Monday, August 24, 2009

A Meaty Solution

With the economy still looking peaked, there has been quite a bit of discussion about new and unique ways to combat the recession. While some states are throwing around the possibility of a marijuana tax, other more inventive states are considering the implementation of a "fat tax" or a tax on junk food and soda. A recent poll shows that over half of Americans are in favor of this idea, and even more would be if the tax money went into the funding of health care reform and health related programs. While I personally can't see how this could be viewed as a bad thing, some critics argue that a fat tax would unfairly target those under the poverty line, and others argue that it would be nearly impossible to decide which foods to classify as junk. I say, if you can figure it out, go for it, if not, here's an idea: tax meat instead!

Before you decide to write me off as a vegan nutcase (which I am, but still), hear me out. A sin tax on meat, similar to that placed on cigarettes, would work beautifully in a number of ways if passed, and here's how:

  • First of all, where it may be difficult to classify what is junk food and what is not, it is fairly simple to classify meat; if it used to have a face, it's meat.
  • According to a 2006 United Nations report, raising animals for food emits 40 percent more global warming gases than all the cars, trucks, SUVs, Hummers, planes, and ships in the world combined. The environment is now a major concern for the government as well as the people, and since the meat industry is the main contributor to global warming and environmental pollution, a meat tax could potentially decrease consumption and guard against future effects of global warming.*
  • The health of Americans is bad and getting worse. Obesity, heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are just a few of the health epidemics sweeping the country, and the consumption of meat, specifically red meat, contributes greatly to each of them. Multiple studies* on vegetarian diets have shown that the less meat one eats, the risk for all of the above diseases and variations of such decrease dramatically.
  • The tax would not have a severe impact on small family owned farms, as the majority of meat on the market comes from large corporate factory farms. An increase in factory farms over the years has taken over the vast majority of family farms and have replaced workers with technology. Those who do work in the factory farms are often illegal immigrants who are paid measly wages and are expected to perform dangerous tasks, often suffering severe injuries on the job. If your conscience lies with the meat industry, it is important to remember that like the tobacco lobby, meat corporations are completely disinterested in the health of the consumer, and are simply out to make a profit, a big one.
  • Additionally, a meat tax could potentially increase the demand for healthier products like fruits and vegetables. Because local farms are more likely to deal in these kinds of products as opposed to meats, local economies would be positively impacted, and when local economies are thriving, state economies thrive, and on up the chain. And so on.
  • And if your concern goes beyond the U.S. into nations rife with poverty and hunger, a meat tax could help there too. Ungodly amounts of land, water, and other resources that could be used to grow mass amounts of vegetables, fruits, and grains for humans are being used to feed a significantly smaller number of cattle and livestock used to support the meat loving diet of the U.S. and other core countries. In fact, it takes up to 16 pounds of grain to produce a single pound of edible animal flesh. By decreasing our demand for meat , we could be helping feed millions of people.
Whether you are a die hard vegan or a carnivore for life, I think we can all agree that compassion is a good thing. The meat industry is a multi-billion dollar enterprise that capitalizes on the suffering of animals AND humans. The conditions behind the closed doors of factory farms are some of the most gruesome and horrific for the animals that must endure them and the conditions for the exploited workers are not much more appealing. Supporting a meat tax could reduce suffering on every level, and would yield positive environmental, health, and economic results as well.


*http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526134.500
*http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Eating_Lots_of_Red_Meat_Linked_to_Colon_Cancer.asp
*http://www.goveg.com/heartdisease.asp


No comments: