you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Not sure why he believes citing that graph is some great counterpoint. Less demand does factually translate to less supply and therefore less suffering. The problem is that populations still continue to grow and the number of vegetarians/vegans is neglible to overall growth.

Obviously if every vegan and vegetarian suddenly began eating meat again, then that graph would only increase in rate of change.

Change the minds of more people, and watch that change the rate of supply of course.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Obviously if every vegan and vegetarian suddenly began eating meat again, then that graph would only increase in rate of change.

    how? how can you know whether a farm can even expand to accommodate more production?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The problem is that populations still continue to grow and the number of vegetarians/vegans is neglible to overall growth.

    any excuse you make doesn't change whether more animals were killed this year than last, regardless of how many vegans there are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I don't think I agree with this, as less people buy meat the demand for it falls. As the demand falls less is produced. Kind of a simple take I guess but I don't think your comment makes sense.

    Is there an angle to this that I've missed?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Less demand does factually translate to less supply and therefore less suffering.

    this is not causal

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments