That explains why vegetables are more expensive, at least in Ireland.
What an incredibly fucked up thing to do. I’m not a vegan but I don’t see any reason why meat should be subsidized at all, given the numerous problems with both raising and consuming it.
I agree. I’m a meat eater but if the market forced me to not eat meat anymore due to ecological conditions then I wouldn’t eat meat anymore. Too bad the market only cares about sell, sell, sell. And in this world, nothing matters unless it sells.
it pretty much guarantees conservative voting areas in many countries, which is why its subsidized, and plus the cheap labor.
Certainly that’s the case in the US. It would be suicide for US republicans adhere to their conservative values and drop subsidies, which would outrage all the farmers whose vote republicans rely on.
But why not the dems? No farmers vote for dems, so no loss there. But I suppose there would be enough meat-eating dems who would abandon their own party. Just like in California a politician tried to push a fuel tax and got voted out by both parties.
seems like farmers a evil necessities in most states.
Subsidizing beef is likely worse than subsidizing meat in general (even though I’m generally not a fan). The climate damage caused by beef and the dairy industry is simply too high.
Even if in the EU we don’t have the VAST intensive cattle farming that is common in the US, I am still completely with you.
I want more mussels subsidized! Those little bastards are a net positive on the environment. That and insects and research in synthetic meat.
Remember to always vet and vote for candidates in the EU elections, it really does make a difference.
I’d like to know more about mussels
My sources are from non-English speaking biology YouTubers, but I will try to look up the papers they referenced. In short, mussels filter water and release nutrients in a vast area around where they naturally grow or are cultivated and therefore around them increased biodiversity and biomass can observed.
Literally a net positive.
its also quite moderate, but not large enough for the us market. we actually import most of our beef from places like australia, argentina, dont know about brazil.
If animal flesh wasn’t subsidised so much in a lot of places, no one except the wealthy would be able to afford to eat animals.
Yes and no. Prices may rise but that doesn’t necessarily mean the poorer would be unable to eat meat.
Current western culture, outside of explicit vegan and vegetarianism, has people eating meat almost every day, for both lunch and dinner, and occasionally for breakfast and snacks too.
Fish may be eaten once or twice a week, but generally people eat some form of chicken, beef, turkey, pork, or lamb every single day, at least twice a day.
Instead of being an item that is eaten with almost every meal, it could instead be treated as an item to only consume occasionally. Or once a day instead of multiple times a day.
Protein and flavour is in plentiful supply from plants.
Note: before the “um actually, I don’t”, this is a broad generalisation of western food habits. Not necessarily indicative of specific people’s individual habits.
All anyone has to do is begin viewing meat as an accompaniment to their diet rather than the feature.
I used to stockpile meat in my freezer when it was on sale. So, I would keep the usual suspects - celery, carrot, onion, potato, garlic - in the fridge because they kept longer and went well with beef/pork/chicken.
So my diet stagnated. I regularly had eight pork chops, six steaks and three butchered chickens in my freezer, so the sunk cost fallacy would lead me to come up with different ways of preparing them.
Strange how things go. One year my wife had to go back to be with her family a month or so earlier than planned for the holidays. So for half of November and most of December I was flying solo. Great, I just used what I had at hand.
By the time it was my turn to join her I had cleaned out my freezer.
Coming back after the holidays, there were no sales to be had to “restock” my freezer so I didn’t bother with that. I was also pretty tired of a meat-heavy diet so the first few weeks back I did things like eggplant parm, but also much lighter meals like panko crusted tofu with snap peas, etc
That was about four years ago. That early January desire for a change of pace resulted in me planning meals more precisely, because I had to buy produce with a much shorter shelf life.
That organization opened up a variety of possibilities. I started looking for shops that specialized in produce rather than just looking for what was available at the big box grocery stores.
Instead of spending on beef at stupid rates, I started looking at widening my spice drawer. Aleppo pepper, black garlic, pomegranate molasses, high quality Spanish paprikas, saffron, the list goes on. I also started trying out fruits and vegetables as features instead of sides. Jackfruit, daikon radish, different gourds, a panoply of brassica…
I still eat meat, but it’s the side now. Much more interesting.
Ooh pomegranate molasses sounds really good
It is a common ingredient in Middle Eastern cuisine.
Ah, that’s a cuisine I really ought to learn to cook. I never have because I’m a pescatarian and my wife finds falafel unsatisfying as a meal
Oh no
I am also a fat vegan.
which is a good and a bad thing simultaniously. same with flying in planes, should be more expensive but then is too expensive for some
If the money is not spend on meat or planes, then it would be spend on other things instead. There are alternatives for that. Say planes and high speed rail for example. Warsaw to Lisbon is a 2800km directly. High speed trains can go 300km/h and faster, so a sleeper train with that sort of speed can make the trip pretty easily, without even having to go at top speed and around some natural barriers.
Something similar would happen with meat. As in workable alternatives would be developed or adopted.
Or more likely those of us who eat meat would just have it on holidays and special occasions
As regular people have for most of history.
Fair enough, let’s ban meat for everyone then.
Guardian is paywalled for me.
Agriculture in industrialized countries, as it depends on high capital investment, chemical products like fertilizer, pesticides, and antiobiotics, and cheap saisonal migratory workers, is just a kind of industry. The beef industry specifically is simply a part of the fossil industry, as it can’t exist without cheap fossil fuel. The carbon footprint of meat is at least ten times higher than the footprint of grocery.
Subsidizing the meat industry is subsidizing the fossil industry. Why would any sane denocratic goverment do that?
Good luck convincing Europeans to let go of their traditional cheeses and sausages.
I’m European, I say fuck the animal product industry. Traditions that people care about won’t fully die out anyway
Of course, I can only speak for myself
It found beef and lamb were subsidised 580 times more than legumes in 2020, while pork was subsidised nearly 240 times more. Dairy, meanwhile, received 554 times more in subsidies than nuts and seeds.
This shows in shops price. Beef price/kg is similar or lower than appetizers with seeds and dried fruits. The later deserves more subsidies not less, for obvious reasons (lower environmental impact, better for health, longer shelf life).
I understand what this is getting at. But trying to compare the two isn’t the same. The meat industry does need a major overhaul but the subsidies for a cash crop and livestock will never reach 1 to 1.
Just-so fallacy. Why shouldn’t it be the same? Cause it wouldn’t exist then? Why should it exist?
Because finding a true plant based alternative that is acceptable for meat eaters is much closer than any other form to erradicación of the meat industry.
Surely higher meat prices would encourage this search.
To quote above user fatvegan@leminal.space:
“Oh no”
