Skip Navigation

queermunist she/her

@ queermunist @lemmy.ml

Posts
2
Comments
3833
Joined
3 yr. ago

/u/outwrangle before everything went to shit in 2020, /u/emma_lazarus for a while after that, now I’m all queermunist!

  • When meat becomes unaffordable, it's banned for the poor. A partial ban is still a ban, if they're forced to only have meat once or twice a week that will still create resentment - but it wouldn't be a proletarian revolution. It'd be a reactionary counterrevolution, with Nazis (backed by ranchers and meat industry money) screaming "LOOK AT WHAT THEY TOOK FROM YOU!!!1" as they march vegans like me into gas chambers.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • One of my favorite Threshold songs tbh

  • There are far more poor people than there are rich people, which is why food prices are common precursors to riots and coups. The idea isn't feasible because the poor will notice when they are forced to eat beans and rice, while their masters get to have steak. Unfairness breeds resentment. If you want to destabilize society a good way to do it is to make food access even more unequal.

  • That story about the creep generating AI nudes of his classmates and getting smacked around for it is really revealing. There's a small but relentless segment of posters who are mad that she hit him, and I assume these fucking creeps are doing the same shit. They sympathize more with the boy who got arrested than the girl who got expelled because they see themselves in his shoes.

    Why did they even leave Reddit?

  • A dividend that presumably pays out during tax returns at the end of the year (anything else would end up overly complicated) is a pipe dream for people living paycheck-to-paycheck, it's still effectively a ban for people too poor to afford the price hikes. They can't afford to pay a higher price now and then get a rebate later, they're just going to be priced out of eating meat entirely.

  • The exact opposite - just because they're rich doesn't mean they should get the privilege of eating meat.

    If we're going to ban meat for poor people then we have to ban it for rich people too.

  • Getting your caffeine from anything other than the cheapest pills you can find is actually bourgeois decadence.

  • Again, price "incentives" are just a ban for poor people. A poor person who can't afford beef is banned from eating it. It's basically illegal with extra steps, because they can't afford to buy it and the only alternatives are illegal.

    If we're going to ban meat we should apply the ban equally and fairly, instead of just banning poor people.

  • It's interesting that you think prices are voluntary.

    If meat is too expensive for poor people to eat, then it's the same as banning poor people from eating meat.

  • Israel can't allow this, it would reveal how many of their own people they killed.

  • If we stopped hurting animals we could rewild a lot more land. All that pasture, boom, back to the wild. Then, all the farmland used to grow feed for animals, split it up into what is necessary for human flourishing and then the rest can also go back to the wild.

    That's the efficient use of land to feed the maximum number of people while maintaining the maximum wild acreage.

  • Yeah, and those extra steps require more land and more water and more transportation and more harvesting and more processing etc etc. Every extra step makes the whole system less efficient. We're essentially sacrificing farmland.

  • Near slaughter when they get fattened up on feed lots (called finishing) it's mostly cracked corn grain, it's more towards the beggining of life that they're fed roughage with only a small amount of supporting grain.

  • Okay, but can we stop using suitable farmland to grow corn cattle feed?

  • <to the tune of the song of the same name by the Red Hot Chili Peppers>

  • This thread picked a fight with me, the OP is literally calling me evil.

    Then you continued the fight, with "uncompromising shrieks” and “absurd” and “childish.”

    Then I fight back and you cry about me picking fights.

    Talking to you is self harm. Blocked.

  • Who said we should eliminate subsidies from both sides? Subsidizing good things is good. Subsidizing bad things is bad.

    We should subsidize the alternatives. I'm not some free market moron. I just recognize that the subsidies for milk make it cheaper to produce, and thus increase its production. Increased milk production means more byproducts with greater availability and cheaper costs. Whether it's a waste product or not is irrelevant, price is determined by supply and demand. Decrease supply, prices go up.

    Then, maybe, we could make a world where no one exploits animals for their milk. It's definitely a first step.

  • Your employer already governs your livelihood through your paycheck.

    That's why employers should be elected, not just be rich people that can afford to hire workers.

  • "We came, we saw, he died! Haha!"

    Every current and former member of the US federal government should be in jail.