Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

PepeHacker t1_j81b4n7 wrote

I hate to be this person but reducing beef consumption is needed to stop deforestation in Brazil. Most of the deforestation is being done to allow for cattle grazing. Current US regulations allow for beef processed in the US to be labeled as US beef.

359

BZenMojo t1_j823bmh wrote

While this is true, it's always important to be reminded the role fascism has in the destruction of natural resources and indigenous cultures.

161

djstocks t1_j830n3f wrote

Or this is just a puff piece.

−63

Wareve t1_j82u1yd wrote

If the environmental regulations are strong enough and enforced, the beef supply will be limited and the price will go up, resulting in less consumption.

This is a difficult ask from governments obviously, but consider that the alternative is trying to convince vast numbers of people to willingly stop eating tasty meat. Humans have issues doing that when it's literally killing them and they've been told so by doctors. Expecting them to do it when told to by environmentalists seems a little less likely to me than the governmental regulation option.

61

handsomehares t1_j84vcjn wrote

We can get people to protect the rainforest without asking them to eat less beef.

Just… don’t tell them about the beef part.

8

reedef t1_j82mx0q wrote

Or develop artificial meat

21

WhatuuupKrisp t1_j838g20 wrote

Yes, but this will take some more time. People shouldn't wait for that before they drastically reduce their meat consumption.

14

BoJaNYK t1_j83g5j3 wrote

There are alternatives at the ready, and if more people switch they will be getting better and better.

9

searchforstix t1_j83lrmh wrote

An example for your statement - I’m not quite vegan (I’ll get there as I go), but learning that lentil tofu, and other beans, exists. I’m not a big soy person, so it was an awesome thing to discover the process!

5

theGurry t1_j848dqj wrote

The problem with the alternatives is the sodium content.

−3

JoyfulExmo t1_j82gje0 wrote

100% this. Deforestation is YOUR hamburger, people. One of many reasons I’m glad I don’t eat it.

17

KaimeiJay t1_j82u7e8 wrote

You’re not the one responsible for that. Saddling the consumer with the ethics of climate change is a corporate grift.

37

J_Tarrou t1_j838alx wrote

Arguing that only consumers should worry, not companies - yep, corporate grift.

Arguing that you have no personal responsibility, even when you consciously choose things that are bad for the environment - nope, you're just making excuses.

This isn't like when people have to drive because of where they live, and can't afford an electric car. I'm not aware of anyone who has to eat beef.

23

waffle_socks t1_j8441lq wrote

Thank you for saying this. Too often I see people parroting that line, ignoring that its a two sided problem. Supply and demand would have to decrease together. Consumers need alternative options, but companies wouldn't make money on unethical products if consumers force the issue. The alternative would often be regulating what is produced and sold and you won't ever pass legislation that, for example, outlaws farming and sale of beef. Tinfoil hat time: I think that industries simultaneously push the idea that consumers shouldn't be responsible at the same time as pushing the idea that companies shouldn't be responsible for change. That way, no one has to feel responsible and nothing ever changes.

8

GD_Bats t1_j839jz7 wrote

I’m going to point out that US raised and butchered beef is a thing- granted still not the greatest thing for the ecosystem, but the deforestation of the US is mostly a done deal at this point.

3

handsomehares t1_j84vlma wrote

The forests in the USA are actually at some of their largest since the old growth was cut down.

For what it’s worth.

We destroy the grasslands for beef, not the forests, here in the USA.

4

GD_Bats t1_j84yrqz wrote

Fair point, though I’d also cite replacing grasslands with lawns in there as a big part of the issue. Yes lawns are better for the ecosystem than paving it all over, but just barely

2

handsomehares t1_j8503sa wrote

Once upon a time out lawns were filled with clover and other pollinators and were actually fairly “good” for the local eco system.

Not so much any more :(

3

dzigizord t1_j82z1je wrote

If it was legal for corporations to sell slaves, would you happily buy them and say it is corporation problem? People want changes, but only if change happens somewhere else and not in them

−6

KaimeiJay t1_j831ms3 wrote

Holy mother of strawman, Batman! 🤣

8

dzigizord t1_j842qy4 wrote

it is the same, if you think eating beef is unethical for whatever reason then stop it, don't wait for corporation to stop producing them.

only logical conclusion is that you think eating beef is fine.

1

handsomehares t1_j84vqdi wrote

If only there were some sort way to see nuance. Shame. If only.

0

SoupIsForWinners t1_j83qx7r wrote

Nah, I get my burger from a farm in the next town over. That's the real solution. If you have the option, buy local. It's a beautiful purple color, rather than the grayish red I see at the store.

6

Nerdymonkeyboy t1_j840llj wrote

Americans can't buy a Amazon burger if Lula never lets them build the ranch.

9

fiendishrabbit t1_j85llez wrote

Soy production is just as culpable. Soybean production is the second largest direct source of deforesttion in brazil and most likely the largest indirect source. For the last 20 years or so new soy farming methods (which allows soy to use previously unsuitable land) have taken over land that's previously been used for cattle grazing. After soy has been used to increase land fertility it's followed by other agricultural produce such as maize.

So targeting beef in particular when one of the big drivers is animal products in general (as soybeans are used as protein for animal feed)...

2

SemperMeTaedet t1_j886k3h wrote

>Current US regulations allow for beef processed in the US to be labeled as US beef.

Never heard of this loophole and I'm not even mildly surprised to hear about this bullshit. Just another day in the US of A

1

obinice_khenbli t1_j84g7tw wrote

Sounds like an internal USA problem, that's not how we do things in Europe. Why should we reduce our beef consumption because the USA has dodgy practices?

Not that reducing meat consumption is a bad idea in general of course, I just don't see why we should change our diet because of something the USA does to itself. We don't import USA beef.

0

theluckyfrog t1_j85kdey wrote

No, you import Brazilian beef. Which is better how exactly?

1