• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Meat tax

As in many things, you will be able to get research to support whatever argument you want.

If this is ever going to get off the ground as a "policy" then it requires proper analysis covering all aspects, and proper modelling of the consequences.

...........or, as is the usual way, just do whatever sounds the most popular.
 
bulkbiker said:
Except the "science" behind that statement is quite flaky..and seems to take little if any account of the soil regeneration that animal manure provides (as well as the carbon sink). Without the animals (and there wouldn't be anywhere near as many without the meat industry) how will the soil be replenished for all the vegetables to grow... chemical fertilisers? We all know they're not especially good for us.
Click to expand...
When vegetation decays it gives off CO2 and methane, along with H2S. If we or cows digest said food, it still gets turned into CO2, CH4, H2S. since matter cannot be destroyed, then the resultant effect is effectively the same. Marsh gas and fart gas is the same stuff.
 
Guzzler said:
I say cut down on cars.
Click to expand...

Me too, in fact on Monday I shall be the owner of a fully electric car, I'm just thinking of other people's grand-children. Even that has it's "issues" like CO2 emissions from production (true for any car), emissions when producing the electricity to charge the car (easily offset by my solar panels).

Brunneria said:
And then there is a much more balanced view
Click to expand...

My post was only a suggestion as to why Caroline Lucas thought a meat tax might be a good idea. I'm not even suggesting they are a major cause of emissions. No room for a balanced view, that's a different discussion.

Brunneria said:
The soundbites that reach the media are NEVER the full story.
Click to expand...

Where cattle are concerned you're dead right, we haven't even looked into how much land is being deforested just to grow products for cattle to eat.There was a time when forests did a good job of absorbing CO2. Now I see that the Tropical forests which previously acted as a vital carbon “sink”, taking carbon from the atmosphere and turning it into oxygen, now emit almost twice as much carbon as they consume.
 
DavidGrahamJones said:
Me too, in fact on Monday I shall be the owner of a fully electric car, I'm just thinking of other people's grand-children. Even that has it's "issues" like CO2 emissions from production (true for any car), emissions when producing the electricity to charge the car (easily offset by my solar panels).



My post was only a suggestion as to why Caroline Lucas thought a meat tax might be a good idea. I'm not even suggesting they are a major cause of emissions. No room for a balanced view, that's a different discussion.



Where cattle are concerned you're dead right, we haven't even looked into how much land is being deforested just to grow products for cattle to eat.There was a time when forests did a good job of absorbing CO2. Now I see that the Tropical forests which previously acted as a vital carbon “sink”, taking carbon from the atmosphere and turning it into oxygen, now emit almost twice as much carbon as they consume.
Click to expand...
The University West of England is conducting an experiment. They have converted a farm that used to produce a commercially viable source of animal protein and turned it over to crop production only, So far the experiment has failed and crop yields have fallen year on year despite increasing chemical (vegan compatible) fertilizers being applied. Without EU funding for the research the farm would not be viable and the vegan cafe it supplies now has to use imported produce to feed its patrons, The cafe has now diversified and advertises itself as a Vegan Junk Food vendor, as the sign in their window states. The proprietor of the cafe actually looked quite ill in her tv interview, but that could be the winter light being unkind.
 
Oldvatr said:
They have converted a farm that used to produce a commercially viable source of animal protein and turned it over to crop production only,
Click to expand...

Why? BTW I'm not vegan or vegetarian although I go through short periods of time following a vegetarian. I look forward to my bacon on Sunday morning, and beef/pork/lamb Sunday evening. Then there's the steak, chicken and don't forget the spare ribs.
 
Oldvatr said:
The University West of England is conducting an experiment. They have converted a farm that used to produce a commercially viable source of animal protein and turned it over to crop production only, So far the experiment has failed and crop yields have fallen year on year despite increasing chemical (vegan compatible) fertilizers being applied. Without EU funding for the research the farm would not be viable and the vegan cafe it supplies now has to use imported produce to feed its patrons, The cafe has now diversified and advertises itself as a Vegan Junk Food vendor, as the sign in their window states. The proprietor of the cafe actually looked quite ill in her tv interview, but that could be the winter light being unkind.
Click to expand...
Do you have a link? Thanks.
 
Muneeb said:
Its any excuse to make money, as with the sugar tax. Instead of imposing sanctions/limits on manufacturers to produce less ****, they put tax on it, that makes selling it ok then apparently.
Click to expand...
Except that putting a tax on something tends to nudge the public to consume less of it. My issue with a meat tax is that meat is a healthy foodstuff and may not be more damaging to the environment than the kind of commodity crops required to feed the planet if we all stopped eating meat. Suspect she has an urban constituency with high volume of vegans being noisy?
 
NicoleC1971 said:
Except that putting a tax on something tends to nudge the public to consume less of it. My issue with a meat tax is that meat is a healthy foodstuff and may not be more damaging to the environment than the kind of commodity crops required to feed the planet if we all stopped eating meat. Suspect she has an urban constituency with high volume of vegans being noisy?
Click to expand...
I think se represents Brighton
 
NicoleC1971 said:
Except that putting a tax on something tends to nudge the public to consume less of it. My issue with a meat tax is that meat is a healthy foodstuff and may not be more damaging to the environment than the kind of commodity crops required to feed the planet if we all stopped eating meat. Suspect she has an urban constituency with high volume of vegans being noisy?
Click to expand...

