6 ms·

From your perspective, you just made a smart comment that adds wider context on this issue. From mine, it's something of a cosmic horror that people can think

From your perspective, you just made a smart comment that adds wider context on this issue. From mine, it's something of a cosmic horror that people can think like this and be proud of themselves. We are wreaking havoc on the Earth and all life on it; strip mining it to the bone for the shallowest purposes. And some people have this strange glee about it... It's Lovecraftian to me. Like cultists worshipping death and darkness - literally. Dramatic? Sure. But you're literally cheer-leading the death of billions and billions of lives as a strong economic indicator. The fact is, we can't afford industrial farming (and many other 'indicators'). The bill is coming due for our lifestyle. Faster and closer every day. What to you is "determination to enjoy life", reads to me as blissful ignorance - but only blissful for the ignorant.

Spivak 4y ago
Of course people are going to be proud, the horrors of capitalism aside, we’ve completely eliminated hunger in the US (not implying we’re the only place). Not one single person is starving because we are unable to feed them. And we’re able to feed everyone with the absolute top tier of food desired by humans. It used to be an event only for special occasions to slaughter your lifestock. The only people who got a steady diet of meat were the wealthy. Cruelty aside that is something to take so much pride in. I think it’s easy to forget the bigger picture of progress here. Are we destroying the planet, oh yeah. Have we created a machine of unfathomable cruelty, also yes. But are we well fed with exactly the food we want to be eating given the choice, hell yeah and that’s an insane accomplishment. That’s something that was not possible 150 years ago.
- throwanem 4y ago
  The question of present concern is whether it will still be possible 150 years hence.
- fnimick 4y ago
  "We're destroying the planet with unfathomable cruelty, but at least we get to eat what we want!" This is not the accomplishment you think it is. This is absolute depravity on a societal scale and the fact that we're all so okay with it is horrifying.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    Okay we have to take a step back here, things are allowed to good and bad. I am in no way whatsoever trying to downplay the bad parts of our meat industry. I feel like there's a tendency in online discussions that if you ever point out any positive aspect of something that someone doesn't like overall, then it's taken as a full endorsement of that thing. Clearly I did not admonish the industry enough to make that clear. We're not going to get anywhere unless we can agree broadly that humans like eating meat. For all of human history it's been the most prized food and sits at the center of a lot of our rituals -- ham for Christmas, lamb for Easter, turkey for Thanksgiving, pork for New Years. I'm not assigning any value judgement to this. And so reaching a point where this thing that previously had to be savored because it was expensive and/or only available after the harvest now being a commodity is an accomplishment. You might not like the manifested will of humanity but we nonetheless did it and that's impressive in and of itself.
- thatguy0900 4y ago
  Where do you live? The greater cruelty is that we can feed everyone, but choose to throw it away instead if they can't pay. My mother worked at inner city schools in Ohio, let me tell you if the schools didn't have a free lunch and breakfast program (something a lot of politicians hate) a lot of kids wouldn't be eating at all. Saying hunger is solved in America is absurd. Maybe it is in a technical sense but it's far more profitable to keep it around, so we do. Rate limit edit: The fact you have to give out food for free is the opposite point. They had food lines during the great depression too. Ideally the government wouldn't have to hand any children food for free lest they not eat at all.
  - nemo44x 4y ago
    - fnimick 4y ago
      Or we give out "free lunches" to people because as a society we don't value them starving? It's not an indicator of some huge oversupply and I certainly hope we wouldn't let them starve if food became slightly more scarce and expensive. Poverty and food anxiety is an enormous issue in this country and it baffles me that you can't see it.
      - nemo44x 4y ago
        It’s literally an indicator of a surplus. If you were ever poor you’d notice they label it “surplus cheese” when you’re given it.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    We're agreeing. This is exactly my point. Hunger is not solved in the US because of capitalism, not because we're unable to produce enough food to feed everyone which is a horror unto itself.
  - groffee 4y ago
imwillofficial 4y ago
I do not equate animal lives to human lives. I am fine with the death of billions of animals to keep humans fed. This is their job. This is the way of nature. We’ve just streamlined it a bit
- nemo44x 4y ago
  I agree. Humans have struggled to feed themselves since the beginning. We finally, only recently, figured out how to make people not starve to death and now we have people saying we are morally wrong for living how humans always wanted to. I think sone people need the guilt of being alive religion gave them. But they rejected traditional methods and invented a new religion of self hatred. Humans as sinners that need to seek redemption or some other silly idea.
  - hn-is-retarded 4y ago
- virgildotcodes 4y ago
  Humans are but one species of animal. We may like them better, given that we are them. We may like our families more than strangers as well. That does not mean that a machine that used unfathomable cruelty to concentrate the rest of humanity into a slurry for the pleasure of our family members would not be a horror.
  - nemo44x 4y ago
    Humans are more important by far. This idea that a cow’s life is as precious as a human’s life is the worst type of misanthropic thought. There is a hierarchy and although we shouldn’t torture living things, giving them “1 bad day” is totally ethical when used to endure and pleasure. I admit we don’t live up to that standard necessarily, but we should strive for it. Ideally everyone that wants to is eating happy animals at their pleasure.
    - virgildotcodes 4y ago
nemo44x 4y ago
I guess we can agree to disagree. Livestock is something only the wealthy could eat daily and today we have discovered methods that allow anyone to enjoy this. This is great progress. You’re free to choose your lifestyle of course and I’m grateful to live in a place and time where that’s possible. But I don’t subscribe to your beliefs. I have access to the same information you do. I possibly have a more critical appraisal of it and I don’t believe the hype. People have acted like you since the dawn of time. They might be right one day but they’ve been wrong every time so far. Line the guys who claim the market is crashing every month.
- eyko 4y ago
  > we have discovered methods that allow anyone to enjoy this. This is great progress. Just because we can produce (and consume) vast amounts of meant doesn't mean we must. Restraint is a virtue.
  - nemo44x 4y ago
    You sound like a Catholic. Just because we can have sex doesn’t mean we should, etc. What is the point of restraint? To what end? I should suffer to make your ideal of how the works ought to be a reality? I’m not into your religion.
    - tpush 4y ago
      > What is the point of restraint? To what end? You know, stopping climate change. The thing that's gonna keep your grandchildren from eating meat at all if people don't stop consuming so much of it.
- notch656a 4y ago
  A cow was worth about 10 months of skilled labor in ancient Rome [0]. If you keep the fat trim that's maybe ~600-700 pounds of usable meat. That's about 0.01666 of a month's salary for a pound of meat. So if you were willing to spend 10% of your salary on meat, you could have a quarter pounder everyday. Not cheap, but if you really liked meat and you had a semi-skilled job you could afford to eat it everyday. [0] https://www.money.org/uploads/pdfs/press-releases/ANAPR.10.16.06%20Ancient_Coins_Sidebar.pdf https://www.money.org/uploads/pdfs/press-releases/ANAPR.10.1...
throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
Yes.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Spivak 4y ago

