"Dave" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> rick wrote:
>> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > rick wrote:
>> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> ups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ups.com...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> oups.com...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> oups.com...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> snippage...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > If you do not buy grain fed, chemically laced
>> >> >> >> >> > meat
>> >> >> >> >> > then
>> >> >> >> >> > you
>> >> >> >> >> > have
>> >> >> >> >> > about the same impact upon the industries that
>> >> >> >> >> > produce
>> >> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> >> > as
>> >> >> >> >> > vegans do.
>> >> >> >> >> ======================
>> >> >> >> >> Your logic is failing. I have an impact on the
>> >> >> >> >> industry.
>> >> >> >> >> I
>> >> >> >> >> buy
>> >> >> >> >> a product that directly competes with what loons
>> >> >> >> >> rant
>> >> >> >> >> about.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Someone who stops eating beef will have to eat
>> >> >> >> > something
>> >> >> >> > else or go hungry. All food products are in
>> >> >> >> > competition
>> >> >> >> > with
>> >> >> >> > each other to some degree.
>> >> >> >> ==========================
>> >> >> >> Someone who does not eat meat and never will has no
>> >> >> >> impact
>> >> >> >> on
>> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> meat industry they spew about.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > That is the point. They have no impact on the
>> >> >> > industry.
>> >> >> > They
>> >> >> > don't
>> >> >> > provide the motive for treating animals that way
>> >> >> > unlike
>> >> >> > people
>> >> >> > who
>> >> >> > consume the cheapest meats available.
>> >> >> ============================
>> >> >> Yet they do nothing to change the industry the spew
>> >> >> about.
>> >> >> Having an impact for change means you have to
>> >> >> participate.
>> >> >
>> >> > Reduction is a type of change.
>> >> ===========================
>> >> You're missing the point.
>> >
>> > No it's you who are missing the point.
>> =======================
>> No, you are being willfully obtuse on the point..
>> Again, there is no 'reduction' involved by vegans. They are
>> already
>> non-participants in the process of producing meats. You
>> cannot
>> reduce what you have not engaged in to begin with.
>
> It is an ongoing reduction compared to a meat eater. The veg*n
> is still a *potential* consumer of meat in that they could
> consume
> it but choose not to.
==========================
LOL There is no on-going *reduction* by vegans. Are you really
this dense, or just refuse to see facts?
Again, take an econ 101 course...


>
>> And, their non-participation does NOTHING to provide an
>> incentive
>> for producers to change their methods.
>
> Correct. They don't provide the producers a beef an incentive
> to
> continue producing their product using any method.
=========================
Yet they still rant about wanting to change what they see as a a
problem industry.
As is, they have NO impact on the industry, and especially no
imapct on any change.


>
>> Since they are already
>> not buying meat,
>> any change has to come from those that are paying for that
>> change.
>
> People who buy "factory" meats provide an incentive for
> fatcory farming. People who buy Grass-fed meats provide
> an incentive for intensive grazing systems. People who buy
> no meat at all provide no incentive to produce meat by any
> method. It's not rocket science.
===========================
Apparently to you it is. Non-buyers of meat have NO impact on
the industry, period.
Not buying meat does nothing to bring about there demands for a
change. They are non-participants
in anything the meat industry does.


>
>> >> Since vegans do not and will not buy
>> >> meat they aren't reducing their use of meat. Since they do
>> >> participate, they have no impact.
>> >
>> > Their use of meat is less than it would be if they weren't
>> > vegan.
>> > By continuing to be vegan they are removing their
>> > contribution
>> > towards the commercial incentive to produce meat of any
>> > kind.
>> ======================
>> No, they are not. They have no effect on the market at all.
>> I buy no llama wool from the Andes. I never plan to, and
>> never
>> will.
>> I have ZERO effect on the market for llama wool. If it is
>> produced inhumanely
>> I have no say in the impact of making changes. Same goes for
>> vegan that do not,
>> and will not ever buy meat. They have no impact on production
>> methods or supply.
>
> Right. And if everyone had zero impact on supply then their
> would
> be no commercial production which is what veg*ns want.
================================
They have no impact on that want. They are non-participants,
period.



