer, rancher, whatever...he clearly chose his outfit such that he wanted to look like one. That alone, in my opinion ought to be at least mildly suspicious. It's subtle yet to me it's like you were a fireman and just causally said "I'm definitely a fireman, you can tell by my outfit, so don't question it."

You're right, changing who hosted the video isn't sole point for me, that was just one detail among many that turns me off about it, so just changing that one thing isn't going to magically make me believe everything the guys says.

The "how would he know" is the most important thing, in my opinion. You clearly trust that this person is telling the truth, so you must believe that he has a way of knowing. That's implicit in any situation where you are taking someone's word on something. If you are going to take someone's word on something, without evidence, you need to believe two things: They aren't intentionally trying to deceive you and They must have some way of knowing the thing they are trying to tell you. If you don't believe BOTH of those things than you have no reason to take the person's word on something.

To continue with the metaphor, cus it's fun:

I'm a skeptic. So if a fireman comes into my house and says "There's a fire get out." I'm going to say "I don't see any smoke sir. Can you show me where the fire is." and if his response is "No, I'm a fireman, trust me." Then I'm going to ask him to leave. And if my house DOES end up burning down around my head, I'm not going to feel bad about not believing him because he didn't give me a good reason to believe him. It's not my fault he wasn't convincing enough, I did the best I could, and maybe the fireman was right all along but I'm not going to abandon my house just cus he told me to.

Intellectual exercise can be "fun" but that doesn't mean it is disingenuous. I'm not just trolling. I'm just saying I enjoy thoughtful discussion.

That said, I think there is a very, deadly serious note in this to be teased out. And that is, indeed, food shortages. The reason why there is a food shortage is because people are buying more food than they need right now. I think part of that is just everyday ordinary panic but I'm sure some of it is because people see videos like this and stock up on food and preemptively taking food out of their neighbor's pantry. So it isn't exactly just fun and games. Videos like this that spread fear and panic may (and probably do, since so many commenters seem to take it seriously) cause food stress for people.

I'm trying to assume the best intentions in people though, difficult as it may be since there really is no evidence for what the guy is saying. So I neutrally suggest that people think more about the stuff that they feed their brains.

Assuming the best intentions, if it turns out that everything this guy is saying really is a load of crap, you'd want to be pointed out to that, wouldn't you? You're certainly not trying to disseminate incorrect information, so you oughta welcome it when people try to question the information given. That's what it means to be a believer in truth, , because no one is perfect, and there's always a possibility of being wrong about something. I'm doing nothing more than stating my honest opinion about what he is saying. That can't possibly be out of place in a post that is serious about the truth.

By that logic, it must be that the toilet paper makers being forced to destroy toilet paper. Likewise with people who make bleach and hand sanitizer, etc.

It isn't as simple as just ordering more stuff...there is a supply chain and when there is a sudden stress on one end of the supply chain, shortages happen, at least in the short term. There is also a fear of over-ordering on the part of retailors because they don't know when consumption is going to return to normal levels, so they won't necessarily order more bulk in things, especially perishables, but even non-perishables when you take into account that there is often a limited amount of space for such things.

Like you say, there is overproduction at times, and that's often why farmers end up getting rid of product, not because someone is being forced to.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/02/upstate-ny-dairy-...

I understand why the bs comment came off as being pretentious but I was just trying to say that I find the guy to be disingenuous and why I feel that way, I'm sure you know a thing or two about spotting a lie BUT then again I don't get why anyone would believe the guy in the video. I mean yes, that drawl is pretty sexy but once the star eyes pass I don't think there is much there.

Notice how none of the farmers in the article are wearing plaid shirts or cowboy hats....sorry had to say it LOL.

I was just making a point of reason. You're saying the reason why there is a food shortage is that farmers are destroying the food. If we apply the same reasoning to toilet paper, then, it stands to reason, people are destroying the toilet paper they've made as well. If that is what you're saying, then I guess at least you're being consistent. Though I'm not sure how that would fit into the government's depopulation plot. Unless making people less sanitary is part of that plot.

I'm confused as to whether you're making a purely semantical point here or trying to disagree with what I said. I said "supply chain" not supply. Perhaps you don't like that term, but it's the one I used, and I think it was clear what I meant by it. I mean the WHOLE supply chain, not just one end of it. Meaning the producer (farmers in this case), transportation comapnies, wholesalers, and retailors, and finally the consumer. Those are all parts of what I'm talking about. You could have all the food in the world, if you don't have a way to get it to the people who want to buy it, it's not going to do them any good.

