5 ms·

Yea this also. Colorado, one of the major state producers requires all chickens who produce eggs for sale to be cage free as of January 1st.

kibwen 4y ago
Same here in Massachusetts.
justinator 4y ago
As an athlete who eats like a highschool linebacker (in Colorado), I've been watching eggs prices climb up $0.50 each week for a dozen, then jump $3 in one week. Now there's none on the shelves at all.
- amalgamated_inc 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - barbazoo 4y ago
    They definitely did help the chickens.
    - HideousKojima 4y ago
      Unfortunately for the chickens, a government is supposed to serve the interests and well-being of its citizens, not that of its livestock (insert joke about there being no difference).
      - NineStarPoint 4y ago
        Maybe the majority of the citizens wants to live in a society that is kinder to animals? (That said citizens might not fully appreciate the knock on effects that will have on costs is a separate question. Do people actually want to be kinder to animals if it means eggs cost twice as much?)
        amalgamated_inc 4y ago
        Well those people can already buy free-range chickens. This is preventing people who'd rather pay less for cruelly-treated chickens from making that choice.
        barbazoo 4y ago
        Given that it's a democratically elected government that made the regulation I don't think there is anything the "people who'd rather pay less for cruelly-treated chickens" can do here other than try to lobby for the rule to be reverted or moving somewhere where animals can be treated "cruelly" without repercussions. It's not always only a question of free market.
        amalgamated_inc 4y ago
        This argument I'll classify as "might makes right."
        barbazoo 4y ago
        Not a big fan of democracy then I'll take it?
  - mint2 4y ago
    Treating the short term adjustment effects of a new rule as the same as the eventual steady state impact of the rule makes arguments against new rules seem deceptive and misleading
    - amalgamated_inc 4y ago
      Ignoring the cumulative burden of infinite bureaucracy and surveillance seems deceptive and misleading
  - mullingitover 4y ago
    At least in California it was more like "We voted for this in overwhelming numbers because industrialized animal cruelty does not align with our society's values."[1] [1] https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_12,_Farm_Animal_Confinement_Initiative_(2018) https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_12,_Farm_Anim...
jwineinger 4y ago
What is the intent of this change?

kibwen 4y ago

Same here in Massachusetts.

justinator 4y ago

As an athlete who eats like a highschool linebacker (in Colorado), I've been watching eggs prices climb up $0.50 each week for a dozen, then jump $3 in one week. Now there's none on the shelves at all.

amalgamated_inc 4y ago
[flagged]
- barbazoo 4y ago
  They definitely did help the chickens.
  - HideousKojima 4y ago
    Unfortunately for the chickens, a government is supposed to serve the interests and well-being of its citizens, not that of its livestock (insert joke about there being no difference).
    - NineStarPoint 4y ago
      Maybe the majority of the citizens wants to live in a society that is kinder to animals? (That said citizens might not fully appreciate the knock on effects that will have on costs is a separate question. Do people actually want to be kinder to animals if it means eggs cost twice as much?)
      - amalgamated_inc 4y ago
        Well those people can already buy free-range chickens. This is preventing people who'd rather pay less for cruelly-treated chickens from making that choice.
        barbazoo 4y ago
        Given that it's a democratically elected government that made the regulation I don't think there is anything the "people who'd rather pay less for cruelly-treated chickens" can do here other than try to lobby for the rule to be reverted or moving somewhere where animals can be treated "cruelly" without repercussions. It's not always only a question of free market.
        amalgamated_inc 4y ago
        This argument I'll classify as "might makes right."
        barbazoo 4y ago
        Not a big fan of democracy then I'll take it?
- mint2 4y ago
  Treating the short term adjustment effects of a new rule as the same as the eventual steady state impact of the rule makes arguments against new rules seem deceptive and misleading
  - amalgamated_inc 4y ago
    Ignoring the cumulative burden of infinite bureaucracy and surveillance seems deceptive and misleading
- mullingitover 4y ago
  At least in California it was more like "We voted for this in overwhelming numbers because industrialized animal cruelty does not align with our society's values."[1] [1] https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_12,_Farm_Animal_Confinement_Initiative_(2018) https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_12,_Farm_Anim...

jwineinger 4y ago

What is the intent of this change?