supply and demand isn’t a magic phrase that makes your theory true. there is no reason to believe animal husbandry will ever stop before people are extinct.
Each person’s purchases directly lead to consequences. Paying for animal products kills over 200 animals a year per person who does it reguarly. Even if animal abuse will never end it doesn’t mean we should empower or continue supporting it. Especially 3 times a day.
supermarkets often buy from suppliers who themselves are just middlemen. but regardless, all of those people are agents with free will, so no one else can be said to be resposible for their actions except the person who is doing teh action.
So hilarious to hear this from a fellow commie lmao. You think the same with Nestlé selling water? If no one supported Nestlé they’d continue to bottle up local water supplies and heavily upping the prices? They’d continue to use effectively slave labor for cocoa?
you’re supposing a causal relationship where non exists. people choose their own actions, so their actions can only be said to be caused by their free will.
Farmers are paid long before their products are on the shelves
They’re paid because there is demand for their bloodshed and torture. Supply and demand. If consumers stopped demanding it the supply would diminish
supply and demand isn’t a magic phrase that makes your theory true. there is no reason to believe animal husbandry will ever stop before people are extinct.
Each person’s purchases directly lead to consequences. Paying for animal products kills over 200 animals a year per person who does it reguarly. Even if animal abuse will never end it doesn’t mean we should empower or continue supporting it. Especially 3 times a day.
the animal is dead long before most people walk into the store or restaurant.
Because the consumers paid for that to occur. Paying for steaks makes it so a cow will be bred and killed.
farmers aren’t usually paid by consumers
They’re paid by supermarkets which are paid by consumers
supermarkets often buy from suppliers who themselves are just middlemen. but regardless, all of those people are agents with free will, so no one else can be said to be resposible for their actions except the person who is doing teh action.
that’s not causal
Translation problem? Casual doesn’t make any sense
i am so excited for you to learn about causal relationships
this isn’t causal.
?
there is no causation between what I buy today and what a farmer produces tomorrow
So hilarious to hear this from a fellow commie lmao. You think the same with Nestlé selling water? If no one supported Nestlé they’d continue to bottle up local water supplies and heavily upping the prices? They’d continue to use effectively slave labor for cocoa?
you’re glossing over the operative word here: causation.
Caused by people encouraging the death of animals
you’re supposing a causal relationship where non exists. people choose their own actions, so their actions can only be said to be caused by their free will.