- Sep 2015
-
www.uwgbcommons.org www.uwgbcommons.org
-
level
Working now?
-
At the most basic level
Test 2
-
matter
Test
-
The apparent message is "let's-support-local-business", a kind of community boosterism. Butbuying close to home may be more than a feel-good,it's-worth-paying-more-for-local matter.
Test
-
The apparent message is "let's-support-local-business", a kind of community boosterism. Butbuying close to home may be more than a feel-good,it's-worth-paying-more-for-local matter
How would you describe Schwartz's "move" here? How does she shift the rhetoric of buying locally-produced and locally-sold goods?
Tags
Annotators
URL
-
-
www.wsj.com www.wsj.com
-
Hard to boutique that.
Why does he end like this?
-
I wonder if the 45.3 million Americans living beneath the poverty line—14.5% of the country’s population and almost 18% of North Carolina’s—agree.
Agree with what? Is this an effective rhetorical device? Why or why not?
-
To be sure, Big Agra has been linked to large-scale water depletion, to water and air pollution, even to rising levels of obesity. Yet the “negative externalities” are often exaggerated, such as when they don’t take into consideration the taxes these enterprises—or the taxes consumers of their foodstuffs—pay. In any event, it would be nice if critics acknowledged that inexpensive food frees income that is saved and invested, spent on other goods and on improving the environment and health.
How would you describe the rhetorical "moves" that Coclanis makes in this paragraph?
-
To many folk
Who is the "they" here and what do they say? How does Coclanis shape his thoughts on this particular 'they'?
-
It may not be politically correct to say so, but Big Agra is far more productive than are small “family farms,” particularly organic farms
What is politically correct or not about that statement?
-
spend less than 10% of their disposable income on food,
Why do we spend so little? What are the counterarguments? (If you look any up, please cite them.)
-
large, super-efficient enterprises
What value assumptions does Coclanis make here? What counterarguments could reasonably be made?
-
By trying to remind people that the U.S. is the economic power it is today in large part because of the historical success of its agricultural sector, which was organized along market lines almost from the start—directed by enterprising, commercially-minded farmers operating in a system that protected and promoted private property rights. For much of our history as well, federal and state governments supported agriculture by fostering and disseminating scientific knowledge, and by encouraging export markets. Governments have also generally sought to enhance the safety of food production and processing, and with them the reputation of American farmers and processors.
Please paraphrase Coclanis's explanation of the U.S.A.'s history regarding agriculture.
-
For Chapel Hill is the buckle of the Research Triangle foodie belt, a virtual Valhalla for hard-boiled locavores, iron-fisted organics, no-nonsense vegans, and determined devotees of slow food. Boutique farmers, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) groups, local farmers’ markets and pricey gourmet restaurants are in. “Factory” farms, fast food, dollar meals and supermarkets are out—at least among food snobs and “aware” students.
What ideologies is Coclanis listing here? How does he describe them? How does his language reveal his bias, and why does he craft his bias in this particular way?
-
-
www.slate.com www.slate.com
-
guilt-ridden anguish
Is this perhaps an overstatement? #localgbcomp
-