this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2026
183 points (67.9% liked)

memes

22049 readers
2891 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The better treatment balloons costs by requiring more land and more care, which significantly inflates the cost of the final products. This could be an effective measure for reducing meat consumption by people buying less to save money, many people would be against those increases.

Its just like mass produced clothing. Since they dont see the abuse and destruction, they are satisfied with the lower prices at the store.

[–] bl4ckp1xx13@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Again, scale.

How much of the meat produced is actually eaten? What’s the chance for each garment produced to actually be worn more than once?

The current system can downsize significantly without needing to raise prices, as we’re already in a significant surplus.

The point at which products are no longer guaranteed due to demand is when the prices have to go up.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That surplus is factored in to the companies making money and providing consistant demand. Prices will increase if the treatment gets better because the capitalists and oligarchs will not willingly take a profits cut. The surplus waste in the current system could be utilized better, for example fast freezing and being provided to food banks or soup kitchens.

No matter how you cut it, if labor and land demand increases, the price will increase.

[–] thejoker954@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Obviously if treatment got better, the capitalists and oligarchs would no longer be a problem.

Guillotines

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t really disagree with you, but land area isn’t actually a significant factor. When you consider how much land is used to produce feed for the pigs, it’s clear that the stables themselves take up very little space.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The land use would be significantly higher if the pigs were pasture fed instead of crop fed.

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 3 points 1 day ago

Sure, but we don't have to go all pasture fed. Maybe just 10x more space for them in their stables could be a start. Would it be more expensive, absolutely, but either people will have to eat less meat, consumption has almost doubled the past 70-ish years, or they'll have to pay more for it.

I'm not saying people shouldn't get to eat meat, I'm just saying it's rediculously cheap for what it is, and really not needed in the amounts people eat.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Doubling the cost to raise chicken wouldn't double the shelf price. Most of the cost of food comes from the distribution network. Chicken raised this way costs double because that's what some consumers will pay over cheaper chicken.