>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Not participating will NOT cause any change in the
>> >> >> >> methods
>> >> >> >> they
>> >> >> >> claim to abhor. Claims that are
>> >> >> >> lost in the piles of dead animals that are killed in
>> >> >> >> far
>> >> >> >> more
>> >> >> >> brutal, inhumane ways in mono-culture crop
>> >> >> >> production.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Brutal and inhumane though these deaths may very well
>> >> >> > be,
>> >> >> > they last a short while compared to the life of an
>> >> >> > imprisoned
>> >> >> > animal, there is no guarantee that a natural death
>> >> >> > would
>> >> >> > be
>> >> >> > any more humane and the same deaths that occur as a
>> >> >> > result of crops cultivated for human consumption also
>> >> >> > occur
>> >> >> > as
>> >> >> > a result of crops cultivated for animal feed.
>> >> >> ========================
>> >> >> Tap dancing and delusion.
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't think so.
>> >> ======================
>> >> You keep saying the same spew, like you're not listening.
>> >
>> > I'm feeling exactly that way about what you are writing.
>> > Your logic is deeply flawed on this issue.
>> >
>> >> What
>> >> animals are you refering to as 'imprisoned?'
>> >
>> > The animals that are kept in overcrowded sheds where their
>> > natural behaviours are frustrated to some degree.
>> ============================
>> And which ones are those? Tell me the meats that I eat that
>> have
>> those animals on my plate.
>
> I have already stated that I have no objection to meat per se,
> just the main commercial methods of that production. If you
> had been listening you would realise that I am applauding the
> actions of people who avoid animal products that result from
> these methods regardless of whether they consume no animal
> products at all or whether they consume only animal products
> that have been produced using more appropriate methods.
==================================
Avoiding the products of an industry you don't like does
*nothing* to make that industry change.



>
>> >
>> >> Again, if you want
>> >> to change the way you think animals are raised, then you
>> >> need
>> >> to
>> >> buy the alternatives that provide an incentive to change
>> >> the
>> >> ways
>> >> you think are wrong. Not being a part of that industry
>> >> doesn't
>> >> supply the incentive for change.
>> >
>> > You just don't get it do you?
>> =======================
>> Obviuosly you don't. Try econ 101, and get back with us.
>
> You first.
> ===========================
Already have, and further... You are obviously unwilling to
learn...


>> >
>> >> As for humane deaths,
>> >> alaughtered meat animals die far more humanely than many
>> >> wild
>> >> animals.
>> >
>> > Yes but the method of death isn't the only issue here.
>> ==========================
>> How about numbers then? Vegans lose on that count here too.
>
> Compared to conscientious meat consumers, possibly.
========================
To their own diets. That's the problem with usenet vegans. They
are all talk. They spew about meats and have *never* compared
the foods that they eat to each other. Which causes more death
and suffering to animals? Rice? Potatoes? Bananas? Brocolli?
they don't care. They have their simple rule for their simple
mind, 'eat no meat.'



>> >
>> >> Very few wild animals live a long life and just lie
>> >> down with their extended family around and close their eyes
>> >> and
>> >> die.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> Again, the "fix" for what you think
>> >> >> are bad conditions are to buy meats that aren't raised
>> >> >> that
>> >> >> way.
>> >> >> Continuing to sit on the sidelines and ranting does
>> >> >> nothing
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> provide incentives for change. In the meantime, they
>> >> >> continue
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> cause far more brutal, inhumane deaths.
>> >> >
>> >> > Supply follows demand. The more people buy "factory"
>> >> > meats
>> >> > the
>> >> > more will be produced. It makes no difference to the
>> >> > producers
>> >> > of these "factory" meats whether the people who are not
>> >> > buying
>> >> > their product are buying different sorts of meat or
>> >> > different
>> >> > sorts
>> >> > of plant food.
>> >> =========================
>> >> Again, you've missed the point. Not buying meat and never
>> >> being
>> >> involved in the product doesn't make any change. Buying an
>> >> alternative meat will change the way producers raise their
>> >> animals.
>> >
>> > You'll never get it.
>> ==========================
>> You keep avoiding it. Why?
>
> There's no point in repeating myself if you stubbornly refuse
> to
> be logical.
==========================
I am beiung logical. You, on the other hand...


