To Be or Not to Be Vegan ?

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: To Be or Not to Be Vegan ?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

VGnizm wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:55 pm But what if I did like I do for meat and i refuse to consume food that is processed by cruel and unfair conditions? In doing so it is possible to gradually impose production methods that are more life loving or humane.
Unfortunately, places with better production methods are probably richer countries, so they need the work less.
It'd difficult to apply such precise pressure as a consumer to get products from poor countries, but paying a surplus and ensuring better conditions.
Also, in a poor country where we may typically see lower wages, a very high paying job can have unintended consequences.

There's a recent thread on that here:
http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3314
VGnizm wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:55 pm Provided there is a labeling that can quantify and qualify the human resource ingredient then this would prompt producers to improve worker conditions in return for customers and even if at a higher price. Something like the ‘FairTrade’ label ( https://www.fairtrade.net/ ) is doing for food resources.
Labeling requirements might be counterproductive if we can not first find ways to avoid the unintended consequences inflated prices can have on the market.

See this article on fair trade coffee:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-wydick/10-reasons-fair-trade-coffee-doesnt-work_b_5651663.html
VGnizm wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:55 pmDoes such a scenario seem workable?
Probably not, because poverty is complex and stems from a lot of things that these programs don't and perhaps can't address. Simply buying sweatshop goods at fair market value may be the only reliable means we have.

What is recommended is to, instead of buying cheap low quality products, buy higher products that require more work.
Instead of something that takes a sweat shop worker an hour to make, buy something that takes him or her all day to make; the effect is to create more highly skilled work for them including more work... perhaps also in training and an incentive for the company to treat the worker better just to retain them rather than having high turnover.

Cutting out animal products is easy, because it's just a boycott and dissolution of an industry. But we can't dissolve the industry of human labor since we can't just stop making more humans. We need better jobs, but attempts to do that through processes like "fair trade" have so far failed because they don't take into account the economic complexity of the market and the incentives it creates that may even harm the people it aims to help.
User avatar
VGnizm
Full Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:31 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: To Be or Not to Be Vegan ?

Post by VGnizm »

Thanks and i do agree with most of the arguments if taken in their context but i was suggesting something much simpler.

The idea is to qualify the human resource ( labor ) in a way that relates to its enviornment; ( A 3rd party labeling system ). We are not speaking about completely changing the economic structure of the world and we actually should not.

What is needed is to make sure that labor is purchased at acceptable local rates to avoid exploitation and that working conditions be comfortable enough to maintain dignity and reduce abuse.

It makes sense to maintain labor in underdeveloped countries because it is the only level of labor massively available while they are underdeveloped. The idea is to improve the working conditions on a micro level by consumer choice rather than wait for macro induced change through instituions. Like waiting for governments to ban meat production which will probably never happen.

Basically ' what can or should I do to help ' attitude. If i only buy items that contain a certain quality of human resource then i can assume to be reducing suffering and exploitation. And since the producer wants to sell he will assume the costs for the labelling.

If consumers are provided an honest choice between buying a product that has no human resource tracability and one that does then it might incline some people to choose the one that does and it will also make people generally aware of the fact that such an element exists in the products they purchase.

Does this sound a little more workable maybe :)
Be Strong Be Vegan !
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php :)
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods :)
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: To Be or Not to Be Vegan ?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

I think I know what you mean, the trouble is that when you give consumers information, you can't always trust them to use it in the right way, so you have to look at how they will respond.

A good example is telling consumers something is "Organic". In fact, the Organic fruit and vegetables are usually more expensive, so a person who otherwise would have bought ordinary vegetables but can not afford the organic ones may decide not to buy ANY vegetables at all.
Organic food causes people to eat fewer fruits and vegetables, because it causes them to become frightened of food that is not organic.
User avatar
VGnizm
Full Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:31 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: To Be or Not to Be Vegan ?

Post by VGnizm »

I see what you mean and it is not all negative.

If people know that there are ( organic ) actually meaning ordinary fruits and vegetables ( they way they were intended to grow ) and non-organic meaning ( not ordinary ) there is hope that things will gradually be put right in peoples minds :)

Also the fact that the non-organic are not selling as much will prompt the producer to turn organic and therefore increase supply and lower price.

The net result will be an affordable and ordinary grocery supply :)

I think this does make sense :) Non ?
Be Strong Be Vegan !
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php :)
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods :)
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: To Be or Not to Be Vegan ?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

VGnizm wrote: Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:21 am If people know that there are ( organic ) actually meaning ordinary fruits and vegetables ( they way they were intended to grow ) and non-organic meaning ( not ordinary ) there is hope that things will gradually be put right in peoples minds :)
Organic is a marketing gimmick, though, it has no link to health or nutrition of the foods. Often, organic farmers even spray more chemicals on their crops than conventional farmers. And then the manure, which is bad too (lots of dangerous bacteria).
The only thing it causes for the consumer is for people to buy fewer fruits and veggies because organic costs more.
VGnizm wrote: Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:21 amAlso the fact that the non-organic are not selling as much will prompt the producer to turn organic and therefore increase supply and lower price.
Organic farming is less efficient, so this would decrease the supply of vegetables even more (overall) raising the price even more. This is a large part of why organic is more expensive.
An organic farm produces around 30% less veggies. It's a big problem, because it means we need to use more land, cut down more forest, etc.

Anyway, the point is that consumers don't always make the best choices, because they often act on fear rather than good information, and in terms of altruism they act on impulse rather than consideration.

The effect of labeling human labor could harm people by moving things toward automation, supporting one high paying job instead of ten low paying jobs (which helps more people). There are many potential unintended consequences when people don't have all of the information... and it's almost impossible to put an entire economics textbook on a package. ;)
Post Reply