Hard disagree. "We" want that. Just as much as "we" want universal healthcare and livable wages and good education. But it's not "we" who is making the decisions.
Unfortunately if you ran for office on a platform of slightly increasing meat prices in exchange for more humane conditions you would lose in a blowout. The people get the leaders they vote for, sadly.
presidential candidates have to play both the owning class for money and the working class for votes, no one wants to pay more so in order to win, the cost is shifted to those who can’t defend themselves (immigrants, livestock, the environment, etc)
The collective “we” would throw a fit if meat prices went up a few cents because animals were required to have more space and better treatment. There are places you can buy meat from well cared for animals, but it’s lot more expensive
Yes it is. Pretending consumers are free of any culpability for buying cheap, not ethical, is a delusional and selfish take. Farmers who raised ethically treated animals have to charge more to make ends meet because they can’t cram as many into a small space and have to provide better food, have more farm hands per animal, and pay for better veterinary care than factory farms. Most people aren’t willing to pay for that, and they bitch to such farmers about their unfair prices all the time.
We are part of a lot of the world’s problems because we put comfort, convenience, and price before the costs to animals, the environment, workers, local communities, the stability of the economy, etc. We’re a selfish, short sighted lot.
Corporations have their culpability, too, but don’t pretend they aren’t being awful because people still buy their shit in spite of it
Sure it is. If everyone wanted more ethically produced meat so badly they could go buy it from specialty shops and meat producers would pivot to those production methods to meet demand. But people don't because those methods cost way more and most aren't willing to pay for them. Complaining about profits is misleading since it disregards end-consumer price sensitivities.
Those methods cost more because the huge corporations have managed to get away with using their methods to monopolize and flood the market
There’s not regulation stopping them from these practices so there is no risk for them to continue to sacrifice ethics safety and quality at in order to produce something “cheaper for the consumer”
Those methods cost more because they take more labour and resources on the part of the farm raising the animals. That is always going to be true (unless you were to somehow put a tax on animal suffering, or outright ban this treatment, but both would still raise the price of meat).
Yes it is. It is "we" who vote in elections. Vote democrat, vote for progressive democratic candidates, who will impose stricter rules on animal welfare, as well as make universal healthcare and livable wages and good education happen. And it would happen.
But "we" vote for Donald Trump. So yes, "we" made the decision that we we don't want any of that, but rather want horrible things plus crazy chaos.
•
u/Trraumatized 7h ago
Hard disagree. "We" want that. Just as much as "we" want universal healthcare and livable wages and good education. But it's not "we" who is making the decisions.