[LeeHwang]

Please don't.

A tax will lead to democrat losses in 2018. The sugar tax in philadelphia galvanized republicans across the rest of PA during 2016.

Eating meat is incredibly important to the middle classes. BBQ's are important social quasi-religious family bonding events in the United States. Taxing meat will lead to backlash far bigger than a "tea party".

[sametmax]

I really wonder if people said to lincoln something like:

"Please don't end slavery. The whole economy depends on it. Hell my brother would be out of a job. We would loose half the states in the next vote if you do. Be reasonable mate. There is probably a middle way that can make everyone happy."

Everytime there is an important question raised, it will be hard on the system, on the habits and traditions, and on the ones implementing the new thing.

This can not be a reason not to do it.

Now there could be very good reasons no to do it. Like discovering the whole specie would degenerate if we did.

But "we always have been doing this" should never be a answer in a civilized debate.

Let's talk about this. What are the fact ? What is the price we are paying now from eating that much meat. What would be the benefit and price of stopping ? Is it worth it ?

Otherwise it's just a Facebook talks.

[LeeHwang]

People probably did. Plus it was ultimately decided by a bloody civil war that still has lasting cultural and mental consequences to this current day.

So do you really believe eating meat is at the same level as human slavery , or is it an argument to ridiculousness.

My point was we should not ignore the human cultural consequences in our logical calculus, humans aren't purely rational actors .

[sametmax]

> So do you really believe eating meat is at the same level as human slavery , or is it an argument to ridiculousness.

I'm just using humor to state that if an issue is important, there will always be those type of argument. We should not stop at them. Taking them in consideration is obviously the right thing, but those can't be definitive show stoppers.

Otherwise the status quo will always win since by definition all our systems are built around what we are doing right now.

[paulmd]

Eating meat is not comparable to slavery, and that's really all that needs to be said in response to this.

Is this actually supposed to be a serious platform plank? Not seeing how this will draw more than a pittance of a vote - maybe 5%. It's an extreme minority view, on par with "literal communism now".

[croon]

I completely agree with you.

But it's sad that issues like these can completely grip groups of constituents to vote with tradition against health care, gun control, fair taxation, climate legislation, etc.

People are literally dying by the busload in all those issues, but half the people vote against sane reform for supposedly needing automatic weapons, 4x4 city pickups, $100 less in "taxes" by paying $1000 more elsewhere, and having to eat a 2 pound steak because it's what we've always done...

[StavrosK]

Should we really prioritize politics over the environment, though?

[seanmcdirmid]

In a democracy you have no choice. If it was an autocracy, maybe you could, but eventually people would grab their pitchforks.

[jbob2000]

In this case, absolutely. Because another term with this administration will be much more damaging to the environment than not have a meat tax.

[StavrosK]

Oh, I see what you mean. Yes, I agree.

[wsc981]

I think using higher taxes as a solution to anything is stupid and annoying as well.

I think education should be the key, not taxation.

Educate people that it's more healthy to eat less meat or eat meat less often. Educate people on the amount of resources needed to raise cattle and the impact on the earth. But let people make their own educated choices.

I eat meat maybe 2 times a week. I don't want to pay more for my meat. Buying organic meat is expensive enough already.