4 ms·

> ...but how can we move that further as not only a society, but a species? The answer is simple, the execution is hard and will piss a lot of people off: star

> ...but how can we move that further as not only a society, but a species? The answer is simple, the execution is hard and will piss a lot of people off: start treating red meat as a luxury item, and slowly introduce taxes on top of its price, like we do for alcohol and tobacco. Nothing drastic of course, just a few cents extra every half a year or so to make people reconsider their eating habits again and again. But if we're talking about the US specifically, that's not even necessary. Just removing subsidies that are already handed out to the meat industry will achieve the same result.

BeefySwain 7y ago
Do we have time to do it "just a few cents extra every half a year or so"? From what I read, that would have worked if we started in the 80's or so.
- input_sh 7y ago
  I personally believe that there's no way we'll undo the damage. Unless some drastic change happens in a way we govern ourselves really quickly, the best we could hope for is to minimize the negative effects of our actions. As such, any positive action is better than none.
Carioca 7y ago
There are other measures that could help, like actually policing the region and promoting economic alternatives for local population. Sadly, the currently Brazilian government decided to stop both of them
- icebraining 7y ago
  I dislike the Brazilian government, but the rest of the world shouldn't wash their hands of the problem either. If the Amazon is important to the whole world, the whole world should be giving that government a damn good deal to convince it to prevent deforestation. As an European, I was quite disgusted by the reactions of the "EU leaders".
  - Carioca 7y ago
    I wholeheartedly agree, but Bolsonaro has made it so that every step in that direction is extraordinarily difficult. There is a fund (Amazon Fund) that both provided material resources to IBAMA[1] and financed sustainable economic practices. Earlier this year, the government fired the board of directors of that fund and ended its transparency efforts. The money mostly came from the Norwegian and German governments, to the tune of about US$1.2 billion total[2]. Now both countries have stopped donating to the fund[3]. When Macron offered US$ 22m to help with the fires, Bolsonaro responded by first accusing him of being a “colonialist”[4]. He then proceeds to call Macron's wife ugly because WHY NOT?[5]. His finance minister, who was supposed to be one of the more moderate forces in this government, repeats the insult in a conference[6] This was all “free money”, only strings attached was oversight of its usage 1: Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources, one of two federal agencies in charge of conservation 2: http://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/donations/ http://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/donations/ 3: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-amazon-fund-donation-dispute-brazil-deforestation-jair-bolsonaro https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-a... 4: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/27/world/americas/brazil-amazon-aid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/27/world/americas/brazil-ama... 5: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/26/macron-rebukes-bolsonaro-over-extraordinarily-rude-comments-about-wife https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/26/macron-rebukes... 6: https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/business/2019/09/brazils-economy-minister-insults-wife-of-frances-president.shtml https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/business/2019...
ptah 7y ago
you don't have to tax beef. merely remove the subsidies given to it's producers and let the free market cut down the consumption
- input_sh 7y ago
  Did you read my second paragraph?
- vonmoltke 7y ago
  How much are those subsidies? Would it really be enough to raise the price sufficiently to drive change?
tomp 7y ago
The correct solution is, of course, to tax things according to their externalities. So beef produced with methods that result in less CH4 should be cheaper than more polluting beef.

BeefySwain 7y ago

Do we have time to do it "just a few cents extra every half a year or so"? From what I read, that would have worked if we started in the 80's or so.

input_sh 7y ago
I personally believe that there's no way we'll undo the damage. Unless some drastic change happens in a way we govern ourselves really quickly, the best we could hope for is to minimize the negative effects of our actions. As such, any positive action is better than none.

Carioca 7y ago

There are other measures that could help, like actually policing the region and promoting economic alternatives for local population. Sadly, the currently Brazilian government decided to stop both of them

icebraining 7y ago
I dislike the Brazilian government, but the rest of the world shouldn't wash their hands of the problem either. If the Amazon is important to the whole world, the whole world should be giving that government a damn good deal to convince it to prevent deforestation. As an European, I was quite disgusted by the reactions of the "EU leaders".
- Carioca 7y ago
  I wholeheartedly agree, but Bolsonaro has made it so that every step in that direction is extraordinarily difficult. There is a fund (Amazon Fund) that both provided material resources to IBAMA[1] and financed sustainable economic practices. Earlier this year, the government fired the board of directors of that fund and ended its transparency efforts. The money mostly came from the Norwegian and German governments, to the tune of about US$1.2 billion total[2]. Now both countries have stopped donating to the fund[3]. When Macron offered US$ 22m to help with the fires, Bolsonaro responded by first accusing him of being a “colonialist”[4]. He then proceeds to call Macron's wife ugly because WHY NOT?[5]. His finance minister, who was supposed to be one of the more moderate forces in this government, repeats the insult in a conference[6] This was all “free money”, only strings attached was oversight of its usage 1: Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources, one of two federal agencies in charge of conservation 2: http://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/donations/ http://www.amazonfund.gov.br/en/donations/ 3: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-amazon-fund-donation-dispute-brazil-deforestation-jair-bolsonaro https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-a... 4: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/27/world/americas/brazil-amazon-aid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/27/world/americas/brazil-ama... 5: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/26/macron-rebukes-bolsonaro-over-extraordinarily-rude-comments-about-wife https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/26/macron-rebukes... 6: https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/business/2019/09/brazils-economy-minister-insults-wife-of-frances-president.shtml https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/business/2019...

ptah 7y ago

you don't have to tax beef. merely remove the subsidies given to it's producers and let the free market cut down the consumption

input_sh 7y ago
Did you read my second paragraph?
vonmoltke 7y ago
How much are those subsidies? Would it really be enough to raise the price sufficiently to drive change?

tomp 7y ago

The correct solution is, of course, to tax things according to their externalities. So beef produced with methods that result in less CH4 should be cheaper than more polluting beef.