Does humanity need to reduce meat consumption?

[mikkel_the_dane]

Why are you so angry first thing in the morning? Someone pee in your cornflakes? But, since you asked, electing competent leaders might be a good start.

Yes, that is a part of it.

 

[metis]

My only point was that some things take time to be truly workable. Socialism would probably work in a unified world, but a key problem was that they couldn't adjust to the geopolitical realities and the historical circumstances which they were dealing with.

But there are many different forms of socialism, and they vary significantly, as there's a huge difference between Marxism versus "Scandinavian-style socialism" that Bernie wants.

 

[YmirGF]

Yes, that is a part of it.

While busy with other tasks 2 other things came into my thinking.

1, Elect competent political leaders
2. End all affirmative action endeavors
3. End all D.E.I. initiatives ASAP

If we want our society to function we have to have people who know what they are doing not idealogues glad-handing each others air-headed thinking. Sadly, for the idealogues, a meritocracy is simply the best way to run almost anything. Otherwise you end up with luggage thieves in charge of nuclear waste. Well, at least it looked good doing its job.

 

[Stevicus]

But there are many different forms of socialism, and they vary significantly, as there's a huge difference between Marxism versus "Scandinavian-style socialism" that Bernie wants.

I think the Scandinavian model can certainly work, although I think a key difference is also in how they approached and implemented that model. It wasn't through violence or revolution, as that wasn't necessary. If the different class groups and factions can agree to cooperate and work with each other in good faith for their own mutual benefit, then that's the very essence of what socialism is about, in my view.

In Russia, it was obviously different, so whatever conclusions one might make about "socialism" in that country has to be tempered with the geopolitical and physical realities they were dealing with. Kerensky wanted to make their system more like the British, with a parliament yet still retaining a constitutional monarchy and the traditions associated with it. But instead of that, they got Stalin.

 

[Stevicus]

You advocate trying something with a
record of complete failure by making it
worldwide. That would be a horrible
way to discover that it never works.
You need more than faith in a dream.
Get some reality there, bub.

Well, to me, "getting some reality" means examining and understanding the reasons why things fail. To just assume that something fails based on superficial, cursory analysis may not provide any real answers. That's not "reality," it's political spin.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, to me, "getting some reality" means examining and understanding the reasons why things fail.

Yes, that would be a good start for you.
Been there & done that, ie, systems analysis.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

While busy with other tasks 2 other things came into my thinking.

1, Elect competent political leaders
2. End all affirmative action endeavors
3. End all D.E.I. initiatives ASAP

If we want our society to function we have to have people who know what they are doing not idealogues glad-handing each others air-headed thinking. Sadly, for the idealogues, a meritocracy is simply the best way to run almost anything. Otherwise you end up with luggage thieves in charge of nuclear waste. Well, at least it looked good doing its job.

Yeah, I like how you reference North American politics in a general debate thread about not real 2. and 3., but humanity and how to sustain that in general.

 

[Stevicus]

Yes, that would be a good start for you.
Been there & done that, ie, systems analysis.

Why didn't you ever mention this before? I didn't know you had such a keen interest in history. You always seemed bored by the topic.

 

[YmirGF]

Yeah, I like how you reference North American politics in a general debate thread about not real 2. and 3., but humanity and how to sustain that in general.

Is there some kind of a language problem here? Your comment doesn't actually make a lot of sense as written.

Just for fun, I'll add...

4. End all ESG initiatives immediately.

Maybe once we get rid of those distractions we can have a genuine conversation about sustainability.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why didn't you ever mention this before?

I've dedicated an entire thread
to systems analysis applied to
economic systems.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Is there some kind of a language problem here? Your comment doesn't actually make a lot of sense as written.

Just for fun, I'll add...

4. End all ESG initiatives immediately.

Maybe once we get rid of those distractions we can have a genuine conversation about sustainability.

Okay, state your alternative.

 

[We Never Know]

No need to stop eating meat.
All things have their costs.
Meat is worth its.

