The Disappointment Of Blind Consumerism

[LionL]

England sounds magical.

It is

 

[Ana the Ist]

Livestock is fed on grown crops. Less livestock = more crops for human consumption. Also, less livestock = more land for the growing of crops.

To address your earlier point; if the price of meat goes up less people will buy it. If all farmers who produce meat continued to do so then they could not sell it and so would go out of business. Supply and demand. The few farmers whose businesses survived would continue to produce meat for a smaller market and would indeed see a rise in their profits.

I love the "less livestock"=more land for crops like it's a game of Sim city. I'll let you Google arable land for yourself and see how that works. You can pretty much raise pigs anywhere...can't just grow carrots anywhere.

Tell me how supply and demand work...please...when supply goes down and demand goes up? In my country there are minor fluctuations, but generally over any longer length of time...the price of meat goes up. You're saying to cut back on the number of pigs produced...when realistically we would need to continue to increase the number just to keep up with demand.

Finally, you're right about the feed...but since that's about 90+% grain you'd be looking at a lot of carbs and corn. Most of that corn becomes corn syrup anyway...

This is all a bit complicated, but I'll leave it at saying that you cannot change the food production for 300 million people overnight and expect everything to just be "fine". That's a child's dream. The world is only getting more crowded...so if we could scale back somehow and give the little piggies more space now...what about in a hundred years? 200 years? At some point long before then those pigs are back in the exact same situation.

You wanna help the little piggies and chickens? Figure out a way to quietly get rid of about 4 billion people.

 

[Inkachu]

Is it blind though? Is there anyone who doesn't know that's how we get meat now?

People don't think of rape and murder all day but I'm sure they know it's happening somewhere...I don't think that makes them blind to it. I think it's about the same for farm animals.

"Humane and free from cruelty"...what exactly does that mean? Probably more than just enough room to turn around, right? We're talking grass under their feet...space to move and live and such. Any idea what that would do to the price of meat and vegetables?

Let's say you spend 10% of your budget on food...could you suddenly switch to 30%? I'm sure a lot of people can't...what do you think they'll be eating? What do you think that will cost in health problems and human misery?

Absolutely, I believe there are people who honestly think that chickens and pigs and cows live on big, open farms in the sunshine with kindly farmers and comfortable lives. That's what we see in commercials. That's the images on packaging, especially when paired with phrases like "farm fresh" and "all natural" with pictures of sunrises over green fields in the background. That's why so many people in the audience during her speech were looking shocked, disappointed, and uncomfortable. You and I might know different, but we didn't always know it. It's also common for people to see and hear the truth, but then put it out of their minds as soon as they walk away from the information. "Yeah, I saw that documentary a while ago, but - hey, who wants chicken for dinner?"

I understand the reasoning behind the way things work. I, for one, would be happy to give up meat if animal farming techniques were overhauled and meat became too expensive for me to have constantly. Or I'd just eat it on special occasions. I'd much rather see humane farming than have cheap meat available.

 

[lisah]

I think only people who never watch the news would be blind to this. I agree that it would be good to change the way this is done. I know families who go in together to buy a cow or a pig from local farms and have them butchered. That way they have a better idea what the animal has been fed and where it comes from. So there are options out there.

It's against the law to raise chickens in the city I live in though. I wonder if it is illegal to raise rabbits for eating.

As a teenager, our class had a field trip to a slaughterhouse. We saw everything but the slaying. It was . . . unforgettable. And watching my grandma slice the heads off of chickens was pretty gross. But, the chickens were well cared for up to that point.

How are you going to purchase your meats? What options are available where you live?

 

[Inkachu]

We went to a nearby farmer's market and found some local farmers and butchers. It was a piece of cake. We drove out to the farm so we could see it firsthand; most farmers are glad to show you around. If they aren't, then I'd wonder if they had something to hide. Most people just don't take the time or put in the effort to even think about whether local farms/dairies/butchers are an option for them. I've lived in this area all my life, but had NO idea how many local places there were for meats and things. It wasn't because I was blind and stupid, I'd just gone on living the way I was raised; you get your meat from the supermarket. We kind of stumbled upon the farmer's market by accident, but quickly made a bunch of contacts there, and once we found that we could get our almost all of our food locally, we were hooked. I certainly don't live out in the country, but we're willing to make the drive to where the products are.

