(January 27, 2014 at 2:55 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: How do you know or are you just making it up as you go along? No doubt the latter...twat

How do I know? Well i've asked two seemingly very knowledgable vegans/vegetarians already on this forum and the amount of detail they gave for their plan was appauling. Something about letting the farm animals die of old age and letting the species go extinct. Not a single thought or comment on what this would do to farmers or indeed, whole countries whos main produces involves agriculture. Say Britain perhaps, isn't farming the only thing we do nowadays on a large scale? I guess your plan is to say 'fuck you farmers, get another job, I don't care if your family has been farmers for hundreds of years and providing food to billions, your on your own' Or something like that? Also no mention on how you would feed the ex-farm animals. No plan except to 'put them in a reserve'. Where is the money going to come from to build that?
You see, no plan. And i mentioned this weeks ago, you still haven't come up with a business plan.
Oh yea, thanks for unblocking me, twat.

(January 27, 2014 at 4:00 pm)jg2014 Wrote:

(January 27, 2014 at 3:18 pm)StoryBook Wrote: If eating meat was banned why would we still be killing the animals? After all the whole point of banning it would be to make you feel better, so now it's ok to kill them? Seems you don't understand.

Obviously ideally the animals would be cared for in animal sanctuaries funded by the government, with the animals being prevented from breeding until either there are none left or we keep some in the animal sanctuaries and breed them so that they can acquire the characteristics to live in the wild. However, it is very unlikely that everyone would turn away from meat eating all at once, and so phasing veganism in could be the more sensible option. Never the less, phasing it in would still induce less suffering than continuing the current cycle of breeding animals for meat eating that currently causes so much suffering.

Personally, I don't want to see meat eating banned. People like it too much, and if the government were to introduce such a thing there would be huge social unrest. No, the most likely thing would be for the number of vegans/vegetarians to increase gradually over say 30 to 100 years. This would reduce the demand for meat, resulting in farmers breeding less animals, until eventually all we would have are a few thousand animals kept in animal sanctuaries, again funded by the government.

So the government is going to spend more money they do not have to pay for animals to live? Yup sounds wonderful. Instead of paying for lazy humans on welfare and MY OWN animals, I will also have to pay for you to be happy with your animals in "sanctuary"!
I'm not going to try and do the math but I bet that will cost more,for the government, than going to war.

Also you know how many years of domestication are in cows. It will be a very long time before they will ever be able to go into the wild.

(January 26, 2014 at 9:11 pm)StoryBook Wrote: Animal do not have the same rage of emotions that we do and they don't waste time thinking about what happened in the past and don't think about the future.

More assumptions, why do meat eaters always devalue the cognitive experiences of animals? Evidence suggests not only do rats have episodic memory(ie be able to thing about and remember discrete events in the past) they are also able to make mental representations of the future.

It's really obvious that the veggie people in here don't give a shit about the animals suffering. All they want is to control what we eat.
I tell you what YOU can eat. My shit.

So they can remember, so what? Lots of animals can remember past events, it doesn't mean they obsess and worry about the past like we do, or get stressed and apprehensive about the future. We are the only animals to do that. Those studies say nothing about emotion at all. And no, there is no way that any animal has the same range of emotions as humans do. Its down to our significantly higher intelligence that we feel emotion much more acutely than any other animal. Thats the reason why you are overriding your nature and indeed disobeying the laws of nature, of eating meat, because you feel bad about it.

---

OK KUSA....calm down

Sorry

(January 27, 2014 at 4:22 pm)jg2014 Wrote:

(January 26, 2014 at 9:11 pm)StoryBook Wrote: Animal do not have the same rage of emotions that we do and they don't waste time thinking about what happened in the past and don't think about the future.

More assumptions, why do meat eaters always devalue the cognitive experiences of animals? Evidence suggests not only do rats have episodic memory(ie be able to thing about and remember discrete events in the past) they are also able to make mental representations of the future.

You are assuming you know something that you don't. Why do vegans think they know about animals because they don't eat them?
You have misunderstood what I wrote. If you understood the behavior of animals you would know what I meant. I went to college to learn the science of animal behavior. I'm not making assumptions on this. It is true that animals do not have the same range of emotions as we do. Animals do remember things, so of course they will remember how they got food.

Well meat/poultry sales in the US in 2009 was $154.8 billion. Which is about 1% of GDP. While there would be decreased costs from not having to transport/kill/breed/ the animals in addition to not having to treat diseases caused by overfeeding, there could be an increased cost due to the improved animal welfare.This figure would then come down substantially as the animals died of natural causes.

1% of GDP does sound a lot, but think about the health benefits, and remember that the US spend around 17% of GDP on healthcare, compared to around 9% GDP for the UK. So even a modest improvement in health makes going vegan financially beneficial overall.

All this talk about meat is making me hungry

Hmmm, ribs, steak or a chicken.... Choices, choices.

(January 27, 2014 at 10:31 am)StoryBook Wrote: You do have a point about the 300 lb "hippos", but I have seen many starving Americans also.

So what do you expect us to do with all the livestock we have now? Send them over sea with the overpopulation of horses, so the other country's can eat them? Or just let them starve to death because farmers won't be able to afford to feed them, let alone able to feed their families?

Well, one of the main arguments for meat-eating is that it is necessary-- i.e. a dietary argument. However, many Americans probably over-eat meat by an order of 5x or 10x what they actually need for dietary reasons. If people actually lived according to the arguments they make, not only would all those starving people have meat, the hippos' health would improve greatly, fewer dollars would be spent on hippo healthcare, and I'll wager there would STILL be a reduction in the number of animals caused to exist, suffer, and be killed. This is the key-- not so much how we deal with the existing animals, but making changes to our food consumption and production that would involve the reduction (or hopefully elimination) of the millions of livestock piled into enclosed, unsanitary conditions IN THE FUTURE.

In the end, the problem is that we have all the successes that come with a big brain, and all the instincts and self-control of masturbating monkeys. This has led to an unsustainable growing human population, to a damaged environment, to wasteful consumption of every available resource, and to a continual worsening (in my opinion) of the human quality of life. And our attitudes toward food are both symptomatic of those excesses and part of the problem.

---

(January 27, 2014 at 4:40 pm)StoryBook Wrote: If you understood the behavior of animals you would know what I meant. I went to college to learn the science of animal behavior. I'm not making assumptions on this. It is true that animals do not have the same range of emotions as we do.

Neither do babies. That makes it okay to club them in the head and eat them!