Not to mention today we are feeding more people with 50 million less cows than we did 50 years ago.

"Cows and other ruminants account for just 4 percent of all greenhouse gases produced in the United States, he said, and beef cattle just 2 percent of direct emissions.

Better breeding, genetics and nutrition have increased the efficiency of livestock production in the U.S. In the 1970s, 140 million head of cattle were needed to meet demand. Now, just 90 million head are required. At the same time, those 90 million cattle are producing more meat.

“We’re now feeding more people with fewer cattle,” Mitloehner said."

Cows and Climate Change

Cattle are the No. 1 agricultural source of greenhouse gasses worldwide. One cow belches 220 pounds of methane yearly. Fortunately, UC Davis has solutions.

www.ucdavis.edu

 

[metis]

Not to mention today we are feeding more people with 50 million less cows than we did 50 years ago.

"Cows and other ruminants account for just 4 percent of all greenhouse gases produced in the United States, he said, and beef cattle just 2 percent of direct emissions.

Better breeding, genetics and nutrition have increased the efficiency of livestock production in the U.S. In the 1970s, 140 million head of cattle were needed to meet demand. Now, just 90 million head are required. At the same time, those 90 million cattle are producing more meat.

“We’re now feeding more people with fewer cattle,” Mitloehner said."

Cows and Climate Change

Cattle are the No. 1 agricultural source of greenhouse gasses worldwide. One cow belches 220 pounds of methane yearly. Fortunately, UC Davis has solutions.

www.ucdavis.edu

Maybe we should invest in large enough corks to put in all the cattles' butts?

 

[Secret Chief]

Meh. We have always eaten meat. Since time immemorial. I say we find ethical ways of consuming meat, while also reducing it's prevalence. But getting rid of it altogether, good luck, humans are meat eaters.

I agree it's not going to be got rid of altogether, but the research seems to say we need to reduce its prevalence due to multiple problems.

 

[The Hammer]

We have to do both.
The argument that overpopulation isn't a problem because poor people don't pollute as much as rich people is short sighted. The poor people want to get "rich" (have a more comfortable western lifestyle) also.
You can either reduce the number of people or you can deny a western lifestyle to the less developed world. You can't have growing affluence and a growing population without multiplying the problems.

I say deny a western lifestyle to everyone. It's unhealthy and unsustainable long term.

 

[Secret Chief]

Improve other foods. Meat is relatively safe food. We know what it is, where it comes from. It doesn't cause diabetes, and its a source of protein.

It seems like most things on the shelf are bad for health. There is almost always some compromise with health. Things have sugar, or they have soy oil or palm oil or have strange ingredients. Chips are constipation in a bag, yet there is an entire aisle devoted to them. Where is the food that isn't going to damage my digestive system? Where is the food that is not going to give me Alzheimer's or Parkinsons? Where is the food that tastes great yet is also good for me and is easy to prepare? Oh...that is meat.

And what about the problems the research demonstrates that our consumption level is exacerbating?

 

[Secret Chief]

Too many babies. Reduce humans. 5 billion is gross.

8 billion actually.

World Population Clock: 8.0 Billion People (LIVE, 2023) - Worldometer

 

[Stevicus]

I've dedicated an entire thread
to systems analysis applied to
economic systems.

I must have missed it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe we should invest in large enough corks to put in all the cattles' butts?

It is not cow farts that are the problem. It is cow burps. Most of their methane comes out the front end not the rear.

Oh, and I do need to all that yes, humanity needs to reduce its meat consumption. I want to be sure that there is enough left for me.

 

[Revoltingest]

I prefer evolution to revolution.
A way to mitigate deleterious effects of
meat eating is to alter the ratio of kinds
of meat produced.

Which meat harms our planet the least?

Green Lantern, you're always telling us how bad meat is for the environment. I'm willing to throw some more zucchini kebabs on my barbecue this...

slate.com

Eat more bacon & eggs!