 

[lisah]

It's usually a beautiful drive.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Absolutely, I believe there are people who honestly think that chickens and pigs and cows live on big, open farms in the sunshine with kindly farmers and comfortable lives. That's what we see in commercials. That's the images on packaging, especially when paired with phrases like "farm fresh" and "all natural" with pictures of sunrises over green fields in the background. That's why so many people in the audience during her speech were looking shocked, disappointed, and uncomfortable. You and I might know different, but we didn't always know it. It's also common for people to see and hear the truth, but then put it out of their minds as soon as they walk away from the information. "Yeah, I saw that documentary a while ago, but - hey, who wants chicken for dinner?"

I understand the reasoning behind the way things work. I, for one, would be happy to give up meat if animal farming techniques were overhauled and meat became too expensive for me to have constantly. Or I'd just eat it on special occasions. I'd much rather see humane farming than have cheap meat available.

It's easy to say that their recorded reactions were because they didn't know... but is that the case? It's easy to show shocking photos, record reactions, and claim ignorance. I remember being exposed to this sort of thing... and worse... at 15-16. It's hard for me to imagine that in the last 15 years since then, everyone else hasn't too.

It's almost counter-productive to me (not quite the right word but the best I could think of)...you're eating it... why do you care how it lived? Do you care so much about the cows turned to leather for your shoes or the sofa? How about the neighbors' dog that spends 90% of it's time crated in the backyard? How about the hundreds or more on the brink of extinction? Is there a line drawn somewhere, or do you champion them all?

The point is that you may care about these animals... but there's thousands of others you're being willfully ignorant about... so why do these get special treatment? Is it really for them or for you?

As I already pointed out...the world isn't getting any bigger. Even if we do scale back now...100-200 years from now we're right back in the same place, or worse.

 

[LionL]

I love the "less livestock"=more land for crops like it's a game of Sim city. I'll let you Google arable land for yourself and see how that works. You can pretty much raise pigs anywhere...can't just grow carrots anywhere.

Land may be unsuitable for crops either because it has no source of fresh water, is too hot, too cold, too rocky, too mountainous, too salty, too rainy, too snowy, too polluted or too nutrient poor. Many of these can be made arable. Look at Israel. Mostly desert but now fertile because of irrigation. Yes, crops can't (yet) be grown in the Arctic or up mountains, but neither can livestock be kept there.

Tell me how supply and demand work...please...

Ok. The price of a commodity goes up (ethical farming). Consequently people buy less of it. This creates a surplus. Prices come down because of this surplus. This means there is no profit so businesses fold. The supply of meat dwindles and prices rise again. Because of the higher prices the demand for meat falls again and the product becomes a luxury item to be consumed perhaps only once per week. This would, as a side issue, improve not only animal welfare but also human health.

You wanna help the little piggies and chickens? Figure out a way to quietly get rid of about 4 billion people.

I agree with this. There are far too many humans on Earth. The population needs to come down drastically. Birth control and education are the best ways of doing this I think. But poverty and Catholicism are major obstacles.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Land may be unsuitable for crops either because it has no source of fresh water, is too hot, too cold, too rocky, too mountainous, too salty, too rainy, too snowy, too polluted or too nutrient poor. Many of these can be made arable. Look at Israel. Mostly desert but now fertile because of irrigation. Yes, crops can't (yet) be grown in the Arctic or up mountains, but neither can livestock be kept there.


Ok. The price of a commodity goes up (ethical farming). Consequently people buy less of it. This creates a surplus. Prices come down because of this surplus. This means there is no profit so businesses fold. The supply of meat dwindles and prices rise again. Because of the higher prices the demand for meat falls again and the product becomes a luxury item to be consumed perhaps only once per week. This would, as a side issue, improve not only animal welfare but also human health.


I agree with this. There are far too many humans on Earth. The population needs to come down drastically. Birth control and education are the best ways of doing this I think. But poverty and Catholicism are major obstacles.

Wonderful... I've gone from suspecting that you don't understand supply and demand to knowing that you don't understand supply and demand. Take a look at this...

Supply and demand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's a very basic explanation, you don't have to read the whole page. Law number 4 is the scenario we're talking about. There are markets that do this deliberately... for example the diamond market. Diamonds aren't nearly as rare or valuable as people think...but since supply is kept down, the price goes up. I'm not trying to teach economics here...I'm just trying to make the point that our pig farmer won't be losing his land anytime soon.

I've noticed that you completely omitted the part of my quote where I explained how we'll be right back in this same food scenario in a hundred years or more. Do you just not like to think about that? Are you choosing willful ignorance?

It's hard for me to even take a video like the one presented seriously. The woman speaking is clearly wearing makeup. Any idea what happens to animals in the makeup industry? It's pretty horrific...and it doesn't serve any purpose as noble as feeding people. It serves personal vanity. Do you think women think of that every time they put on makeup? Probably not...yet I'm supposed to pay 60$ for a steak at the grocery store because someone likes cows.

Sorry... I can't support that kind of blatant hypocrisy. Nearly every living thing on this planet needs something living to die so it can survive. I didn't make reality this way...I just accept it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Land may be unsuitable for crops either because it has no source of fresh water, is too hot, too cold, too rocky, too mountainous, too salty, too rainy, too snowy, too polluted or too nutrient poor. Many of these can be made arable. Look at Israel. Mostly desert but now fertile because of irrigation. Yes, crops can't (yet) be grown in the Arctic or up mountains, but neither can livestock be kept there.


Ok. The price of a commodity goes up (ethical farming). Consequently people buy less of it. This creates a surplus. Prices come down because of this surplus. This means there is no profit so businesses fold. The supply of meat dwindles and prices rise again. Because of the higher prices the demand for meat falls again and the product becomes a luxury item to be consumed perhaps only once per week. This would, as a side issue, improve not only animal welfare but also human health.


I agree with this. There are far too many humans on Earth. The population needs to come down drastically. Birth control and education are the best ways of doing this I think. But poverty and Catholicism are major obstacles.

Wonderful... I've gone from suspecting that you don't understand supply and demand to knowing that you don't understand supply and demand. Take a look at this...

Supply and demand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's a very basic explanation, you don't have to read the whole page. Law number 4 is the scenario we're talking about. There are markets that do this deliberately... for example the diamond market. Diamonds aren't nearly as rare or valuable as people think...but since supply is kept down, the price goes up. I'm not trying to teach economics here...I'm just trying to make the point that our pig farmer won't be losing his land anytime soon.

I've noticed that you completely omitted the part of my quote where I explained how we'll be right back in this same food scenario in a hundred years or more. Do you just not like to think about that? Are you choosing willful ignorance?

It's hard for me to even take a video like the one presented seriously. The woman speaking is clearly wearing makeup. Any idea what happens to animals in the makeup industry? It's pretty horrific...and it doesn't serve any purpose as noble as feeding people. It serves personal vanity. Do you think women think of that every time they put on makeup? Probably not...yet I'm supposed to pay 60$ for a steak at the grocery store because someone likes cows.

Sorry... I can't support that kind of blatant hypocrisy. Nearly every living thing on this planet needs something living to die so it can survive. I didn't make reality this way...I just accept it.

 

[Inkfingers]

How that happens... why do the animal farmers sell their land? Especially when they can make more profit than ever.

Animal farmers sell their land because they have gone into debt producing cheap meat for supermarkets and then gone under because they cannot pay those debts. There is nothing left to fund a change of step into growing grain/veg for humans and cover the bills whilst they wait a year for a crop.

However, not all land is suited to growing veg. A lot of meat farming happens on land that cannot easily support veg crops (or cannot at all, such as hill sheep farming).

 

[Ana the Ist]

Land may be unsuitable for crops either because it has no source of fresh water, is too hot, too cold, too rocky, too mountainous, too salty, too rainy, too snowy, too polluted or too nutrient poor. Many of these can be made arable. Look at Israel. Mostly desert but now fertile because of irrigation. Yes, crops can't (yet) be grown in the Arctic or up mountains, but neither can livestock be kept there.


