Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Opinion: "The End of Meat Is Here" - NY Times

I believe the multiple key points and quotes I took the trouble of including in the OP should be able to help you there, but if that's too much effort for you, perhaps it's best you don't bother with this thread.
i dont have my glasses on. could you not some it up in a few words.
 
Looking forward to your rock solid research that backs this claim up.

It's a prediction, not a claim. By the way, have you learned to recognise the difference between an opinion piece published on some quango's website, and a peer-reviewed paper published in a reputable journal? Because I don't think it's quite right for you to be taking others to task for their scientific shortcomings, until you've done that.

If meat consumption increases the environmental impacts will reduce living standards. Why do you think the Amazon has started mysteriously going up in flames?

Depends on how the meat is produced. Clear-cutting virgin rainforest and sticking a load of cattle lots in its place has well-documented effects. But you and I both know that's not the only way to do it. Personally I reckon carniculture is the future of sustainable mass meat consumption, it's already in the prototypical stage.
 
The thing is though, it does taste good. And I say that as a veggie. I think you need to accept this to be able to argue that it might be nice tasting, but there are huge problems with the production and consumption of it
yeah I know, was just on me bingo card :D
well I don't know as haven't eaten it but nuff people eat it and say it is so must be!
 
It's a prediction, not a claim. By the way, have you learned to recognise the difference between an opinion piece published on some quango's website, and a peer-reviewed paper published in a reputable journal? Because I don't think it's quite right for you to be taking others to task for their scientific shortcomings, until you've done that.
So you've just made up something in your head and have absolutely nothing to support it - not even examples of current trends or any studies that back up any aspect of your bizarre claim that a reduction in meat consumption will result in "decreasing living standards"?
 
I just find it ironic for you to take issue with someone making up something in their head and having absolutely nothing to support it.
So you've got absolutely nothing to add to this thread apart from some off-topic, cross-thread irrelevant personal shit? Off you pop then.
 
There's not exactly a wide range of equally useful alternatives to smartphones available though is there? They're pretty much essential for modern living for a huge range of reasons. Not sure the same applies to factory farmed meat...
I've managed without a smartphone for years. Only reason I've got one now is because my bank insists on one to setup payments online.
 
I've managed without a smartphone for years. Only reason I've got one now is because my bank insists on one to setup payments online.
You've underlined my own point. You had to get one for banking. Other people need them for a multitude of other, equally important reasons.
 
Maybe you could manage without one, but for a lot of people a mobile phone is absolutely essential and not just for fun things. It gives them access to council services, helplines, family, news, email etc etc. Or do you think standing in a stinking phone box is a viable alternative?
Landline. Cheaper than both phone box and smartphone.
 
You've underlined my own point. You had to get one for banking. Other people need them for a multitude of other, equally important reasons.
No. I could have done it by landline phone or gone into the bank to do it but that would have caused more problems for me so the smartphone was the lesser of 3 evils.
 
Not heard of a broadband for which you need a landline? :facepalm:
I've absolutely no idea what you're on about and little interest in bothering to find out, but if you think getting a landline fitted with broadband is cheaper than getting a mobile then you're too far out there for me.

And none of it has anything to do with the topic of this thread.
 
So you've just made up something in your head and have absolutely nothing to support it - not even examples of current trends or any studies that back up any aspect of your bizarre claim that a reduction in meat consumption will result in "decreasing living standards"?

I am not predicting that a reduction in meat consumption will result in reduced living standards - in fact, you've got it completely the wrong way around. I hardly think it's a controversial statement to point out that meat consumption generally increases with wealth. People don't improve their living standards by eating more meat, rather they tend to eat more meat as their living standards improve.

I'm honestly wondering how you got that causal relationship mixed up.
 
I am not predicting that a reduction in meat consumption will result in reduced living standards - in fact, you've got it completely the wrong way around. I hardly think it's a controversial statement to point out that meat consumption generally increases with wealth. People don't improve their living standards by eating more meat, rather they tend to eat more meat as their living standards improve.

I'm honestly wondering how you got that causal relationship mixed up.
Let me repost your own words. Maybe then you'll see how I may have got it 'mixed up'. But I'm still baffled: what does the bit about increasing the variety of diets got to do with anything here? And where do the 'dietary moralists ' come into the wealth equation?

If meat consumption decreases, then it will likely be accompanied by decreasing living standards in general; people tend to want to increase the variety of their diet, not decrease it. I think the dietary moralists should be wary about crowing over such developments, for their own sake at least. Although I won't protest too much if they want to rhetorically shoot themselves in the foot.
 
To be fair, I read it the same way. "if meat consumption decreases, then it will likely be accompanied by decreasing living standards in general ". In the order that it is written that implies a causal relationship.
 
editor. It looks a bit like you posted this spoiling for a fight, judging by the OP, and when you got what you wanted, dished out bans. With regards to the subject matter, I do think about giving up meat these days, but I'm not sure if I'll get there. I certainly think about it differently than 10 years ago.
No, not at all. It's a topic that interests me (and others here) and it's frustrating that every single thread that contains any kind of criticism about current meat consumption levels either gets swiftly trolled into oblivion or trashed by off-topic crap. And it's the same few people every fucking time.

This thread was heading off into the same trajectory, but the only people who have been banned off it are people who are clearly have zero interest in anything other than disrupting the thread with drivel (e.g. "I haven't got my glasses on") or bringing over the same personal attacks from the earlier destroyed threads.

There's loads of threads here where people can go on and on about how much they love eating meat, but I'm keen to have at least one that can discuss the issues of meat consumption and its's growing environmental impact.

And if you are serious about reducing your meat intake, there's an excellent thread in suburban that offers plenty of alternatives.
 
I'll take a look. Yeah, I'm not looking for a scrap. Just browsing around.
I've had quite a few mates drastically cut back oi their meat intake recently and they seem pretty happy with the alternatives. My DJ partner went vegan about a year ago and now posts a stream of bloody delicious looking meals on her social media feed. I wish I could be arsed to put as much effort into cooking as she does!
 
Back
Top Bottom