There is a tension in probably all kinds of business between capacity and efficiency. If you invest in too much capacity, you're being less inefficient, and you have to sacrifice capacity for efficiency. This is what I'm talking about (I'm not trying to be pedantic here, I'm just trying to be really clear on what I mean because I often feel like you misunderstand what I'm saying):

I'm a shipping company. I have three trucks. Given the amount of business I get, three trucks is enough. I'm not going to buy three more trucks, because it would be a waste. That's what I mean by efficiency versus capacity.

Now if all of a sudden demand increases, and now I DO have enough business to warrant three more trucks, I have a decision to make as a shipping company. Am I going to invest in more trucks? What if demand drops back down in two weeks? Then I just bought three trucks just so they can sit in my lot and collecting dust and the investment I made in them didn't cover the only two weeks of extra business I got, so instead of simply benefiting from the increase demand with the capacity I had, I invested in more capacity that I didn't really need in the end, and I'm at a net LOSS now.

But, on the other hand, if I DON'T invest in more trucks, that means, in the short term, at least, some people are going to have to wait to get their stuff because I only got three trucks and I can only handle so much capacity. So now that's how a SHORTAGE happens.

These are the kinds of cost versus reward decisions that cause shortages to happen, at least in terms of increase stress on the supply chain. I mentioned in my other comment on how this happens at the retail level. That's what I mean when I say "it's not as simple as just ordering more stuff." You can put in a request, but it might take a month instead of a week to get to you, or maybe you don't even WANT to order more stuff because you're afraid demand is going to drop back down because the only reason why people are buying more is that they are panicking. If they suddenly stop pannicking, than the retailor stocked up for no reason and now they have product taking up space that is going to take possibly months to move when they could have used that space to buy a product that would have sold faster.

I've worked in retail, not in the food industry, but this kind of thing happens even when there isn't a pandemic going on. One week a toy is super popular and a toy retailor stocks up and the next day it's old hat, and now the toy retailor has a whole bunch of toys they can't sell to save their lives. That's why it's always so hard to find the hot new toy at Christmas time...it's far more ideal for the store to sell out of the high demand item and order in gradual increments than to order a surplus and then possibly not sell it all.

When you're talking about stuff that's made on a farm, I'm not sure if venerable is the right term. One obvious thing with vegetables is that freezing most vegetables leads to a drop in quality (as you know if you've ever accidentally tossed mushrooms in the freezer). I am a vegetarian but I do know even meat will eventually go bad in a freezer and freezing too much can lead to freezer burn which I imagine is much harder to manage with you have hundreds of pounds of stuff to work with.

If you're just refrigerating, the stuff will last a little longer than if you weren't, but not certainly not more than a month, depending on what we're talking about.

And the other problem with "the farmers could just store it" is...space. Do they have space and capacity to store stock that they is meant to be moved within a short time period? If they are efficient, the answer is no, that's that tension between capacity and efficiency that I'm talking about. It's often cheaper for a farmer who perishable stuff to throw it out than it is to invest in a way to store it when they then have to live with maintaining that increased capacity.

This is what I'm talking about being able to smell B.S. The video is just some guy saying stuff. Trying to get likes on facebook and a bigger social media following, I assume, or maybe he's simply off his meds, who knows.

The article has ACTUAL farmers who were interviewed. It has names of actual people and farms. It even has a picture of farmers dumping the milk. PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE. If I wanted to I could call the farm in the article and ask them if they did that interview. I could travel to the farm myself and see what is going on because they have actual evidence that can be independently verified. when you have that it makes you a lot more credible than some guy's say-so.

So you're believing some random guy on the internet over some other random guy on the internet but the random guy you're not believing actually has specifics and evidence to back up what he's saying. Where's the logic in that?

But hey, you don't like the new york post, you think maybe they're fabricating the evidence. I guess if they were the only one saying it, that might make sense.

https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/empty-shelves...

https://auburnpub.com/news/local/upstate-ny-dai...

https://www.syracuse.com/coronavirus/2020/04/co...

https://hudsonvalleypost.com/new-york-farmers-f...

Real people and real companies referenced in the article that if you wanted to you could call or even look up on facebook and give them a message. Verifiable source. Not just some guy with a camera.

And just to be clear, I am not making fun of farmers, I'm making fun of that guy specifically.