John asked in Food & DrinkVegetarian & Vegan · 3 months ago

Could the Green New Deal be a possible path to new laws?

Green New Deal mentions not only a carbonless environment and society, but also mentions the high environmental and destructive impact of animal agriculture. Do you think it suggests liberating the cows from these prisons and factories? And, could GND lead to a new set of laws, specifically a Vegan Law, which outlaws meat and dairy and all institutions associated with them become illegal. How could GND pave the way for vegan law?

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 3 months ago

    the Green New Deal is a load of crap. Environmentalists are frauds. They've been preaching the end is 10 years away since the 1960s and change their story about once a decade. AOC the Village Idiot changed that to the end is 12 years away, but she's no good at math. What I see here is one hax trying to support another hoax. 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Jeff H
    Lv 7
    3 months ago

    It is unlikely that the Green New Deal would have a significant impact on long term meat consumption except perhaps, as a side function due to increased costs of production.  First of course the laws would only affect the US and, if you really want to be accurate, it would mean a reduction of animal based pollutants by a whopping 1% compared to levels prior to the creation of ranches etc for the production of animal products.

    Another issue is where would the food come from to feed the planet.  Current agricultural land, if converted to raising human food, would only feed about 75% of the current population.  As such it would require massive clearing of other land in order to raise the necessary crops to feed the remaining population.  This would increase even more unless you propose killing all of the existing animal population currently being used for domestic food production.  This in turn would certainly cause the extinction of multiple species at a rate far higher than is currently happening.  If land were to be set aside to support the current animal population then agricultural land would have to be increased by approximately 50 to 100% in order to both feed them and the Earth's population resulting in more environmental damage.

    Another issue is the fact that human's do not all live on or near land suitable for growing or suitable for growing on a year round basis, even assuming a massive increase in the number of green houses.  Since more land would have to be made available then the moving of humans closer would not be viable so a massive transportation infrastructure would need to be developed with the resultant environmental issues to transport food to various regions on a year round basis.  In addition, or perhaps as a possible exception, massive storage systems would need to be established.

    Considering that most vegans also support organic, non-GMO products, then there could be possible issues with these since adaptation to grow even in current climate may pose a problem.  When grown under the proper conditions, organic farms come very close to producing the same quantity as non-organic farms however they are more restricted based on climate and land types as to variety.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    3 months ago

    Tbe green new deal is a pie in the sky fantasy. It will never happen. AOC (the creator) is an embarrassment to the American people

    • ...Show all comments
    • Sandra K
      Lv 6
      3 months agoReport

      AOC is a blooming idiot. No DemocRat in Congress knows what he/she is talking about, least of all AOC! 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    3 months ago

    Your ideas are far fetched. More likely there will some reform to agricultural regulations like scaling back the maximum size of feel lots, like scaling back how much manure manure can legally accumulate in one place, like reduction in subsidies to meat, dairy, and egg industries and subsequent increased cost to consumers. Nothing like the PRICE of meat reflecting the actual COST of meat to inspire less consumption of meat. 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 3 months ago

    Nope

    They refuse to address the real cause of the damage and that's palm oil plantations, the clearing of rain forest to grow it, all the damage growing plants does 

    Growing plants for humans causes way more damage then rising meat. It needs more land, it needs more water, it uses millions of tons of toxic fertilizers and chemicals that run off into water ways that kill animals and destroy the environment 

    And cows can't be vibrated, they are not prisoners, they are property and if someone wants to shoot and eat a cow they own then you and other vegan retards can't stop them 

    Dariy and meat will never, ever be illegal. 

    • ...Show all comments
    • Star_of_Darkness
      Lv 7
      3 months agoReport

      Yes they are property and yes they should be property. They have no feelings and can't be murdered since they are just lowly animals 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Louis
    Lv 7
    3 months ago

    Well, of course, it would be a path to new laws. The GND is really a bill yet or even an agreed-upon plan but if progressives ever get control of the congress it Could be one of the new Congress' priorities.

    The GND is not about animal rights. Although it might help the animals in a collateral damage sort of way. And veganism is not always low carbon. Asparagus from Chili. 

    However, if we get serious about reducing GHG we will have to look at some ways to decrease the amount of livestock in the World. and yep, that would look good to us vegans

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 3 months ago

    "Could the Green New Deal be a possible path to new laws?"

    I'll be going into nerd mode in answering your question. If you think my previous answers to your previous questions were long, then the title of a song by Bachman Turner Overdrive comes to mind, "You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet."

    While the Green New Deal COULD POSSIBLY be a path to new laws, it's not going to work over the long term, and create the Utopia that vegans dreams of. Instead of balancing things better it's going to throw the balance the wrong way. Banning the eating of meat, and other animal products, is going to cause problems First will be at the environmental and ecological level, and then it's further out issues, will cause health issues for many. In a best case scenario, it would take five years before the health issues started showing up, however realistically, it would start showing up in tow to three years. 

