Choices
Choices
You're viewing a single thread.
148 comments
-
Can we stop buying from them please?
-
That's the best part! You can't!
Thanks to the consolidation and vertical integration of the largest multinationals, as long as you choose to live — no matter how careful and conscious your purchases — a significant proportion of it will still funnel to most of these corporations.
-
Meat is one of the bigger polutters. Meat industry is subsidized by the state. Plant based diets are still cheaper. The vast majority of people still choose to eat meat and actively mock vegans. Just go look at beef (worse meat for the environment) consumption stats in the US.
That's just one example.
People say they want change but won't take it where they can, because deep down it's a lie and they just want someone to fix the problem without them having to do anything.
-
Plant based diets are still cheaper
for some people
-
Can you elaborate on this? Maybe give me some examples?
Because for the vast majority of people in western countries (which have by far the most emissions per capita), it is much cheaper to eat a plant based diet. Rice, beans, and lentils are much cheaper and much healthier than eating beef every day of the week.
-
for the vast majority of people in western countries (which have by far the most emissions per capita), it is much cheaper to eat a plant based diet
I don't think this is true
-
In 2021 Americans ate about 37.81kg of beef per capita per year in 2021, that's about 0.73kg per week, or 1.6lbs.
Cheapest beef in Walmart that I can find, 1 pound for $5.93; so, for 1.6lbs, it comes out to $9.49 per week, for the cheapest Walmart beef. Keep in mind, 1.6lbs = 25.6 oz.
Beans (didn't go for the cheapest): Can of black beans (15oz) for $1.42, another can of butter beans(16oz) for $1.54.
Lentils (not the cheapest): Iberia Lentils 12 oz for $2.59.
Mushrooms (16oz) for $4.34.
So a total of $9.89 for varied and healthy food, vs $9.49 for Walmart's cheapest beef (which realistically would cost $11.86, because you can't just buy 0.6lbs of that beef).
-
you're not accounting for availability of convenient calories. it's cheaper to stop at Burger King than to buy beans and spend my time soaking and cooking. the availability of similarly priced convenient calories simply isn't there if you insist on avoiding animal products.
further, even when people are preparing their own food, if they raise their own, or hunt, fish or trap it, or if it's subsidized or free, then throwing away those foods to buy beans is more expensive than eating what they have.
-
you're beans don't have the same nutrient composition on a per pound basis
-
-
-
-
-
being vegan doesn't stop the growth of the meat industry. it certainly doesn't shrink it.
-
How so? Meat factories exist to feed the people who buy meat. The more people go vegan, the less meat those factories produce, until they shut down. There is no "green version" for the meat industry, it just has to die, and the alternatives already exist and are cheaper. The power is all on people's hands. The government won't do anything about (not even cut the large meat industry subsidies) as long as people keep eating tons of meat, because they know that would mean protests and losing elections.
-
I don't know if I could prove this, but I would bet there are more vegans now than any time in history, and I know there is more meat produced than any time in history. being vegan doesn't stop the growth of the meat industry.
-
Yeah, because there's more people in total. That doesn't mean people going vegan doesn't stop the growth of the meat industry.
Say 50% of people eat meat, and the other 50% are vegan. Then say the world population doubles. Now there will twice as many vegans, but there will also be twice as many meat eaters, and so meat production will double. But there's still only half the meat production that there would be if 100% of people ate meat. And if you could get that value to 0% percent, there would be no meat industry.
-
there's still only half the meat production that there would be if 100% of people ate meat.
production determines availability. there is no reason to assume we could produce more meat than we do, given land and technology constraints.
-
if you could get that value to 0% percent, there would be no meat industry.
meat production happened before trade. there is no reason to assume it will ever end.
-
Yeah, because there's more people in total.
make any excuse you want
That doesn't mean people going vegan doesn't stop the growth of the meat industry.
all the evidence is to the contrary
-
I'll reply all in one comment:
make any excuse you want
Sorry you failed math, I guess?
all the evidence is to the contrary
production determines availability. there is no reason to assume we could produce more meat than we do, given land and technology constraints.
meat production happened before trade. there is no reason to assume it will ever end.
