Veganism is such an elite issue like some people will fight everything except billionaires and the rich.
Veganism cant be and shouldnt be promoted especially in global south where children are still malnourished. Veganism also leads to dehumanization of certain cultures.
I am not vegan. But I’m pretty sure if everyone switched to a plant-based diet it would require significantly less land usage. And thus we could more easily feed everyone. Including those malnourished children.
The amount of available agricultural land is not a factor? I’m just pointing out that one is more efficient than the other. And will feed more people with a given available space.
I don’t think that’s really true. Meat is a delicacy for poorer communities that are basically vegan due to only being able to afford cheap grains / vegetables
In my country where alot of children are malnourished and significant population is stunted Its not feasible nor realistic to shift to only veggies.
Alot of people here have easier access to meat than they do to vegetables because the amount of rabid capitalism that goes on that breaks both farmers and consumers benefiting the middlemen.
People often cant grow their own veggies due to basically land being held by feudal lords, alot of poorer backward communities have relied on cattle for their living due to this.
The supposed upper caste and right wing extremists present eating meat as sin, they often lynch and harass minorities/backward groups who consume meat so it is hard for me to get in line with veganism.
Edit: I think veganism is not something to be pushed, it will come naturally when maybe we solve our other societal ills
Well, that’s a pretty abyssmal situation in your country and I’m sorry to hear that. I would not argue that not eating meat is better than malnourishment or starvation.
You know you can do both, right? Be vegan and fight billionaires.
But I do somewhat agree that it is an elite issue, you do need to be in a somewhat privileged position to become vegan.
But also… who is promoting the global south to go vegan? As far as I’m aware, most vegans just try to get the people in generally developed countries to go vegan, as you have plenty of choices there, and most people are not fighting malnourishment.
And also, I think it’s perfectly justified and not dehumanizing to critique cultures that promote (animal) abuse. Culture is a terrible justification for anything, if that thing is actually harmful.
they only compared retail costs. they didn’t account for people who get food for free or near free through poverty subsistence programs or hunting or fishing or farming their own. it basically didn’t cover poor people at all.
Retail costs are still costs and plant based diets are globally around 30% cheaper than other diets. Where did I specify consumer (or any other particular) cost in my claim? Do you actually think the government giving free food means the food is cost free as well? Do you think self-sufficient people will affect the measure of the cost of food?
Specification is not needed, even you assumed these were retail costs from the get-go,
they only compared retail costs
on the next sentence you conflated retail costs with consumer cost
they didn’t account for people
which of course they didn’t, retail costs will be the same even if the person getting the items isn’t paying for them.
When someone says “this is 30% cheaper now”, any reasonable person would understand that they’re referring to the retail cost, not the consumer cost unless otherwise specified. Like “this is 30% cheaper on my food stamps”.
Veganism is such an elite issue like some people will fight everything except billionaires and the rich.
Veganism cant be and shouldnt be promoted especially in global south where children are still malnourished. Veganism also leads to dehumanization of certain cultures.
https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets
I am not vegan. But I’m pretty sure if everyone switched to a plant-based diet it would require significantly less land usage. And thus we could more easily feed everyone. Including those malnourished children.
do you really think people are malnourished because of insufficient land?
The amount of available agricultural land is not a factor? I’m just pointing out that one is more efficient than the other. And will feed more people with a given available space.
I’ve never seen a plan to actually achieve this
I didn’t say it was feasible. Just knocking down an argument that meat is a better choice for feeding more people.
I don’t think that’s really true. Meat is a delicacy for poorer communities that are basically vegan due to only being able to afford cheap grains / vegetables
In my country where alot of children are malnourished and significant population is stunted Its not feasible nor realistic to shift to only veggies.
Alot of people here have easier access to meat than they do to vegetables because the amount of rabid capitalism that goes on that breaks both farmers and consumers benefiting the middlemen. People often cant grow their own veggies due to basically land being held by feudal lords, alot of poorer backward communities have relied on cattle for their living due to this.
The supposed upper caste and right wing extremists present eating meat as sin, they often lynch and harass minorities/backward groups who consume meat so it is hard for me to get in line with veganism.
Edit: I think veganism is not something to be pushed, it will come naturally when maybe we solve our other societal ills
Well, that’s a pretty abyssmal situation in your country and I’m sorry to hear that. I would not argue that not eating meat is better than malnourishment or starvation.
You know you can do both, right? Be vegan and fight billionaires. But I do somewhat agree that it is an elite issue, you do need to be in a somewhat privileged position to become vegan.
But also… who is promoting the global south to go vegan? As far as I’m aware, most vegans just try to get the people in generally developed countries to go vegan, as you have plenty of choices there, and most people are not fighting malnourishment.
And also, I think it’s perfectly justified and not dehumanizing to critique cultures that promote (animal) abuse. Culture is a terrible justification for anything, if that thing is actually harmful.
Plant based diets are globally around 30% cheaper than other diets and it’s adoption not only can be healthy, but it would be sustainable for the planet.
this study is too narrow to make such a claim
How is it too narrow? They have considered data from more than 150 countries.
they only compared retail costs. they didn’t account for people who get food for free or near free through poverty subsistence programs or hunting or fishing or farming their own. it basically didn’t cover poor people at all.
Retail costs are still costs and plant based diets are globally around 30% cheaper than other diets. Where did I specify consumer (or any other particular) cost in my claim? Do you actually think the government giving free food means the food is cost free as well? Do you think self-sufficient people will affect the measure of the cost of food?
you didnt specify. you made a very broad claim which is not supported by the narrow study.
Specification is not needed, even you assumed these were retail costs from the get-go,
on the next sentence you conflated retail costs with consumer cost
which of course they didn’t, retail costs will be the same even if the person getting the items isn’t paying for them.
When someone says “this is 30% cheaper now”, any reasonable person would understand that they’re referring to the retail cost, not the consumer cost unless otherwise specified. Like “this is 30% cheaper on my food stamps”.
it seems like you understand exactly what i’m saying, but you need to somehow paint yourself as right and me as wrong. fine.
have a nice day.