6 ms·

But, if Americans ate more meat then the people who grow and sell that meat would make more money, and they would spend more of that money to lobby congresspeop

But, if Americans ate more meat then the people who grow and sell that meat would make more money, and they would spend more of that money to lobby congresspeople to convince the populace to eat more meat so they would make more money so they would have more money to spend lobbying the congresspeople to convince the populace to eat more meat so they would make more money

IAmBroom 10mo ago
I'm not convinced that advertising is why my refrigerator contains steak, chicken, octopus, salmon, and bacon. I think my tongue and my belly are the real conspirators.
- soulofmischief 10mo ago
  Lobbying is a real thing, propaganda is a real thing, corporate-government collusion is a real thing. The meat and dairy industries are definitely things, and are GIGANTIC, pouring millions and billions into deceiving the public. If you're looking around the room and don't see the sucker, it might be you.
  - tracker1 10mo ago
    They're nothing compared to the likes of ConAgra, General Mills and Kellogs
    - mrguyorama 10mo ago
      Please google the revenue and/or market cap for Tyson Foods vs Conagra. Conagra even sells meat products! You've got it backwards.
      - tracker1 10mo ago
        Tyson: $20.25B ConAgra: $8B General Mills: $23.36B Kellanova (Kellogg's): $29.03B Doesn't seem so backwards to me... especially considering that Tyson should be broken up by the FTC, imo.
- InitialLastName 10mo ago
  It doesn't have to be advertising; if policies were enacted to either restrict supply (by making it more difficult to produce in favor of some perceived public good) or to raise the price by reducing (currently significant) subsidies or imposing taxes on the supply chain, that might make your fridge less likely to contain those things. Policy and advertising both work at the margins; if something affects consumer choices such that they swing 10% to or away from a sector, that has a huge impact on the sector. Can you imagine no changes that would convince you to eat 10% more or less meat?
  - tracker1 10mo ago
    I am allergic to legumes (the only viable source of vegetarian protein really), as are many others... so fuck you for trying to outlaw my main source of nutrition. Also, why are meat alternatives more expensive?
    - InitialLastName 10mo ago
      To be clear: I'm not trying to outlaw anything, just demonstrate to the parent how they could be subject to the lobbying/regulation/consumption feedback loop without being susceptible to advertising. I'm sorry if that offended you. Which meat alternatives can you eat? Most of the current options are heavily processed, small-scale and heavily tied to brands, all of which raise the price. Once we see the commodification and white-labeling that we see in the rest of the grocery supply chain, I'd expect the prices to come down. As an aside: TVP looks to be about $0.04/gram of protein, which is about half the price of a gram of protein in ground beef.

IAmBroom 10mo ago

I'm not convinced that advertising is why my refrigerator contains steak, chicken, octopus, salmon, and bacon. I think my tongue and my belly are the real conspirators.

soulofmischief 10mo ago
Lobbying is a real thing, propaganda is a real thing, corporate-government collusion is a real thing. The meat and dairy industries are definitely things, and are GIGANTIC, pouring millions and billions into deceiving the public. If you're looking around the room and don't see the sucker, it might be you.
- tracker1 10mo ago
  They're nothing compared to the likes of ConAgra, General Mills and Kellogs
  - mrguyorama 10mo ago
    Please google the revenue and/or market cap for Tyson Foods vs Conagra. Conagra even sells meat products! You've got it backwards.
    - tracker1 10mo ago
      Tyson: $20.25B ConAgra: $8B General Mills: $23.36B Kellanova (Kellogg's): $29.03B Doesn't seem so backwards to me... especially considering that Tyson should be broken up by the FTC, imo.
InitialLastName 10mo ago
It doesn't have to be advertising; if policies were enacted to either restrict supply (by making it more difficult to produce in favor of some perceived public good) or to raise the price by reducing (currently significant) subsidies or imposing taxes on the supply chain, that might make your fridge less likely to contain those things. Policy and advertising both work at the margins; if something affects consumer choices such that they swing 10% to or away from a sector, that has a huge impact on the sector. Can you imagine no changes that would convince you to eat 10% more or less meat?
- tracker1 10mo ago
  I am allergic to legumes (the only viable source of vegetarian protein really), as are many others... so fuck you for trying to outlaw my main source of nutrition. Also, why are meat alternatives more expensive?
  - InitialLastName 10mo ago
    To be clear: I'm not trying to outlaw anything, just demonstrate to the parent how they could be subject to the lobbying/regulation/consumption feedback loop without being susceptible to advertising. I'm sorry if that offended you. Which meat alternatives can you eat? Most of the current options are heavily processed, small-scale and heavily tied to brands, all of which raise the price. Once we see the commodification and white-labeling that we see in the rest of the grocery supply chain, I'd expect the prices to come down. As an aside: TVP looks to be about $0.04/gram of protein, which is about half the price of a gram of protein in ground beef.