Where do you think meat is going? Why do you think it was being produced before trade, for fun? And do you not understand the basic concept that less =/= more, and that less emissions is better than more emissions?
It's really not a hard concept to grasp, but go ahead and keep trying to hide your head in the sand and justify your consumerism while pretending to give a shit. I won't bother wasting my time on someone who apparently can't grasp basic math.
-
do you not understand the basic concept that less =/= more, and that less emissions is better than more emissions?
yes, but there is no evidence that being vegan reduces the emissions from the meat industry.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Outside or raw materials, a cell phone, and maybe a car where are you forced to support corporations?
-
Food, shelter, hygiene prodcuts, clothes, furniture, fucking everything.
Yes, some of these things aren't technically necessary but you did include phone and a car, so I am assuming we're not just talking about base subsistence.
Unless you become a cave hermit or somehow manage to source everything from self employed artisans and cooperatives (and vet their material sources), you will support corporations even if you try to reduce your consumption as much as possible.
Pretty much all industries have been captured by massive corporations at this point, and vetting all companies and their supply lines is literally not possible to do.
Think with your head instead of just saying what feels right for once, please.
-
I buy my food locally. I buy my clothes local to my state. Furniture is made locally. All my hygiene but my conditioner is local. I generate more electricity than I use. But there you go, that's all corporate
It's just easier to buy corporate. Literally nothing you have stated needs to feed corporations. 100% bullshit.
-
Where do the local farmers get their tractors and tools? Where does the fabric, dye, looms, sewing machines etc. for clothing come from? Where does the furniture maker buy his tools and who makes them? Are your solar panels homemade? What does that electricity power?
Whether directly or not, some portion of the money we spend will end up in the hands of these corporations, even if it just means you paid the furniture guy for a chair and he used that money to buy his kids mcdonalds. And while it's great that you sound like you're actively trying to live in a sustainable way, I don't think you get to deny that if you're a part of the economy you're still supporting corporations, simply due to the sheer depth and breadth of these companies.
-
You don't think you can't source cotton directly from farmers and make a shirt by hand? Jesus we really are screwed!
"I can't do it all all I'll do nothing" this thread man 🤣
-
I'm happy for you that you can afford such a lifestyle.
-
-
-
That's all neat but there's a few problems with advocating this approach as a solution to anything.
- The supply chain problem mentioned by the other reply to your comment.
- The economic viability for this approach from both the side of supply and demand.
Local, especially "ethically" produced goods are usually much more expensive, and when people are barely making ends meet.
It's also much harder to expand a business that sources their goods "ethically" and so on.
- This is just not a solution. It's an individualistic approach to an institutional problem.
Companies are largely not accountable, there is largely no economic democracy (vote with your dollar doesn't count), and increasingly all matters of government are once again captured by large corporations and wealthy individuals.
The solution here cannot be to just consume better, something needs to change drastically.
-
I don’t have the option to buy any of those things locally. Just because you can doesn’t mean it is viable for anyone else.
-
👌👍 if you're actually like some help not being helpless let me know you area and I'll find you summer local alternatives to the corps.
-
-
unless your poor, then you buy the cheapest available.
-
-
-
Clothing, food, shelter, software, electronics, medicine, fuel, consumable goods like batteries and much much more. These are just off the top of my head.
-
See my other comment. Bullshit beyond the medicine, healthcare is fucked for sure. Oh and the $20 of rechargeable batteries. Real corpo bullshit buying a pack of AAA or Samsung batteries every 4 or 5 years.
-
-
-
-
You could buy from other company. But if you are buying the same product the pollution fingerprint would be similar on most cases.
You could just not buy the products. But if you buy things is to improve your quality of life.
So the best course of action is not to make people have less quality of life. Instead push for less people on the planet so they can afford more pollution per person.
-
148 comments