If India / Asia starts eating as much meat/dairy as Americans/Europeans do, we're @#$%^&*.
https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-meat-type?coun...
In India, they just call it food. About 40% of Indians are vegetarian[1].
[1]: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/07/08/eight-in-te...
This is how it should be everywhere. Non-vegetarian food is massively subsidised in the West. A Big Mac ought to cost tens of dollars, not five.
But of course, vegetables and such should be cheaper than meat.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-meat-type?coun... (updated, Pakistan 20kg/person/year, 5x less people than India)
Its varieties include additives like chicken or meat but that's about it.
Almost always its given as a way of offering to "feed the poor" and anyone around just turns up and is given a handful.
Don't know if any other place does something similar.
Edit: yeah, plain tahri is just rice cooked with turmeric and garnished with deep fried onions or spring onions.
A way to mass feed a lot of people for cheap.
So maybe it's just a holdover term to dig don't any pulao mixed with a tharka?
At least the "tahri chawal" dish I'm looking at on google seems to be what my parents call pulao
Our version of rice is plain, without embellishments.
A paupers food.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJP3x46PCZs
And a random pulao recipe
> Tehari is a rice-based dish that is popular in Bangladesh and Pakistan, as well as other parts of South Asia. While the basic preparation of the dish is similar, there can be differences in the ingredients and flavor profiles used in Bangladeshi and Pakistani versions of Tehari.
> One of the main differences between Bangladeshi and Pakistani Tehari is the type of meat used. In some regions of Bangladesh, beef is a popular choice for Tehari, while in Pakistan, goat or lamb may be more commonly used. In some regions of Pakistan, there are also variations of Tehari that are made with chicken or fish.
> Another difference is the level of spiciness. Bangladeshi Tehari is often spicier, with the use of more hot chili peppers and spices such as cinnamon and cardamom. Pakistani Tehari, on the other hand, may be milder in flavor, with the use of more subtle spices such as cumin and coriander.
> The type of rice used can also differ. In Bangladesh, aromatic long-grain rice such as Basmati is often used, while in Pakistan, a shorter grain rice may be used.
> Finally, there can be variations in the way the dish is served. In Bangladesh, Tehari is often served with a side of lentil soup and a hard-boiled egg, while in Pakistan, it may be served with a side of raita (a yogurt-based side dish) or pickles.
> Overall, while both Bangladeshi and Pakistani Tehari share many similarities, there can be subtle differences in the ingredients and preparation that reflect the culinary traditions and preferences of each region.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10...
https://www.industrytap.com/worlds-15-biggest-ships-create-m...
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56723560
The media keeps picking on my stakes, ICE engines, decently warm home, etc, because they get paid to divert attention. And then the naive do gooders pick it up and hammer their fellow working class citizens. For what? If everybody on my level makes his life 50% less comfortable we won't even make a single digit percent dent on the environment impact.
Don't shit on the environment. Don't leave the lights and heating on for no reason, don't throw trash in nature, don't get a 7 liter engine for in town driving and so on. Those are the only kind of things an average guy can realistically do. And most of it he can't afford to do anyway. But when you come after my steak sandwich this is where I draw the line.
You can enjoy it all you want if you take responsibility for its consequences. Right now the externalities of a lot of our actions are not taken into account for many things, and so the people who suffer the consequences are not the ones that are enjoying the benefits.
I was a strict vegetarian at the time, but I wonder how many döners a helicopter ride is.
> https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10...
you're saying that the big polluters are Shell and Aramco, and then complaining that we're asking you to stop using ICE engines? Who do you think Shell are selling all this oil to?
> https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56723560
"The wealthiest 5% alone – the so-called “polluter elite” - contributed 37% of emissions growth between 1990 and 2015."
Given the forum we are conversing in, I'm pretty certain we're all in the world's wealthiest 5%..
> Don't shit on the environment. Don't leave the lights and heating on for no reason, don't throw trash in nature, don't get a 7 liter engine for in town driving and so on. Those are the only kind of things an average guy can realistically do. And most of it he can't afford to do anyway. But when you come after my steak sandwich this is where I draw the line.
So basically, "don't make me do anything I don't want to do" ?
Commercial and industrial entities. Retail for cars is little by comparison. See the 15 ships vs all the cars article.
> Given the forum we are conversing in, I'm pretty certain we're all in the world's wealthiest 5%..
What can I even say here? Why are you speaking for me?
> So basically, "don't make me do anything I don't want to do" ?
You don't need to maliciously "summarize" my arguments. I have already done so in the first sentence of the paragraph. And that was "Don't shit on the environment."
> I think you're misunderstanding the articles...
And I think you are trying really hard to misunderstand what I'm saying just for internet points.
And who are they selling to? At the end of the day, it's feeding us, the consumers
> What can I even say here? Why are you speaking for me?
An annual home/family income of more than 50k USD before tax puts you in this 5%. I think this covers the vast majority of people here
We where talking about personal ICE cars. Now you're switching it up to try to win the argument. I'm done with you as you are not replying in good faith.
> An annual home/family income of more than 50k USD before tax puts you in this 5%. I think this covers the vast majority of people here
And I still think you should only speak for yourself as regards to income. You pompous self righteous ignorant american.
That's kind of obfuscatory though. It's kinda like arguing that supermarkets are the ones responsible for bio-industry because they're the ones who buy so much meat from the farmers, while ignoring the demand created by their customers.
The argument is no way similar to meat and supermarkets, because no consumer demands that his goods be shipped with two stroke diesel engines that burn what is basically crude oil.
As I understood it regulating the ships is made difficult because they stay in international waters and off-load their cargoes onto small ships for the last leg of the deliveries. The companies maximise their profits because that's what companies do. If you have ideas about how to regulate against their pollution I'd (genuinely) be very glad to hear them.
With the meat thing, I basically look at purchasing as voting. If you buy goods shipped from around the world and you understand what that means from a pollution perspective then you're effectively voting for it to continue happening.
Personally I try to consider these things when making decisions. Not everyone is in the position to have the time or opportunity to look for alternatives and that's fine, but personally I find having that luxury and not taking it to be morally questionable.
Trains.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bering_Strait_crossing
> If you buy goods shipped from around the world and you understand what that means from a pollution perspective
"You want to reduce the carbon footprint of your food? Focus on what you eat, not whether your food is local ...
Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%.
Very little food is air-freighted; it accounts for only 0.16% of food miles.
Many of the foods people assume to come by air are actually transported by boat – avocados and almonds are prime examples. Shipping one kilogram of avocados from Mexico to the United Kingdom ... is only around 8% of avocados’ total footprint. Even when shipped at great distances, its emissions are much less than locally-produced animal products."
But the points you're making are fair. Indeed the pollution involved in meat consumption is a big reason why I don't eat meat. There are many contributing aspects to the carbon morality of the products we buy and I try to be mindful of them where possible.
Not beigh wasteful is all I can do and I can't even afford to be wasteful so that's that.
I heard that just over half the American military budget is for fuel
Anyway, feels good now that I'm older and there is more and more science backed evidence to show you can be healthy without animal based products and how much better it is for the environment, but I wish I could go back and tell that lonely 10 year old kid being mocked by other kids and adults that he made the right choice.
...and good on you "do-gooders" who have the strength to think beyond yourself and change your habits even if it isn't convenient to you. You make the world go round and better to be in
Yeesh.