Consumers: only buy the cheapest regardless of how it’s produced, ensuring a race to the bottom
Producers: lower standards to increase production so they can sell meat for the lowest cost
Consumers when they find out what that entails: shocked pikachu face
I highly doubt that chain of causation to be true. Had people paid more, the producers would still lower their cost base as much as possible, in order to maximize profits.
Corporations: Under pay employees for decades
Consumers: only buy the cheapest regardless of how it’s produced, ensuring a race to the bottom
Producers: lower standards to increase production so they can sell meat for the lowest cost
Consumers when they find out what that entails: shocked pikachu face
FTFY
also “meat eaters: 😲”
It is in part a consumer issue. Consumers want things as cheaply as possible, and companies that produce as cheaply as possible sell more product. We’ve seen the same issue with apparel; America wants cheap clothing, and so the mills in the US have largely closed, and most production has been moved overseas in order to make the final products cheap enough.
And while it’s partly a consumer issue, the fact that wages haven’t kept up with productivity–that is, more and more money is being skimmed out of the system by investors and executives rather than going to the workers–has been the driver towards making consumer goods more and more cheaply, simply because people have less purchasing power.
Consumers have limited visibility into the conditions under which their products are made, and consumer behavior does not always result in the most desirable outcome for the public. Which makes it a regulation problem. That’s why regulation exists.
Just because something is expensive doesn’t always mean that the standard of living of those making the product is any better. Nike sweat shops for example.
Consumers dont have a lot of transparent choices here. Governments have roles in regulating and making the true cost of products more transparent. I’d say businesses have that responsibility, but clearly that doesn’t work, otherwise we wouldn’t be here etc. Businesses dont want people feeling guilty when they buy their product, so why would they tell people.
For a business to be competitive in a harm free supply chain, then the playing field needs to be levelled. Transparent supply chains everywhere, make everyone feel guilty all the time, maybe something would change.
Just because something is expensive doesn’t always mean that the standard of living of those making the product is any better.
Oh, absolutely. But when mills, etc. are in the US, there’s more direct control over the living conditions of the workers.
make everyone feel guilty all the time,
Then people just tune it all out, and learn to accept the inherent violence of the system. Sadly.
These problems are not all the fault of either the producers or consumers, we’re both part of a fucked up cycle within an exploitative economic system and influence each other.
It doesn’t make any more sense for the consumer to wash their hands of all blame and consume without concern and push all the blame on the producer than it does to say it’s all about our “carbon footprint”.
I wouldn’t let consumers off the hook so easily.
Every time I comment in a thread with a topic like this suggesting people simply opt out of animal agriculture by changing what they buy at the store, I’m typically downvoted more than I’m upvoted.
Even the people who know we’re at higher risk of zoonotic diseases due to animal ag don’t care - they like the taste of meat, milk, and cheese and another pandemic just isn’t enough to get them to stop buying it.
In other words its not because of the consumers, but because of the greedy skimming off the top.
Look, no one decides that they want to work in the mines because it’s good for society as a whole to have consumer goods made from what they mine. Everyone expects to be paid in some way.
If I’m making jeans as an independent designer–which I tried doing, briefly–and I decide that my time is worth $20/hr, then I’m going to have to charge around $500 for a single pair of jeans after you figure in all the time needed to make a single pair that’s been customized to fit a single, specific person. (Maybe more; I haven’t done the math in a decade or so.) Almost no one is going to want to, or be able to afford to pay that. Am I skimming off the top? No, I’m charging a fair–and actually very low–rate for custom work. But just like when I tried to do that a decade ago, no one can or will pay for that.
Even if we capped profits of investors, and capped salaries of executives, and had most of the profits going to the workers, people would tend to prefer less expensive goods over more expensive goods. That’s how competition in the market works. In a sufficiently competitive environment, without legal constraints, prices have to drop. (Monopolies raise prices by reducing competition; a sufficiently competitive environment assumes that there is no single company dominating the market.)
i agree with everything you’ve said including your links between causation etc
except the final link you make that its the consumer, i note you said ‘partly’ a consumer issue, so its not a full attribution - perhaps i’m misinterpreting what % you’re attributing.
tbh my take is alot of people would like an option between paying $2 for a garment they know involved exploitation/slavery vs an accessible1 independent option that doesn’t cost $500/garment.
i don’t think people are still choosing the $2 option because they’re ok with slavery. but (tragically?) they’re more ok with someone else being the slave vs them being the slave - which is what they’d basically be if every piece of clothing cost them $500.
and i think we know the reason there’s very little accessible options in between is because the game is rigged, you (HelixDab2) can’t realistically enter the game without serious capital behind you (ie. wealth/connections) to reach the volume prices which might give us an option in between - the market isn’t fair, its been stitched up long ago, by the same people who don’t produce anything and greedily skim off the top.
the venn diagram of independent designers fairly charging $500 for their labor and the greedy skimmers getting fat without producing anything themselves is two separate circles - they’re worlds apart
1 Quick note on accessibility, there are ofc some scant options between $2-500, but what isn’t clear (ie. readily accessible) to the consumer is which of those options isn’t just some greedy bastard buying a $2 option and selling it on for $15.
Meat industry: have to ramp up production because fucking idiotic people continue to breed uncontrollably and unsustanably
disease starts spreading and affecting the industry
Smug-ass cultist vegans: MuSt Be ThE mEaT eAtErS!!!1 Come on, my wife Moon Seashell, we need to get you pregnant again because our 14 malnourished kids isn’t enough!
