6 ms·
This is equivalent to saying: "paid labour may never be cost-competitive enough to replace slavery". Sure, "traditional meat" is cheaper. But that's because it
by aviraldg 5y ago
This is equivalent to saying: "paid labour may never be cost-competitive enough to replace slavery".
Sure, "traditional meat" is cheaper. But that's because it involves the torture and murder of animals.
- skybrian 5y agoI think the point is that if it's that expensive, some other alternative is likely to win. There are other meat substitutes, which are already having some success. Expensive technologies win a lot of market share only if no other alternative can work, and even then their use will be minimized.
- drooby 5y agoIt’s also subsidized
- deworms 5y agoAnimal husbandry is not "torture and murder". Man is the ruler of this planet and has the right to feed himself as he sees fit.
- sweetheart 5y ago> Man is the ruler of this planet Might !== right.
- ryan93 5y agoAnimals don’t care if they die. Just do it quick.
- kwere 5y agoIt takes YouTube 30 seconds ti disprove you
- sweetheart 5y agoThis is one of the silliest things I've read in all my discussions about animals and diets.
- Jeff_Brown 5y agoIt's actually smarter than the slavery statement. Slavery wasn't just cruel and sick; it was also economic insanity, the biggest waste of potential in at least America's history. People, educated, free and motivated to innovate, are our greatest asset. (Innovations do break through, of course, even from people denied those things. But even the richest elites would be better of if nobody had to overcome those barriers.)
- xdennis 5y agoSuch drama. We've evolved over millions of years brains so large that we now think that eating food is murder. Our "monkey" ancestors are laughing at us.