Hacker News Reader

Comment by CydeWeys | Hacker News Reader

Maybe (hopefully?) China will shut down these markets after this outbreak. They've been known to take serious measures in the past when necessary. Surely the benefit of these markets cannot outweigh their costs (including on the local wildlife, not just infectious diseases).

View on HN

I've been told by friends in China that modern cities like Beijing shut down these markets years ago. It's still a holdover from the huge migration from rural to urban environments, and a cultural preference for eating wild meats, more so than a cost of living issue.

Wuhan is a modern city.

I've never been to Beijing but I have visited two of the other tier one cities and I can assure you wet markets still exist there.

In places like Singapore (Chinese dominant culture, but different government), wet markets exist, but they don't sell unregulated wild meat.

I gather the one in Wuhan wasn't supposed to either, but either enforcement was lacking or they were paid to look the other way.

How much unregulated wild meat is there in the city-state of Singapore to begin with?

Close to none.

Recent and relevant interview from All Things Considered (NPR):

https://www.npr.org/2020/01/22/798644707/why-wet-markets-per...

One interesting point was they had tried to discourage these markets in the past and replace them with supermarkets, but people didn't want to switch. These markets offered food cheaper, people like them, they might offer opportunities to socialize, and they offer wild animals which are traditionally viewed as healthy and a sign of wealth.

Of course, the Chinese government can do a more authoritarian crackdown on it than what they tried in the past. Also, maybe this outbreak could change public opinion.

Won’t that just drive it underground? Then nobody would even know where it started when the next outbreak happens.

Don't underestimate how effectively a totalitarian and surveillance state like China can be in discouraging behaviors they don't want. People aren't willing to risk their lives just to eat exotic animals. And that could be what's at stake here; witness what happened to some of the people involved in the melamine baby milk formula scandal.

Seems like they are already risking their lives eating exotic animals.

Thinking that the wild animals are more healthy

You can drive it underground because, I think, the problem is coming from having too many animals/people in a small crowded place. If people were to raise their own cattle it'd be much healthier[-].

- Not really an expert, might be wrong.

That's a very western-centric view of things. I'm assuming trying to draw parallels from happened when the US tried alcohol prohibition, which failed partially due to government greed. These things can be effective in other cultures, especially when people believe in the cause (e.g. see how quickly and efficiently alcohol consumption practically ceased overnight in Islamic history).

It is because of the wealth disparity. A massive chunk of the population lives in absolute poverty. I don't see them fixing that anytime soon.

Maybe they could take some of the wealth some Chinese have accumulated and give it to the poor and needy, but that's probably just communist crazy talk from me.

Edit: typos

> massive chunk of the population lives in absolute poverty

30 years ago yes, but not anymore.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY?locations=C...

Also, the rural folks living in poverty are not the ones buying exotic animals in a big city like Wuhan. Although they may well be at the start of the supply chain, catching it for the well-heeled city folks treating guests to exotic banquets.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com