Of course people are going to be proud, the horrors of capitalism aside, we’ve completely eliminated hunger in the US (not implying we’re the only place). Not one single person is starving because we are unable to feed them. And we’re able to feed everyone with the absolute top tier of food desired by humans. It used to be an event only for special occasions to slaughter your lifestock. The only people who got a steady diet of meat were the wealthy. Cruelty aside that is something to take so much pride in. I think it’s easy to forget the bigger picture of progress here. Are we destroying the planet, oh yeah. Have we created a machine of unfathomable cruelty, also yes. But are we well fed with exactly the food we want to be eating given the choice, hell yeah and that’s an insane accomplishment. That’s something that was not possible 150 years ago.

throwanem 4y ago
The question of present concern is whether it will still be possible 150 years hence.
fnimick 4y ago
"We're destroying the planet with unfathomable cruelty, but at least we get to eat what we want!" This is not the accomplishment you think it is. This is absolute depravity on a societal scale and the fact that we're all so okay with it is horrifying.
- Spivak 4y ago
  Okay we have to take a step back here, things are allowed to good and bad. I am in no way whatsoever trying to downplay the bad parts of our meat industry. I feel like there's a tendency in online discussions that if you ever point out any positive aspect of something that someone doesn't like overall, then it's taken as a full endorsement of that thing. Clearly I did not admonish the industry enough to make that clear. We're not going to get anywhere unless we can agree broadly that humans like eating meat. For all of human history it's been the most prized food and sits at the center of a lot of our rituals -- ham for Christmas, lamb for Easter, turkey for Thanksgiving, pork for New Years. I'm not assigning any value judgement to this. And so reaching a point where this thing that previously had to be savored because it was expensive and/or only available after the harvest now being a commodity is an accomplishment. You might not like the manifested will of humanity but we nonetheless did it and that's impressive in and of itself.
thatguy0900 4y ago
Where do you live? The greater cruelty is that we can feed everyone, but choose to throw it away instead if they can't pay. My mother worked at inner city schools in Ohio, let me tell you if the schools didn't have a free lunch and breakfast program (something a lot of politicians hate) a lot of kids wouldn't be eating at all. Saying hunger is solved in America is absurd. Maybe it is in a technical sense but it's far more profitable to keep it around, so we do. Rate limit edit: The fact you have to give out food for free is the opposite point. They had food lines during the great depression too. Ideally the government wouldn't have to hand any children food for free lest they not eat at all.
- nemo44x 4y ago
  - fnimick 4y ago
    Or we give out "free lunches" to people because as a society we don't value them starving? It's not an indicator of some huge oversupply and I certainly hope we wouldn't let them starve if food became slightly more scarce and expensive. Poverty and food anxiety is an enormous issue in this country and it baffles me that you can't see it.
    - nemo44x 4y ago
      It’s literally an indicator of a surplus. If you were ever poor you’d notice they label it “surplus cheese” when you’re given it.
- Spivak 4y ago
  We're agreeing. This is exactly my point. Hunger is not solved in the US because of capitalism, not because we're unable to produce enough food to feed everyone which is a horror unto itself.
- groffee 4y ago

imwillofficial 4y ago

I do not equate animal lives to human lives. I am fine with the death of billions of animals to keep humans fed. This is their job. This is the way of nature. We’ve just streamlined it a bit

nemo44x 4y ago
I agree. Humans have struggled to feed themselves since the beginning. We finally, only recently, figured out how to make people not starve to death and now we have people saying we are morally wrong for living how humans always wanted to. I think sone people need the guilt of being alive religion gave them. But they rejected traditional methods and invented a new religion of self hatred. Humans as sinners that need to seek redemption or some other silly idea.
- hn-is-retarded 4y ago
virgildotcodes 4y ago
Humans are but one species of animal. We may like them better, given that we are them. We may like our families more than strangers as well. That does not mean that a machine that used unfathomable cruelty to concentrate the rest of humanity into a slurry for the pleasure of our family members would not be a horror.
- nemo44x 4y ago
  Humans are more important by far. This idea that a cow’s life is as precious as a human’s life is the worst type of misanthropic thought. There is a hierarchy and although we shouldn’t torture living things, giving them “1 bad day” is totally ethical when used to endure and pleasure. I admit we don’t live up to that standard necessarily, but we should strive for it. Ideally everyone that wants to is eating happy animals at their pleasure.
  - virgildotcodes 4y ago

nemo44x 4y ago

I guess we can agree to disagree. Livestock is something only the wealthy could eat daily and today we have discovered methods that allow anyone to enjoy this. This is great progress. You’re free to choose your lifestyle of course and I’m grateful to live in a place and time where that’s possible. But I don’t subscribe to your beliefs. I have access to the same information you do. I possibly have a more critical appraisal of it and I don’t believe the hype. People have acted like you since the dawn of time. They might be right one day but they’ve been wrong every time so far. Line the guys who claim the market is crashing every month.

eyko 4y ago
> we have discovered methods that allow anyone to enjoy this. This is great progress. Just because we can produce (and consume) vast amounts of meant doesn't mean we must. Restraint is a virtue.
- nemo44x 4y ago
  You sound like a Catholic. Just because we can have sex doesn’t mean we should, etc. What is the point of restraint? To what end? I should suffer to make your ideal of how the works ought to be a reality? I’m not into your religion.
  - tpush 4y ago
    > What is the point of restraint? To what end? You know, stopping climate change. The thing that's gonna keep your grandchildren from eating meat at all if people don't stop consuming so much of it.
notch656a 4y ago
A cow was worth about 10 months of skilled labor in ancient Rome [0]. If you keep the fat trim that's maybe ~600-700 pounds of usable meat. That's about 0.01666 of a month's salary for a pound of meat. So if you were willing to spend 10% of your salary on meat, you could have a quarter pounder everyday. Not cheap, but if you really liked meat and you had a semi-skilled job you could afford to eat it everyday. [0] https://www.money.org/uploads/pdfs/press-releases/ANAPR.10.16.06%20Ancient_Coins_Sidebar.pdf https://www.money.org/uploads/pdfs/press-releases/ANAPR.10.1...

throwaway0x7E6 4y ago

Yes.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]