>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> Unlike vegan loons, I buy meat. I cause an
>> >> >> >> >> alternative
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> noraml production methods to take place.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > You fuel the demand for an alternative to regular
>> >> >> >> > beef.
>> >> >> >> > Vegans
>> >> >> >> > fuel the demand for other alternatives.
>> >> >> >> ==============================
>> >> >> >> Not in the meat industry.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Scarcely a relevant distinction to the point in hand.
>> >> >> ==========================
>> >> >> LOL Yes it is. The discussion is about how to change
>> >> >> an
>> >> >> industry that vegans claim to want to change.
>> >> >> You can't do that from the sidelines.
>> >> >
>> >> > Reduction is a type of change.
>> >> =======================
>> >> You keep saying this but there is *no* reduction since they
>> >> are
>> >> already not buying meat products and never will...
>> >
>> > You'll never get it.
>> ==========================
>> You keep avoiding it. Why?
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> Are you being this obtuse on purpose?
>> >> >> >> They make the claim they want changes in the meat
>> >> >> >> industry
>> >> >> >> they
>> >> >> >> claim to dislike. Not participating does nothing to
>> >> >> >> encourage
>> >> >> >> those changes.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Reducting the size of the meat industry is a change.
>> >> >> =====================
>> >> >> vegans are not doing that.
>> >> >
>> >> > They are collectively reducing the size of the meat
>> >> > industry
>> >> > compared with the size it would be if they weren't vegan
>> >> > or fussy about what meats they did buy.
>> >> ========================
>> >> No, they are not. They are so miniscule a loon group that
>> >> they
>> >> would have no effect if they stopped tomorrow. Oops, they
>> >> already aren't buying meat, and haven't been. Kinda hard
>> >> to
>> >> make
>> >> a difference if you already aren't doing something.
>> >
>> > You'll never get it.
>> ==========================
>> You keep avoiding it. Why?
>>
>>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> It's a large and growing alternative. It is
>> >> >> >> >> available
>> >> >> >> >> now
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> anyone that wants it.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Your consumption of grass-fed beef helps support
>> >> >> >> >> > the producers of grass-fed beef, a seperate
>> >> >> >> >> > industry
>> >> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> > produces a similar product.
>> >> >> >> >> ==============================
>> >> >> >> >> No, it is the same industry. It is an alternative
>> >> >> >> >> production
>> >> >> >> >> technique.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > The method of production alters the taste and
>> >> >> >> > nutritional
>> >> >> >> > profile.
>> >> >> >> ============================
>> >> >> >> But it is still the production of meats.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Yes. And?
>> >> >> =========================
>> >> >> Yes, and why is that important?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Or, do you think it
>> >> >> >> somehow changes the meat to brocolli?
>> >> >> >> The differences are part of why the demand is growing
>> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> industry is starting to accomdate us.
>> >> >> >> Just today I saw that 4 major chicken producers have
>> >> >> >> announced
>> >> >> >> they have stopped the use of antibiotics.
>> >> >> >> People who buy chicken, and have demanded this change
>> >> >> >> are
>> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> ones that had an effect.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Yes but a reduction in the numbers of chickens raised
>> >> >> > would
>> >> >> > have
>> >> >> > achieved the same result, (eg fewer chickens raised on
>> >> >> > antibiotics)
>> >> >> ===============================
>> >> >> That isn't what the consumers are wanting. the
>> >> >> consumers
>> >> >> want
>> >> >> chemical free meat.
>> >> >
>> >> > Some consumers want chemical free meat. Some (ie veg*ns)
>> >> > don't
>> >> > want meat at all.
>> >> ======================
>> >> yet they still claim to want a change in the methods of
>> >> production. Why is it so hard to see that since they
>> >> already
>> >> are
>> >> not part of a products users, they jhave no impact on
>> >> causing
>> >> changes.
>> >
>> > Because you are talking nonsense.
>> =====================
>> No, I am not. I'm the one discussing supply/demand. You seem
>> to
>> think that never being involved in the process somehow means
>> something. Producers don't make products for people that
>> aren't
>> buying them, and never will.
>
> Bingo!
===============================
LOL And those people that have never bought a product and never
will have NO inpact on those production levels.
being a non-participant means that no one is listening to your
loonism, and that your wishes mean nothing.


