5 ms·

> I think consumers need to take more personal responsibility in what kind of practices their wallets are supporting. Consumers aren't making the choice to tr

> I think consumers need to take more personal responsibility in what kind of practices their wallets are supporting. Consumers aren't making the choice to treat the animals that way, the business are. And (most likely) without regulation, that will not change. Not enough people/consumers have enough discretionary spending to make a change (I believe). I for one don't even know where I can buy meat from well-treated chickens. Sure I can look it up, but most consumers will need to as well, which will probably not happen. It's about high time we stop putting things on the consumer (see recycling) and make the businesses do better for our ecosystem. I hope not to add too many more regulations, the fewer the better IMHO, but damn, there still needs to be some.

jfim 5y ago
That's the price we pay for making everything an interchangeable commodity. If you go to the grocery store, there might be some organic chicken and non organic chicken, but not that much of a choice otherwise. There's no real way to know whether the place treats their chickens and workers well, what kind of feed or environment the chickens live in, if it's a local farm or a mega factory, and so on. On the upside, the prices are lower and we get any kind of produce year round. On the downside, that produce might come from across the world, be specific breeds that survive shipping well and look good at the expense of taste, and generally not come from local farms but rather large factory farms.
- sweetheart 5y ago
  They killed the chicken, so you know it wasn't treated well.
mosseater 5y ago
Consumers are totally making the choice. You could make the same argument that the consumer's demand for lots of meat is causing the businesses to have to do this. In reality it's a chain of choices made by multiple groups of people. The consumers, the industry, and whatever governmental regulatory bodies are involved. One group can't just give up responsibility of the choices they are making. In the end, consumers drive the market. If there's no consumers of unethical meat, no one will unethically raise meat. Out of the groups of people involved, it's only the consumers participation that keeps the cycle alive. Eating meat isn't a required activity for humans. If the treatment the chickens are going through doesn't seem ethical to you, continuing to eat it is hypocritical. You can totally reduce your meat consumption in order to afford eating ethically raised meat, or just not eat meat at all.
- mattmanser 5y ago
  There are literally 10s of thousands of little things like this in your life. Most of them you will not be aware of. Some of them require huge amounts of effort to figure out. On top of that what you're saying isn't true for huge swathes of the population. They can't afford to eat ethically raised meat, they can't afford to not eat meat protein, and even if there is some (probably imaginary) way for them to do that, it requires a disproportionate amount of effort for them to do so. Most people will think chicken is just chicken. They may be peripherally aware that there's some sort of intensive farming going on, but not really what that entails, or how horrific it is. And so some governments around the world have stepped in and stopped those practices. But not the US. Hence the trade arguments you may have heard about chlorinated chicken. It's not the chlorination that's the problem, it's WHY they need to be chlorinated. Because you need to do that to chicken to make it safe to eat if you grow them in those sort of horrific conditions. So next time you think about blaming the consumer, stop and think. You've been dead wrong once. Government intervention works. Are you wrong again?
  - kapp_in_life 5y ago
    >they can't afford to not eat meat protein, and even if there is some (probably imaginary) way for them to do that, it requires a disproportionate amount of effort for them to do so. Didn't know eating beans instead of meat for protein was a disproportionate amount of effort. It's even cheaper to boot. Those people are not invalids, they just don't care about the lives of farm animals. They may say they do, but their actions prove otherwise.
    - jimmygrapes 5y ago
      While you are not wrong about beans as a protein source, this argument always strikes me as a sort of "let the poor people eat bland mush their entire life, and if they want better food they can get rich like me and have meat from ethical sources." A large part of why factory farming exists is to drive down costs as demand rises, but you gotta keep in mind that the demand rises because eating beans and rice for every meal your entire life is miserable.
sweetheart 5y ago
Of course consumers are making the choice. These places don't sell to nobody, they sell to folks who want these products. And so many of the issues with factory farming, like all the issues listed in the article, are a result of supply trying so desperately to meet demand. When consumer's stop buying, suppliers will stop supplying. As a general rule-of-thumb for whether not any meat is the result of inhumane practices, a safe bet (_very_ safe bet), is that it _all_ is. Just don't buy meat at all and you don't need to worry about whether or not you're ethically sourcing the meat.
- brutal_chaos_ 5y ago
  I'm on a fixed income. I can't afford the better treated chicken option (usually). I still want to eat chicken, so I'll grab something from the low cost options. I (again, usually) cannot vote with my wallet. I know vegetarian diets can be delicious, but I don't want to ONLY eat vegetarian. Also, Vote with your wallet works if the consumer has 100% information (usually assumed, but isn't the case in the real world) and enough money to do so (typically this is assumed as well, and again is untrue in practice, e.g. fixed income, low income, etc).
lumost 5y ago
Without regulation businesses can simply say that their chickens are healthier and happier without changing anything. Are farmer john’s eggs just resold perdue eggs with a markup?

