5 ms·
>Unless you're eating a ridiculous amount of chicken at every meal, which you probably shouldn't, the cost of chicken could be higher if it means better working
by searine 10y ago
>Unless you're eating a ridiculous amount of chicken at every meal, which you probably shouldn't, the cost of chicken could be higher if it means better working conditions and humane treatment of the animal.
This is a privileged viewpoint.
When dealing with food policy you need to view the food system from the perspective of those impoverished.
Cheap food is a big deal, and often it's the only thing keeping millions of people in this country from starving. As such, keeping food cheap is an cornerstone of governmental policy because hunger=revolution.
- teekert 10y agoKeeping food cheap, or rather, as cheap as possible makes good food a luxury item. Redistribution of wealth would be much more effective.
- toomuchtodo 10y agoFunny how animal welfare activists, environmentalists opposed to factory farming, and minimum wage increase labor reformers should all be working together on this. I would've never thought of that coalition.
- antisthenes 10y agoRedistribution of wealth faces the problem of fleeing capital from your country. Remember that the global elite (people who control the vast majority of the capital) is highly mobile and from their perspective there's no difference between being robbed and having their wealth "redistributed". It should also be taken into account that even if the wealth was redistributed, each poor person would only receive a minute amount, for example let's say 1 share of Google, Amazon and a few more shares. They would almost immediately have to sell this wealth to transform it into income for current needs.
- toomuchtodo 10y agoIn this case, redistribution would be raising wages. It doesn't matter if "the global elite" is mobile. They're not going to move their factory farming operations outside of the US, and if they do, you tariff them when they ship the product back in.
- searine 10y agoCheap food isn't necessarily bad food. Luxury food isn't necessarily good food. No matter the political climate, or income inequality. People need to eat. The idea of cheap food is to completely remove it from the spectrum of politics. Your full dinner should never be subject to political whims. It should be a constant.
- x5n1 10y agoYes and the reason many of those people are poor are low paying jobs.