← Back to context

Comment by BizarroLand

3 days ago

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

8 comments

BizarroLand

Reply
IAmBroom  3 days 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.

  • InitialLastName  3 days 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  3 days 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?

      1 reply →

  • soulofmischief  3 days 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.