jfim 5y ago

That's the price we pay for making everything an interchangeable commodity. If you go to the grocery store, there might be some organic chicken and non organic chicken, but not that much of a choice otherwise. There's no real way to know whether the place treats their chickens and workers well, what kind of feed or environment the chickens live in, if it's a local farm or a mega factory, and so on. On the upside, the prices are lower and we get any kind of produce year round. On the downside, that produce might come from across the world, be specific breeds that survive shipping well and look good at the expense of taste, and generally not come from local farms but rather large factory farms.

sweetheart 5y ago
They killed the chicken, so you know it wasn't treated well.

mosseater 5y ago

Consumers are totally making the choice. You could make the same argument that the consumer's demand for lots of meat is causing the businesses to have to do this. In reality it's a chain of choices made by multiple groups of people. The consumers, the industry, and whatever governmental regulatory bodies are involved. One group can't just give up responsibility of the choices they are making. In the end, consumers drive the market. If there's no consumers of unethical meat, no one will unethically raise meat. Out of the groups of people involved, it's only the consumers participation that keeps the cycle alive. Eating meat isn't a required activity for humans. If the treatment the chickens are going through doesn't seem ethical to you, continuing to eat it is hypocritical. You can totally reduce your meat consumption in order to afford eating ethically raised meat, or just not eat meat at all.

mattmanser 5y ago
There are literally 10s of thousands of little things like this in your life. Most of them you will not be aware of. Some of them require huge amounts of effort to figure out. On top of that what you're saying isn't true for huge swathes of the population. They can't afford to eat ethically raised meat, they can't afford to not eat meat protein, and even if there is some (probably imaginary) way for them to do that, it requires a disproportionate amount of effort for them to do so. Most people will think chicken is just chicken. They may be peripherally aware that there's some sort of intensive farming going on, but not really what that entails, or how horrific it is. And so some governments around the world have stepped in and stopped those practices. But not the US. Hence the trade arguments you may have heard about chlorinated chicken. It's not the chlorination that's the problem, it's WHY they need to be chlorinated. Because you need to do that to chicken to make it safe to eat if you grow them in those sort of horrific conditions. So next time you think about blaming the consumer, stop and think. You've been dead wrong once. Government intervention works. Are you wrong again?
- kapp_in_life 5y ago
  >they can't afford to not eat meat protein, and even if there is some (probably imaginary) way for them to do that, it requires a disproportionate amount of effort for them to do so. Didn't know eating beans instead of meat for protein was a disproportionate amount of effort. It's even cheaper to boot. Those people are not invalids, they just don't care about the lives of farm animals. They may say they do, but their actions prove otherwise.
  - jimmygrapes 5y ago
    While you are not wrong about beans as a protein source, this argument always strikes me as a sort of "let the poor people eat bland mush their entire life, and if they want better food they can get rich like me and have meat from ethical sources." A large part of why factory farming exists is to drive down costs as demand rises, but you gotta keep in mind that the demand rises because eating beans and rice for every meal your entire life is miserable.

sweetheart 5y ago

Of course consumers are making the choice. These places don't sell to nobody, they sell to folks who want these products. And so many of the issues with factory farming, like all the issues listed in the article, are a result of supply trying so desperately to meet demand. When consumer's stop buying, suppliers will stop supplying. As a general rule-of-thumb for whether not any meat is the result of inhumane practices, a safe bet (_very_ safe bet), is that it _all_ is. Just don't buy meat at all and you don't need to worry about whether or not you're ethically sourcing the meat.

brutal_chaos_ 5y ago
I'm on a fixed income. I can't afford the better treated chicken option (usually). I still want to eat chicken, so I'll grab something from the low cost options. I (again, usually) cannot vote with my wallet. I know vegetarian diets can be delicious, but I don't want to ONLY eat vegetarian. Also, Vote with your wallet works if the consumer has 100% information (usually assumed, but isn't the case in the real world) and enough money to do so (typically this is assumed as well, and again is untrue in practice, e.g. fixed income, low income, etc).

lumost 5y ago

Without regulation businesses can simply say that their chickens are healthier and happier without changing anything. Are farmer john’s eggs just resold perdue eggs with a markup?