>
>> >> It is those people that want a different method of
>> >> production that are driving the changes, not vegans.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> vegans have no inpact on how meat is raised,
>> >> >> or the numbers.
>> >> >
>> >> > Supply follows demand.
>> >> =====================
>> >> LOL Again, vegans are not part of the demand to begin
>> >> with.
>> >> Why
>> >> are you stuck on this broken record?
>> >
>> > Becuase it is an important point which you obviously don't
>> > understand
>> > the significance of.
>> ==========================
>> You keep avoiding it. Why?
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> It is growing, providing regular producers an way
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> change their methods to accommodate the growing
>> >> >> >> >> demand.
>> >> >> >> >> Vegans
>> >> >> >> >> have *no* effect on that change.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > The regular beef industry would not be viable if
>> >> >> >> > everyone
>> >> >> >> > went
>> >> >> >> > vegan.
>> >> >> >> ==========================
>> >> >> >> That will never happen. You know it and vegans know
>> >> >> >> it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > For every person that stops consuming beef the demand
>> >> >> > is
>> >> >> > reduced. Why wouldn't supply follow?
>> >> >> =============================
>> >> >> Only if the numbers were growing. they aren't. vegans
>> >> >> are,
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> will be a very small minority of loons...
>> >> >
>> >> > If those people who are currently vegan suddenly decided
>> >> > to
>> >> > stop fussing about food then demand for beef would rise
>> >> > and
>> >> > supply would try to follow. If some of the people who
>> >> > currently
>> >> > eat "factory beef" became vegan demand for beef would
>> >> > decrease
>> >> > and supply would be forced to follow.
>> >> =======================
>> >> And that is unlikely to happen. What is happening, and
>> >> likely
>> >> to
>> >> continue is the demand for alternative methods of meat
>> >> production. Vegans are on the sidelines of these changes,
>> >> despite saying the want the changes to occur.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> They
>> >> >> >> are such a small minority of loons that they have no
>> >> >> >> real
>> >> >> >> effect
>> >> >> >> on anything. So the point remains that they claim
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> want
>> >> >> >> changes.
>> >> >> >> How best do you accomplish this change? By ignoring
>> >> >> >> it
>> >> >> >> or
>> >> >> >> providing for a alternative production meathod?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Depending on what changes you want to accomplish. If
>> >> >> > you wish to have beef from free range, chemical free,
>> >> >> > pasture
>> >> >> > raised cattle then switch to grass fed beef. If you
>> >> >> > don't
>> >> >> > like
>> >> >> > beef or you don't want to see cattle farmed at all
>> >> >> > then
>> >> >> > switch
>> >> >> > to other food products like nuts and legumes.
>> >> >> =========================
>> >> >> That's not what vegans are doing. They are already not
>> >> >> eating
>> >> >> meat.
>> >> >> Besides, it still begs the point that they are killing
>> >> >> more
>> >> >> animals, far more brutally by being vegan.
>> >> >
>> >> > Compared with eating grass fed beef that may well be
>> >> > true.
>> >> > Compared with eating cheap "factory" meats it self
>> >> > evidently
>> >> > isn't.
>> >> ======================
>> >> No, it isn't self-evident even then. The vegan that buys
>> >> and
>> >> eats only imported foods has far more impact than many
>> >> meats.
>> >> Unlike the fruits and veggies we eat, most meat is rather
>> >> local
>> >> or regional.
>> >
>> > That line of argument only works if the feedstuffs,
>> > antibiotics
>> > and
>> > suchlike are also local and regional.
>> ============================
>> It's kinda hard to import pastureland/rangeland eh?
>> And what part of chemical-free meats don't you understand?
>
> Me: Compared with eating grass fed beef that [the proposition
> that being vegan results in many more animal deaths] may well
> be true. Compared with eating *cheap factory meats* it self
> evidently isn't.
>
> You: No it isn't self evident.
>
> F***ing hell. Get back to me when you have taken comprehension
> 101.
=================================
ROTFLMAO You're the one that had it go right over your head,
fool. You brought up feed and biotics, even after being told
that the meats I eat, and am talking about don't use them. So,
I'm left to think you must be talking about the only things the
meat I eat uses, grasslands and ranges. Willful ignorance
doesn't become you...



>
>> You keep failing to understnad the issues I mention,
>
> The only thing I need to understand is that you have a logical
> blindspot
> regarding this issue.
> ===================================
You're the only one being blind here, willfully so.


>> and revert
>> to tired old vegan spew about all meats being the same.
>
> Never.
=====================
Always.


>
>> Why is
>> that?
>> Because the alternatives blow the vegan delusions off the map?
>
> Which is why I don't advocate veg*nsim, at least not as the
> only
> alternative.
======================
Then why pretend they have an impact they do not?