The Price of Rat Meat Quadruples in Cambodia

[MacGuffin]

Where in my post did I suggest rat is considered a delicacy. Reuters did I didn't. You are disagreeing with article you yourself posted not my post. I agree Cambodians would rather eat beef, but rat is not the last resort food one may think. Rat like dogmeat is a poor man's food much like rabbit is considered in England. Eating rat does not have the social stigma it does in the west.
Regarding "increased corporatization", my point was in response to denu pointing out that foreign aid gets stolen and asking "what other recourse could there be". I suggested foreign investment not aid. Almost every government in the world, including my own England, seeks to attact foreign investment so I am not surprised Cambodia is also. I never suggested the Cambodian government wasn't. I was suggesting western governments could encourage multinationals to open factories there to provide jobs and stimulate the economy as an alternative to aid. You disagree that increased capitalism is a solution for Cambodia. Well it works for America and Europe and worked for the Asian Tigers and newly devloped nations. What alternative do you see, surely not peasant farmers and smallholdings.
I didn't follow your leap from foreign investment instead of foreign aid to who is cutting down trees. I know who is cutting down the trees and never suggested it was the peasants. The reuters report attributed the increase in rat eating to floods and rats being easies to catch coupled with the increase in the price of beef. What is the relationship between deforestation and beef price increase. Deforestation has been going on for years. It has not suddenly increased. I was suggesting that just as the sharp increase in food prices in America is due to oil prices the same is true in Cambodia, but the effects are far greater in Cambodia than America.
You find it "hilarious" that a government official says the kids are happy hunting rat. I find nothing a hilarious in kids having to hunt rat to support their family. I would find nothing hilarious in a corrupt government official from a third world country misleading people. no more than I if the American President did. I do believe that South East Asian rural children find it fun catching rats just as Americans find it find to go raccoon hunting. But, if you read the report you posted you will note the official did not say they the kids were happy rat hunting, he said they were happy "making some money" and I am sure that is true. Are you telling me that american kids aren't thrilled to make money.
Your post seemed to have a mocking air to it, which disturbed me and prompted my reply. You suggest that misappropriated foreign aid will "eventually find its way into the g-strings of Cambodian prostitutes". This seems to promote the sterotype that all South East Asian countries have is prostitutes. It's they have prosititutes and it's true cheap prostitutes is the reason many westerners are "in need of a holiday in Cambodia" but I didn't see the reason for that mocking jibe. America has prostitutes and US politicians aren't averse to using them as Governor Spitzer recently demonstrated. Somehow I don't think the prostitutes' g-strings are big enough to hold the millions of dollars stolen from aid. I find it more probable those stolen millions are in America invested in american bluechips or in the hands of american arms manufacturers.
And for your information I have lived, not vacationed, many years in South East Asia and have eaten rat, dog and even pussy!

[Thorne]

And for your information I have lived, not vacationed, many years in South East Asia and have eaten rat, dog and even pussy!

Not overcooked, I hope. It's always better with a little pink inside!

[Virulent]

Your post seemed to have a mocking air to it, which disturbed me and prompted my reply.

I'm not mocking you, though I do think you're demonstrably wrong. If I seem abrasive, I apologize, and I hope you no longer feel that I'm mocking you, yet continue to reply anyway.

Where in my post did I suggest rat is considered a delicacy. Reuters did I didn't. You are disagreeing with article you yourself posted not my post.

I can't find that anywhere in the article. You're right though that you didn't say that rat meat was a delicacy. I never said you did, either. There are two other instances where you claim some of my simply factual statements are meant as claims of ignorance on your behalf; when I cite a fact there is not a concurrent implication that you specifically didn't know it.

I agree Cambodians would rather eat beef, but rat is not the last resort food one may think. Rat like dogmeat is a poor man's food much like rabbit is considered in England. Eating rat does not have the social stigma it does in the west.

I think you're splitting hairs to distinguish between "poor man's food" and "last resort food" in a country where so many die of malnutrition every year. I will agree that it doesn't have the same social stigma though; do you think that might be because the people who can afford rat get to watch the people who can't die in the street?

Regarding "increased corporatization", my point was in response to denu

If your replies are specific to one individual, and you'd rather not have others comment on them, you can always private message them I suppose. Or do you just mean you'd rather I not reply to you in general?

I was suggesting western governments could encourage multinationals to open factories there to provide jobs and stimulate the economy as an alternative to aid. You disagree that increased capitalism is a solution for Cambodia. Well it works for America and Europe and worked for the Asian Tigers and newly devloped nations...

...I didn't follow your leap from foreign investment instead of foreign aid to who is cutting down trees.

a.) The Asian Tigers attracted foreign investment while retaining tight state controls on profits from natural resources. The Chinese government makes a killing on their rape of the country's few remaining lumber stands. Cambodia, contrarily, is exporting natural resources with only individual benefit.

b.) I am not going to take the time to talk about the differences between Cambodia aspiring to an industrial standard of living in the 21st century and Europe and America doing it in the 19th century. That would be a book. If you think there is any merit to this simile, then consider me to have conceded to you.

Maybe I'm being confusing. Here's a clear premise: Cambodia's forests were cut, primarily, by Western lumber concerns. There had to have been a terrific amount of money made in the clear-cutting of Cambodia's forest. That the vast majority of the people still suffer in abject poverty seems like a clear demonstration that foreign investment, such as that of lumber permits, is ineffective (and in fact, only serves to enrich those who already have more wealth than any human needs).

What is the relationship between deforestation and beef price increase.

Other than they're both emblematic of a nation in crisis where the poor are getting screwed extra hard? Regardless, I didn't say there was a relationship deeper than nationality.

Deforestation has been going on for years. It has not suddenly increased.

I suppose it depends on your time scale. Its been going on for less than 40 years. To go from 70% forest to 3.1% forest that quick seems pretty sudden to me. Most importantly though, the people didn't benefit.

As to your last two paragraphs... I was making what I thought was an obvious attempt at humor (Denu got it, at least). I have no interest in defending the epistemological accuracy of statements made in jest.