Under capitalism, it would be difficult, but we’ll regulated markets should be able to. The problem is that the negative externalities of meat are not being adequately captured, and meat producers are abusing the general Commons without recompense. That needs to be fixed with taxes or regulations. Then the market can balance around the true cost of providing meat, which would be much higher.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 week ago
Well-regulated markets, under capitalism, just means comfortable monopoly. You can’t work against the system of voracious demand for profit within said system. You can’t just pray for taxes abd regulations, the only ones that get passed are ones in the interests of the largest capitalists.
rbos@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
I agree that capitalism (as distinguished from straight markets) is the problem, yeah. Especially the part where the accumulation of capital influences the future accumulation of capital via the political process and externalizes cost to the commons.
Markets only work to the extent that they capture all costs in some form. If something is cheaper than the actual cost to society, you end up with problems.
So if (for an impractical example) oil producers had to pay to capture and sequester all the CO2 and methane implied by their oil and gas extraction, as well as repair all the direct damage their wells do, etc, the market might sort itself out. The “true” cost of oil might be $1000/barrel, and society would adjust accordingly. Of course, the time between point A and point B would involve a lot of misery with our current society.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 week ago
Sure, I can see that hypothetical, but we can’t get to that hypothetical in capitalism. Profit drives and steers the system, not humans.
rbos@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
Yeah, it’s a problem. Our society is only sustainable to the extent to which we capture externalities through regulation and taxes, and efforts to undermine that entire concept is infuriating.