True, increased demand for meat is one of the driving factors of ecological malpractise as it’s found in the meat industry.
Plant based diets and a lifestyle free of animal products provide a more sustainable and ecologically beneficial alternative. As does reducing the overall world population of course.
A lifetime free of animal products is not sustainable. Humans need at least some meat to survive. The average person eats too much which isn’t helping. Advocating a vegan (or even vegetarian) diet is ignoring science and how our bodies function. It causes long-term, serious harm to people who do not supplement their diet with at least some meat.
Pure veganism is a cult that ignores science, diet, and common sense. Nothing wrong with eating vegan meals (I love them) but completely cutting out meat is bad for you.
So precisely how long are vegans able to survive without suffering ill effects? Because I mean we’ve all heard of people who have lived on that diet long term, so at what point do the wheels start to fall off so to speak? Is there some kind of extended latency period where you are okay before you get sick, or are vegan influencers just pretending to be healthy?
Also your how do you propose we change our agricultural practices so that our food supply isn’t tainted by sick meat grown in poor conditions? There’s a lot of evidence that there’s not enough land mass on earth to feed everyone a diet of free range grass fed beef. Or do you propose we run full steam ahead with factory farming and damn the consequences?
Humans need at least some meat to survive. […] It causes long-term, serious harm to people who do not supplement their diet with at least some meat. […] completely cutting out meat is bad for you.
That is not correct.
Advocating a vegan (or even vegetarian) diet is ignoring science and how our bodies function. […] Pure veganism is a cult that ignores science, diet, and common sense.
To the contrary. It is very much supported by science. Are you interested in the scientific literature? I’ll happily share.
Ah yes humans evolved to eat everything. Now let me just cut a part of that diet out of my life.
The science doesn’t agree with that
It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes. Plant-based diets are more environmentally sustainable than diets rich in animal products because they use fewer natural resources and are associated with much less environmental damage. Vegetarians and vegans are at reduced risk of certain health conditions, including ischemic heart disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, certain types of cancer, and obesity. Low intake of saturated fat and high intakes of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, soy products, nuts, and seeds (all rich in fiber and phytochemicals) are characteristics of vegetarian and vegan diets that produce lower total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and better serum glucose control. These factors contribute to reduction of chronic disease
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27886704/
Nevertheless, several RCTs [randomized controlled trials] have examined the effect of vegetarian diets on intermediate risk factors of cardiovascular diseases (Table 1). In a meta-analysis of RCTs, Wang et al. (22) found vegetarian diets to significantly lower blood concentrations of total, LDL, HDL, and non-HDL cholesterol relative to a range of omnivorous control diets. Other meta-analyses have found vegetarian diets to lower blood pressure, enhance weight loss, and improve glycemic control to greater extent than omnivorous comparison diets (23-25). Taken together, the beneficial effects of such diets on established proximal determinants of cardiovascular diseases found in RCTs, and their inverse associations with hard cardiovascular endpoints found in prospective cohort studies provide strong support for the adoption of healthful plant-based diets for cardiovascular disease prevention
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/am/pii/S1050173818300240
Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence. Vegetarian diets offer a number of nutritional benefits, including lower levels of saturated fat, cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher levels of carbohydrates, fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants such as vitamins C and E and phytochemicals
I love how people love to rag on vegans talking about veganism unprovoked.
Those damn vegans always not even being part of the conversation yet! Let’s make fun of them trying to save the planet so they can show up and we can talk about how self-righteous they are.
What the fuck are you talking about? Countries with low birth rates and high incomes are the ones eating giga tons of meat
Which countries are those? None. Vegan cultists love to pull bullshit out of their ass, don’t they?
It’s one of a few reasons why I only eat halal / kosher. Animal treatment from birth to slaughter is far more humane than that of how the heathens treat and slaughter animals.
Yeah yeah downvote me, heathens.
There’s nothing wrong with eating halal/kosher, but labelling the exploitation and slaughter of a living creature as ‘more humane’ is a delusion.
If you care about the humane treatment of animals, climate change, food supply safety, or even just want to decrease your monthly grocery bill you would commit to a plant based diet.
I’m not criticizing your diet, I am just asking that you own it and quit deluding yourself. ‘muh local farm is more humane’ propaganda is total bullshit. You support the exploitation and slaughter of these animals, quit trying to tell people you don’t.
So with halal, animals are not stuffed into big metal buildings where the temperature can reach 130-140 degrees fahrenheit (if not higher). They are not beaten. They are not tortured. They do not have any part of them removed for any reason (for example chicken beaks). These animals are treated humanely. They are fed what they are meant to be fed, most times left to graze on their own. Generally they are not slaughtered at an early stage but there’s no age restriction as well. Lastly animals are not to be slaughtered in front of other animals / witnessed by other animals.
I’ve seen how Intensive farms operate… it’s fkin disgusting and just awful. The only other option I have besides halal/kosher is going to an actual local farm buying a cow and having it slaughtered in a halal manner, then butchered and packed. The farm I’ve gone to is very humane in their animal husbandry. You can actually visit these farms and see for yourself the treatment of their animals, then decide if that’s where you’d like to purchase your animal from. It is true, there’s local farmers that do treat their animals humanely. I’ve seen it in NE Oregon, Northern California, and Michigan. And of course deer/elk hunting.
Damn. As an atheist vegan I’m treating animals even better than religious people.
