> That's like also saying bankrupting consumers means they'll eat less. I would presume that this is true, in the sense that the overall economic footprint of

> That's like also saying bankrupting consumers means they'll eat less. I would presume that this is true, in the sense that the overall economic footprint of what these bankrupted consumers eat will be smaller. The caloric difference will be insignificant. But instead of having it come from meat, and especially cattle, have it come from vegetables and poultry. No one needs to eat red meat every day.