Plus to do large-scale agriculture, you have to rip out the trees and bushes so you can drive the combine harvesters around. This is something I appreciate about pastured meat - trees are an asset to the farm.
I was also talking this way challenging obvious facts as lies when I was eating meat. Itās fine, takes time to realize.
ok but most ppl eat the 50 billion land animals slaughtered in factory farming. Do you think pasture raised is sustainable to feed the whole population?
I do. I think the increased price would even out demand.
I joke that weād need to add a bin for collecting grass for extra feed, but Iām not really joking about that. Think about how many yards full of grass there are across the US. Mow and donate itā¦
I also think that people would offset their purchases by owning their own chickens for eggs.
BTW: It doesnāt help that we are subsidizing corn and soy in the US, and that the excess is going towards factory farm animal feed. Doing that keeps the prices of factory farmed meat artificially low.
The whole Buffalo industry is organic as far as I know and utilizes land good for little else. Buffalo meat is good stuff. In some areas open range cattle, when managed to proper densities, keep down invasive introduced grasses benefiting the environment. They just need to be kept out of riparian areas.
Itās a mistake to categorize all animal production as āusingā land. This implies that the use destroys the land which is not necessarily the case.
For me, this is the crux of the issue - you can grow cattle and chicken on natural land - ie, it doesnāt require tilling or fertilizing or ripping trees out - just fences to keep predators out. Modern farming of annual-based foods (ie, not fruit/nut trees) re-tills the land it grows on every year.
Iād rather use more land for growing if it meant minimizing the processing done to it. From environmental point of view, cutting down trees is the worst thing you can do if you want to sequester CO2.
There are also so many other things that can be done -
-
Grow food in your backyard (yes, it wonāt be all of your food, but if weāre worried that thereās not enough agricultural land, then every square foot helps)
-
Reduce food waste - both what is bought, cooked, and also when neighbors have too much, make it easy to share
-
Grow chickens for eggs (ie, use land that is household land for growing food).
-
How about allowing household pigs again? They eat your leftovers.
-
More fruit and nut trees, less ornamentals. (So many people rip out their fruit trees because they donāt have time to harvest the fruit and hate the mess it makes. Eat it or share it!)
I feel like the issue of meat is this all-or-nothing thing. Itās like āThereās not enough space to meet demand (of a large 16 ounce steak for dinner every day for every person), so letās all go vegetarian.ā Thereās a middle ground in there somewhere!
Add a new reasonā¦
Then putā¦
in my mouth. And concludeā¦
Your brain works in a magical way that I canāt comprehend
Even ripping out trees is complicated. The Forest Service spent 100 years jumping on every forest fire resulting in a massive overgrowth. Theyāre slowly changing their ways, protecting towns with breaks and back-burns and letting fires clean things out. Overgrowth of trees leads to unnatural crown fires which become mega-fires which incinerate seeds and sterilize the soil.Trees compete with each other for resources becoming stressed which makes things worse. They suck up and transpire off massive amounts of water which would otherwise recharge aquifers and fill lakes. In Show Low the Forest Service, after 10 years of failing to come to an agreement with loggers, recently committed 50 million dollars to bring in giant mastication machines to effectively mulch huge sections of forest. Of course they could have made money and created jobs but thatās your government in (tr)action.
South Korea elementary school commencements. Out of 6200 schools, 131 have zero new students and another 125 have only one.
Remote work => mini baby boom in the US last year.
Good or bad for you?
Is lion eating a rabbit good or bad? Neither. Itās just law of nature.
What we see is East Asian countries that were poisoned by Confucius traditions having the lowest birth rates in the world. Itās a fatal bug in the Confucian culture. The common themes include a backward looking culture that places too much emphasis on the old instead of the young. Rigid patriarchy structure that give too little rights to women.
So unless Japan/Korea/China/Hong Kong/Singapore/Taiwan etc fix the bugs in their culture, they are doomed to have these death spirals.
.
You change tune according to your whimps. Are you now agree with my ācruel to be kindā view?
Cruel as in ākilling the elderly offā? No. I donāt agree with killing people intentionally.
Notā¦
is not the same as intentionally.
I see you like to follow views of the day. Chasing whatever media talks about. What I know is content put out by journalists are intentionally dramatic and usually not rigorousā¦ more for read and forget.
Itās useful to pull out old copies of things like Fortune or even The Economist. Look at what seemed to make sense at the time and then consider what actually happened later. Everything appears to make some sort of sense in its immediacy but then itās forgotten when much or all of it turns out not to have been true.
Itās more productive to engage with peopleās arguments directly, preferably with counter arguments backed by data. Continue guessing on peopleās intentions or cherry picking on credentials doesnāt push the understanding forward.
To me, bashing the media is pretty dumb. Like how do you get objective information then? Talking to your one relative in China doesnāt mean you know whatās going on in a country of 1.4B people. There is a difference between news and opinions, and newspapers have both. Itās fine dissing the opinion part, but even there, good opinion writers often cite data to back up their arguments. We can look at the data and make up our own mind.