    As an example the adequate intake for choline is currently set at for men at five hundred fifty milligrams per day. For some men that's fine. For others it's not enough, the same applies to females who aren't either pregnant or are lactating, where the adequate intake is set at four hundred twenty five milligrams per day, for those lactating or pregnant, then that's raised to the same as men. Then there are people whose body's does NOT convert beta carotene to vitamin A that well. While not great it's not horrible as twelve to one conversion at best. However some the conversion is far worse, if they can even convert to the fully formed vitamin A. So the strict vegetarian diet will NOT work for them.

    Then as in another question by you, as I stated the negative environmental impacts would be disastrous to say the least, especially if all of the cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, as well as chickens, ducks, geese, turkeys, and and other animals goes in two short years would result in a serious ecological damage, and environmental damages, and the loss of not only endangered plants, but also animals that are on the watch or endangered list, that WOULD become extinct.Then there's the other damages due to turning loose all of the livestock. 

    Pigs WOULD quickly become the biggest issue not only in  causing the extinction of plants and some animals, as PIGS ARE omnivores. Then there are the issues with the erosion that would be caused as a result of not only the pigs, but also to some degree sheep, but more so with goats. Both goats and sheep will eat vegetation right down to the ground, and leave the soil exposed.

    Another major impact would be as a result the amount of crops, that would be available for human consumption. Pigs in particular will root, and that would lead to heavy erosion of the topsoil. Without sufficient topsoil, there's not going to be enough arable land, that's going to be suitable to raise the foodstuffs to eat.Then in that same two years, we'd be facing a food shortage. The biggest cause of that would be pigs, since they have no actual predators here in the U.S. Pigs in the U.S. are a non native, and highly invasive species. With pigs not having a real predator, would easily quintuple the first year, and then by that much again, in the second year. Due to the number of pigs in the U.S. at the end of just the first year, the numbers could easily surpass two hundred million. at the end of the second year over one point two billion, and even realistically surpassing one point five billion or more.

    The number of cattle if turned loose as you and some others are proposing would exceed easily two hundred million, after two years. However the number COULD potentially even come in close to approaching three hundred million. The number of goats as a result of being released in the way you're basically outlining would in that two years if not quadruple, would nearly quadruple in two years. This is the worst case scenario. The best case scenario is four and JUST MAYBE five years. 

    he  was all the result of a conversation I overheard , by a vegan biologist, trying to explain to a far younger vegan, who was only about a year or so older than I was, which was a fair number of years ago now. The one piece he was missing at that time was the non native but highly invasive animal, which hadn't been released at that time, which is pigs. Which are not only very invasive, but are also highly destructive on an ecological/environmental level. He also called hunting a necessary evil. He also believed that a certain but undefined percentage of the population, would need to continue to eat meat.

    Then there's the issue of a rapid rise and spread of diseases, that are carried by pigs and chickens in particular. This would impact the health care industry, and place  a major burden on it. It would also drive the costs far higher than what they are now. If you think it's bad now, think how about how that would have a negative impact on everyone.Another issue that would eventually crop up is that eventually those which are predators or apex predators would eventually be found in populated areas, and people by and large, are NOT going to want any dangerous predators roaming the streets. Then even before that would be the issues of traffic congestion would increase, due to those animal release into the wild, eventually making their way into the more densely populated areas. That in turn would result in a rapid increase in incidents involving vehicles increasing as well. Which would effectively in a very short time would increase the premiums charged for vehicle insurance.

    Another major issue would be a sudden major increase in those who would become unemployed. displacing ten million people from the workforce would extend well beyond that, and would rise to levels not seen since the Wall Street crash in 1929. That increase could even top the percentage of people without jobs. Something that the recovery could take more than ten years. It would also mean not only jobs lost, but a major increase in the number of people who would become homeless.Now as far as "paving the way," for vegan law, the results wouldn't take as long, to be repealed, as it took Prohibition to be repealed. If you actually paid attention in history class, then you'd know how well the Prohibition worked, or more accurately how miserably it failed, and how fast it failed.If you think I've covered quite a bit, and while it MAY SEEM that way, yet there's more, that I didn't cover.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 3 months ago

    As you mentioned, the GND would doubtless put a tax on carbon emissions. Animal farming, however, degrades the atmosphere with methane. Methane is a more aggressive pollutant than carbon but is not popularly vilified. Ruminant animals such as cattle, sheep, goats, buffalo, deer, elk, giraffes and camels have a complex digestive structure with four stomachs that produces prodigious quantities of methane as a byproduct of their digestion. Were methane to be taxed, it would raise the price of meat from all of these animals, and that would result in reduced consumption but likely not lead to outlawing them being raised for profit.

  • 3 months ago

    No, it suggests moving away from animal agriculture. Extremists on both sides about every issues scream that some new plan or law will end everything. Like some how gun control means going to every persons house and taking their guns. Or working towards alternatives to animal agriculture means that you won't be allowed to each steak or hamburgers every again.

    • John3 months agoReport

      If GND suggests moving away from animal agriculture, then I am for it. A vegan world is a better world for all. 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.