I am not convinced with the starting point that naturalizes money as driver of behaviour. Money is leading behaviour because our survival depends on it, not because we only behave to incentives, but rather we are force to do things we do not necessarily want because we need to pay the bills. The end of subsidies and transfer of consumer money to the good providers is a great strategy, but we should point out that the bad guys will stay as long as goverments are at their service as there is an economic mandate to grow and expand capital.
In the United States the majority of the department of agriculture budget is SNAP. I am all for it and everyone should be except we should change the model. It should be #FarmToFamily modeled after the incredibly successful #FarmToSchool paradigm. As is, it is nothing more than a corporate subsidy. Due to the logistics of the folks you receive it and they’re localities.
Beef is a luxury item that we in Australia massively overproduce to the detriment of our natural landscape, wildlife and climate. The beef industry is dominated by wealthy vested interests who have scant interest in the small farmer.
I too support grass finished beef reared according to the principles of regenerative agriculture.
However, grass fed and grass finished are poorly defined terms. My understanding is that grass fed beef will have been finished in feed lots.
Grass finished beef should be 100% grass fed (although there’s always the chance of supplemental feeding).
The fact remains that we all need to eat less meat, and be more interested in its quality and how it was raised and slaughtered.
Dean, thanks for your comment. I went back and edited the piece to make it clearer.
I am not convinced with the starting point that naturalizes money as driver of behaviour. Money is leading behaviour because our survival depends on it, not because we only behave to incentives, but rather we are force to do things we do not necessarily want because we need to pay the bills. The end of subsidies and transfer of consumer money to the good providers is a great strategy, but we should point out that the bad guys will stay as long as goverments are at their service as there is an economic mandate to grow and expand capital.
In the United States the majority of the department of agriculture budget is SNAP. I am all for it and everyone should be except we should change the model. It should be #FarmToFamily modeled after the incredibly successful #FarmToSchool paradigm. As is, it is nothing more than a corporate subsidy. Due to the logistics of the folks you receive it and they’re localities.
Beef is a luxury item that we in Australia massively overproduce to the detriment of our natural landscape, wildlife and climate. The beef industry is dominated by wealthy vested interests who have scant interest in the small farmer.
I too support grass finished beef reared according to the principles of regenerative agriculture.
However, grass fed and grass finished are poorly defined terms. My understanding is that grass fed beef will have been finished in feed lots.
Grass finished beef should be 100% grass fed (although there’s always the chance of supplemental feeding).
The fact remains that we all need to eat less meat, and be more interested in its quality and how it was raised and slaughtered.
We clearly both agree that there is a need to consume less beef. And I don’t disagree with you in the other points that you mention. So, yay! Peace.
…Which means that we’re both willing to make a case for a world in which people eat less beef!
I sincerely doubt that industrialism is the only reason. There’s more to food than supply, see for example, https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/the-rest-is-history/id1537788786?i=1000590504636
There’s nothing to argue about. I think we substantially agree. We need to consume less beef. See also:
https://newrepublic.com/article/171781/meat-culture-war-crickets