Ok. The price of a commodity goes up (ethical farming). Consequently people buy less of it. This creates a surplus. Prices come down because of this surplus. This means there is no profit so businesses fold. The supply of meat dwindles and prices rise again. Because of the higher prices the demand for meat falls again and the product becomes a luxury item to be consumed perhaps only once per week. This would, as a side issue, improve not only animal welfare but also human health.


I agree with this. There are far too many humans on Earth. The population needs to come down drastically. Birth control and education are the best ways of doing this I think. But poverty and Catholicism are major obstacles.

Wonderful... I've gone from suspecting that you don't understand supply and demand to knowing that you don't understand supply and demand. Take a look at this...

Supply and demand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's a very basic explanation, you don't have to read the whole page. Law number 4 is the scenario we're talking about. There are markets that do this deliberately... for example the diamond market. Diamonds aren't nearly as rare or valuable as people think...but since supply is kept down, the price goes up. I'm not trying to teach economics here...I'm just trying to make the point that our pig farmer won't be losing his land anytime soon.

I've noticed that you completely omitted the part of my quote where I explained how we'll be right back in this same food scenario in a hundred years or more. Do you just not like to think about that? Are you choosing willful ignorance?

It's hard for me to even take a video like the one presented seriously. The woman speaking is clearly wearing makeup. Any idea what happens to animals in the makeup industry? It's pretty horrific...and it doesn't serve any purpose as noble as feeding people. It serves personal vanity. Do you think women think of that every time they put on makeup? Probably not...yet I'm supposed to pay 60$ for a steak at the grocery store because someone likes cows.

Sorry... I can't support that kind of blatant hypocrisy. Nearly every living thing on this planet needs something living to die so it can survive. I didn't make reality this way...I just accept it.

 

[LionL]

Sorry... I can't support that kind of blatant hypocrisy. Nearly every living thing on this planet needs something living to die so it can survive. I didn't make reality this way...I just accept it.

That's true, but we do not need to treat animals badly before we kill them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Land may be unsuitable for crops either because it has no source of fresh water, is too hot, too cold, too rocky, too mountainous, too salty, too rainy, too snowy, too polluted or too nutrient poor. Many of these can be made arable. Look at Israel. Mostly desert but now fertile because of irrigation. Yes, crops can't (yet) be grown in the Arctic or up mountains, but neither can livestock be kept there.


Ok. The price of a commodity goes up (ethical farming). Consequently people buy less of it. This creates a surplus. Prices come down because of this surplus. This means there is no profit so businesses fold. The supply of meat dwindles and prices rise again. Because of the higher prices the demand for meat falls again and the product becomes a luxury item to be consumed perhaps only once per week. This would, as a side issue, improve not only animal welfare but also human health.


I agree with this. There are far too many humans on Earth. The population needs to come down drastically. Birth control and education are the best ways of doing this I think. But poverty and Catholicism are major obstacles.

I understand you're not an economist... and your grasp of the food market is lacking...that's why I tried to steer the conversation away from economics and towards the obvious. You decided to leave the obvious out of my quote...so we'll come back to that in a moment.

Supply and demand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's a basic explanation of supply and demand. You're asking livestock farmers to go from more efficient to less efficient...and you think it's going to create a surplus of food? Probably not. It will take more space to raise less livestock at higher cost. This will cause a shortage... and higher cost. The demand hasn't changed...so what we're looking at would be a situation like the fourth law of supply and demand. It's not unlike how diamonds are kept expensive. No livestock farmers are going out of business...none. Even if everything I just wrote is completely wrong...and it's not...our farmers are heavily subsidized. There isn't a lot of risk in that industry for a reason...people need food.

If you don't want to look up what it would take to make land arable...I'll explain it to you in my next response. If you're willing to take my word for it...You're oversimplifying things. A lot.

Let's go back to blind consumers for a moment. How many makeup products do you think that female presenter was wearing? Any idea how horrible animals are treated in that industry? And for what? Nothing more than personal vanity. Why should I pay 60$ for a steak while women everywhere get to use makeup that's tested on animals in cages? What about their suffering?

What about that land we're going to aerate for more crops? What happens to all the animals living in those delicate ecosystems? Why don't you care about them? Why is their suffering somehow less important?

The reality is that just about every aspect of modern life damages animals in some way because of the sheer numbers of humans on the planet. It's unavoidable. It's only going to get worse. The "damage" done to livestock is minimal compared the animals in the wild. It's almost laughable to be concerned about the livestock at the expense of wild animals. Livestock will be here in 200 years...hundreds if not thousands of species won't.

Since you dropped it out of my quote, I'm guessing you understand that even if we did give livestock better lives... before we slaughter and eat them...we'll be right back in a similar farming situation out of necessity in a relatively short time. Why not address that point? Willful ignorance?

Sorry for the double reply. Phone issues.

 

[Ana the Ist]

That's true, but we do not need to treat animals badly before we kill them.

But we will need to eventually...regardless of how you feel about it. That's what this is really about. How you feel... not some phony concern for animals. You don't want to feel like you're directly responsible for the suffering of another. Well you are...whether you like it or not.

Even if you could stop the suffering of livestock...you're just as responsible for the extinction and suffering of countless more. So why does the livestock get special treatment? It's hypocritical, it's disingenuous, it's completely unnecessary.

 

[LionL]

Even if you could stop the suffering of livestock...you're just as responsible for the extinction and suffering of countless more. So why does the livestock get special treatment? It's hypocritical, it's disingenuous, it's completely unnecessary.

So, what you are saying is that because we cannot end all suffering then we should not try to stop any suffering at all. Would you apply the same rule to humans, who are after all only a species of animal?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Animal farmers sell their land because they have gone into debt producing cheap meat for supermarkets and then gone under because they cannot pay those debts. There is nothing left to fund a change of step into growing grain/veg for humans and cover the bills whilst they wait a year for a crop.

However, not all land is suited to growing veg. A lot of meat farming happens on land that cannot easily support veg crops (or cannot at all, such as hill sheep farming).

Do they subsidize livestock farmers in the U.K.?

 

[Ana the Ist]

So, what you are saying is that because we cannot end all suffering then we should not try to stop any suffering at all. Would you apply the same rule to humans, who are after all only a species of animal?

No.

I'm just saying let's use our brains and be reasonable about it. Tearing up new land for crops is almost certainly going to eradicate animals. For what? So something we eat can live a happy life before we take everything it's ever had from it? These aren't even animals that could survive a predatory environment.

If it's a real problem...and I don't think it is...it can be solved any time. There will always be livestock. Can't say the same for most animals. Working on this now does far far more harm than good.

 

[Inkfingers]

Do they subsidize livestock farmers in the U.K.?

The CAP used to subsidise all manner of farming in the UK. I do not know the current policy standard.

 

[Inkachu]

It's easy to say that their recorded reactions were because they didn't know... but is that the case? It's easy to show shocking photos, record reactions, and claim ignorance. I remember being exposed to this sort of thing... and worse... at 15-16. It's hard for me to imagine that in the last 15 years since then, everyone else hasn't too.

Not being able to imagine that others have had a different experience from your own is not a good way to engage in open discussions and debates. Regardless, I don't remember the first time I saw footage of actual cow/pig/chicken farms, but it certainly wasn't when I was 15 years old.

It's almost counter-productive to me (not quite the right word but the best I could think of)...you're eating it... why do you care how it lived?

Because part of being a human being with a conscience and a heart is striving to alleviate as much unnecessary suffering as possible, IMO.

Do you care so much about the cows turned to leather for your shoes or the sofa?

Sure I care, and I don't have shoes or furniture made of leather.

How about the neighbors' dog that spends 90% of it's time crated in the backyard?

Do I care? Yes, I do. I hate seeing dogs tied up outside. It's inhumane to keep a social, pack animal isolated like that.

How about the hundreds or more on the brink of extinction? Is there a line drawn somewhere, or do you champion them all?

I champion what I can. I'm only one person.

The point is that you may care about these animals... but there's thousands of others you're being willfully ignorant about... so why do these get special treatment? Is it really for them or for you?

You assume an awful lot about me. Tell me, which animals specifically, am I willfully ignorant about?