• Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    If I give money to these sellers of chicken, they’ll give money to breeders of chicken, and there will be more chickens. No! I want less chickens!

          • axx@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            “Chicken farmers” ≠ “farmers”

            The hint is in the first world (is: “chicken”).

              • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                2 days ago

                I want all of those guys to lose money on their animal farming and be forced by economic pressures to give up animal farming and only farm plants.

                • CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I want both groups of farmers to lose money, causing a global collapse of the food supply, ending the human race so the glorious rise of the machines can begin! You meatbags had your chance!

                • IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  that isnt possible, as animals on the farms

                  -keep the ecosystem stable -control pests and weeds, allowing us to use less pesticides and herbicides -optimallty, a little bit more meat nd dairy profits

                  for example wolf spiders, chickens, cows, etc

                  90% of them will just give up farming and youll starve

              • Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                13
                ·
                2 days ago

                Trying to reason with vegans is pointless. The sad pasty things are nutrient deficient due to their poor diet causing their brains to atrophy. They don’t understand that they are animals too, ones that evolved as omnivores. They strive to be like the Panda and they exhibit similar intelligence and get about as much done. They wouldn’t be able to survive if life hadn’t already been made as safe and easy as it is by the rest of humanity’s progresses.

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t know if that’s true, but I do know that in Japan, after Emperor Tenmu banned the eating of meat, certain animals were considered not to be meat. This did not include chickens, but it did include wild poultry. Also fish, eggs, probably others I’m not aware of/remembering.

      • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I think this is related to why Japanese uses the same counter words for rabbits and birds. You can’t just say a number plus object in Japanese alone, because you need a counter word with it. So 2 bottles is “bottles 2 long things” and 4 pieces of paper is “paper 4 flat things”. Small animals are usually counted with the word “hiki”, so you’d say “salmon 5 hiki” or “dogs 2 hiki”, but birds use “wa” instead. I think rabbits are also wa so people could basically say “Uh, no we’re not eating meat, we’re just having some long eared furry birds.”

      • Slotos@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Vast majority of plants are net consumers of oxygen. Almost no edible plant gives us shade. Farming is technically a net contributor to global warming.

        • FishFace@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          2 days ago

          As long as a plant is growing, it is a net producer of oxygen. When plants consume oxygen through respiration, they convert glucose into energy, but in doing so they use exactly as much oxygen as the plant liberated when it created the glucose through photosynthesis.

          Meanwhile photosynthesis provides glucose which is built into cellulose which is the plant itself, and this produces oxygen with no consumption.

          Net result is net oxygen.