4 ms·

> Food isn't all about efficiency This thread you have been commenting on is talking about efficiency... > I think it's equally likely that it'll stay an over

by shlant 7y ago

> Food isn't all about efficiency This thread you have been commenting on is talking about efficiency... > I think it's equally likely that it'll stay an overpriced niche product You say, ignoring that the opposite is happening > Yet, it's more expensive, so there clearly other inefficiences in that process It's still currently expensive because of the sunk cost of R&D. Now it's just about demand and scale which are both there and growing. Your arguments are weak. All you have is "it's more expensive" and "It's tasty". Keep your head in the sand.

gridlockd 7y ago
> This thread you have been commenting on is talking about efficiency... Yes, but this kind of raw input efficiency isn't the only consideration when it comes to food. There would still be plant-based products that are more efficient to grow than other plant-based products. Apples are cheaper to grow than Oranges, which is exactly what this comparison of food for livestock against food for people is. Beef production is 100% efficient at producing beef. Milk production is 100% efficient at producing milk. You just claim these alternatives are "more efficient", yet they are more expensive, they do not taste quite like beef, nor do they have the same nutritional profile. They're more efficient on some metrics, some of which are irrelevant to us. > You say, ignoring that the opposite is happening It's not clear that the opposite is happening. There's a lot of media buzz around Beyond Meat or Impossible Burger (and their IPOs). Their initial output was tiny, so naturally it can currently grow fast. This is the hype phase. We'll see how it works out in a few years. > It's still currently expensive because of the sunk cost of R&D. I doubt that. Those companies are in their growth phase and they're burning lots of capital. This is not the time to pay back on R&D. It's rather that their processes are not mature, that they're simply trying to figure out their markup, and/or that they have lots of other overhead that beef producers do not have. For instance, would you not count the marketing budget as an "inefficiency"? > Your arguments are weak. Well, alright. I think your "efficiency" argument is weak. It's pretty much irrelevant to our economy. Just look at how cheap beef is. Shockingly cheap, in fact. It could easily tolerate price increases. Even if plant-based meat replacements were significantly cheaper, they probably wouldn't displace a lot of demand for beef. Rather, they'd displace demand for vegetarian/vegan products. Those countries where meat is relatively more expensive, where efficiency is more important, those already have a rich cuisine based on plant-based products. They already have their own "fake meat" made out of for example Tofu. In my experience, that stuff is already superior to crappy Western products made for vegetarians.
- shlant 7y ago
  > Beef production is 100% efficient at producing beef. Milk production is 100% efficient at producing milk. Alright, I think there is little point in continuing this discussion. You don't seem to understand what "efficient" means and have weak, unrelated, unsubstantiated retorts for everything. I'm sure you'll always argue that beef isn't that bad/"is efficient for what it is" regardless of the reality (which is saying a lot considering beef is the worst of all the meats). You are free to eat what you want, but at least own up to the reality of your food choices.
  - gridlockd 7y ago
    "You have weak arguments" isn't much of an argument either, you know. I'm well aware of what "efficient" means. I do not disagree that shoving raw plant material down people's throats is an extremely efficient way to feed them. A slightly less efficient way would be to prepare that plant material into something more palatable. Livestock is far less efficient still, and at the other end of that "efficiency spectrum" you have something like Kobe Beef. Yet, if I was to argue that we should all be eating cheap US beef instead of expensive Kobe beef because that is more efficient, it would be an obviously silly argument. Both products just don't play in the same league. > beef is the worst of all the meats In what sense? Environmentally? Perhaps. Nutritionally? Absolutely not.

by shlant 7y ago

gridlockd 7y ago

> This thread you have been commenting on is talking about efficiency... Yes, but this kind of raw input efficiency isn't the only consideration when it comes to food. There would still be plant-based products that are more efficient to grow than other plant-based products. Apples are cheaper to grow than Oranges, which is exactly what this comparison of food for livestock against food for people is. Beef production is 100% efficient at producing beef. Milk production is 100% efficient at producing milk. You just claim these alternatives are "more efficient", yet they are more expensive, they do not taste quite like beef, nor do they have the same nutritional profile. They're more efficient on some metrics, some of which are irrelevant to us. > You say, ignoring that the opposite is happening It's not clear that the opposite is happening. There's a lot of media buzz around Beyond Meat or Impossible Burger (and their IPOs). Their initial output was tiny, so naturally it can currently grow fast. This is the hype phase. We'll see how it works out in a few years. > It's still currently expensive because of the sunk cost of R&D. I doubt that. Those companies are in their growth phase and they're burning lots of capital. This is not the time to pay back on R&D. It's rather that their processes are not mature, that they're simply trying to figure out their markup, and/or that they have lots of other overhead that beef producers do not have. For instance, would you not count the marketing budget as an "inefficiency"? > Your arguments are weak. Well, alright. I think your "efficiency" argument is weak. It's pretty much irrelevant to our economy. Just look at how cheap beef is. Shockingly cheap, in fact. It could easily tolerate price increases. Even if plant-based meat replacements were significantly cheaper, they probably wouldn't displace a lot of demand for beef. Rather, they'd displace demand for vegetarian/vegan products. Those countries where meat is relatively more expensive, where efficiency is more important, those already have a rich cuisine based on plant-based products. They already have their own "fake meat" made out of for example Tofu. In my experience, that stuff is already superior to crappy Western products made for vegetarians.

shlant 7y ago
> Beef production is 100% efficient at producing beef. Milk production is 100% efficient at producing milk. Alright, I think there is little point in continuing this discussion. You don't seem to understand what "efficient" means and have weak, unrelated, unsubstantiated retorts for everything. I'm sure you'll always argue that beef isn't that bad/"is efficient for what it is" regardless of the reality (which is saying a lot considering beef is the worst of all the meats). You are free to eat what you want, but at least own up to the reality of your food choices.
- gridlockd 7y ago
  "You have weak arguments" isn't much of an argument either, you know. I'm well aware of what "efficient" means. I do not disagree that shoving raw plant material down people's throats is an extremely efficient way to feed them. A slightly less efficient way would be to prepare that plant material into something more palatable. Livestock is far less efficient still, and at the other end of that "efficiency spectrum" you have something like Kobe Beef. Yet, if I was to argue that we should all be eating cheap US beef instead of expensive Kobe beef because that is more efficient, it would be an obviously silly argument. Both products just don't play in the same league. > beef is the worst of all the meats In what sense? Environmentally? Perhaps. Nutritionally? Absolutely not.