DonFerrari said:
Immersiveunreality said:
First bolded: yes that is the answer for people that have money to spare but the meat coming from producers that do take care of their livestock is more expensive and that results into people buying the cheaper less controlled meats and making it less expensive is also never an option because the farmers that care about the livestock would go broke because they're the ones that do invest into better feeding and environments for the animals and that needs to be translated into the profits to be viable.
Second bolded:That is a very loaded question and i partly agree with it because yes species that go extinct for reasons not related to human interference should not make us the moral criminals if we let its extinctence just proceed but the animals we control are not comparable with the free animals of the wild and i would rather use the term slave for the donkeys you mentioned earlier so when this extermination translates into no more forced slavery work for lots of unhappy animals than i might be not so sad we could lose a species over that.
|
If people wants to discuss or live the moral, market also adapts, there is space for organic vegetable food that is much more expensive than regular one. So you can have independent party audit and certify the production (as jew and muslim demands for kosher and jalal, and we have several places in Brazil that abide and make a lot of money with it) and producers can sell it more expensive to who think this is an important point. You don't need government intervention for that.
|
Could be true yes,but if it is not existent already then what would trigger its existence without goverment interaction?