Well extra tax on alcohol and cigarettes just meant that its all imported illegally from eastern Europe etc.. Didn't stop many people there.
 
DavidGrahamJones said:
Why? BTW I'm not vegan or vegetarian although I go through short periods of time following a vegetarian. I look forward to my bacon on Sunday morning, and beef/pork/lamb Sunday evening. Then there's the steak, chicken and don't forget the spare ribs.
Click to expand...
They are testing the new way of thinking that livestock farming should be replaced by crops for a sustainable future for mankind. Seems it is not so simple. I am not vegan or veggie either but I do have sympathies with the husbandry issues. UWE are largely agric and own their own farms for research, so they explore these esoteric theories from the EU since it gives them extra funding.
 
DavidGrahamJones said:
Me too, in fact on Monday I shall be the owner of a fully electric car, I'm just thinking of other people's grand-children. Even that has it's "issues" like CO2 emissions from production (true for any car), emissions when producing the electricity to charge the car (easily offset by my solar panels).



My post was only a suggestion as to why Caroline Lucas thought a meat tax might be a good idea. I'm not even suggesting they are a major cause of emissions. No room for a balanced view, that's a different discussion.



Where cattle are concerned you're dead right, we haven't even looked into how much land is being deforested just to grow products for cattle to eat.There was a time when forests did a good job of absorbing CO2. Now I see that the Tropical forests which previously acted as a vital carbon “sink”, taking carbon from the atmosphere and turning it into oxygen, now emit almost twice as much carbon as they consume.
Click to expand...
Wow, have you got a special charging port installed in your garden , and do you have to pay to charge your car up at the points in car parks, also how long does the battery last on the electric and how much to replace it ? I'm very interested because we are looking into buying one .
 
DavidGrahamJones said:
Me too, in fact on Monday I shall be the owner of a fully electric car, I'm just thinking of other people's grand-children. Even that has it's "issues" like CO2 emissions from production (true for any car), emissions when producing the electricity to charge the car (easily offset by my solar panels).



My post was only a suggestion as to why Caroline Lucas thought a meat tax might be a good idea. I'm not even suggesting they are a major cause of emissions. No room for a balanced view, that's a different discussion.



Where cattle are concerned you're dead right, we haven't even looked into how much land is being deforested just to grow products for cattle to eat.There was a time when forests did a good job of absorbing CO2. Now I see that the Tropical forests which previously acted as a vital carbon “sink”, taking carbon from the atmosphere and turning it into oxygen, now emit almost twice as much carbon as they consume.
Click to expand...
There is I believe a rational reason behind this that gets left out of the narrative, and that is that the forests are stripped,but the land is actually poor quality and subsistance farming can only exist on it for a while, then they have to aabandon the land and move on to the next bit of forest. The land they leave behind is capable only of growing soy or similar and so it gets used for feedstock for animals. So the animals do not need high grade arable land to be viable, humans are the ones that require it. The other crops that this land is being used for are ones to be converted into biofuel, which is also a growing business in that region. I believe that Brazil and Argentina are now investing heavily in sugar cane for fuel in a big way.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...Hill/1e9940d0bc65a08ef219b90b3d6c92dc15bb73b7
 
britishpub said:
If it was on BBC Points West you may be confusing News with Inane Drivel :wideyed:
Click to expand...
As the beer advert says "probably". There is no mention on the cafe website of their tv appearance.

The cafe however does show up as being a member of the Secret Society of Vegans (MERCH). They do offer Junk Food such as crisps, hot dogs, eggs, cafe creme, Latte and capucino, and also vegan honey. Not sure how this equates with vegan fare.

PS MERCH = "Merch is a slang believed to have been originated from Chicago, Illinois. Merch means to put it on something, or to be able to provide factual evidence that something is what you're claiming it to be. ... This slang is heavily used by those in the criminal world." - Wikki
 
Oldvatr said:
forests are stripped,but the land is actually poor quality and subsistance farming can only exist on it for a while, then they have to aabandon the land and move on to the next bit of forest.
Click to expand...

Land being stripped for subsistence farming would suggest that it was being used to benefit individual farmers. I don't believe that is the case. An estimated 18 million acres (7.3 million hectares) of forest, which is roughly the size of the country of Panama, are lost each year, according to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). I guess the figures will depend on where they're coming from, cattle farmers don't care about the planet and neither do farmers growing feed for the cattle. Twenty-six percent of the Planet's ice-free land is used for livestock grazing and 33 percent of croplands are used for livestock feed production.
 
bulkbiker said:
A rather overly simplified statement perhaps?
Click to expand...
Probably because I only tried to suggest a reason for why a meat tax was suggested. Sometimes it's just better to keep my mouth shut, or keep my fingers in my pockets or something. At the end of the day why should I care? I might have 20 years left if I'm lucky. There again, I do care about the planet. Individual farmers will care so I should have directed my statement at the large corporations.
 
Back
Top