silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 4 months ago
silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 4 months ago
Archived copies of the article: archive.today ghostarchive.org
Raising the cost will reduce demand, and prompt producers to either reduce supply to avoid overproduction or find a way to keep costs down.
In first case, there will be less cow farts, and less meat and milk on the tables of poor people. There will be public health consequences, but emissions will be reduced.
In the second case, the government will get more taxes, emissions will be the same, and there will be possible public health issues due to lower meat/milk quality resulted from cost cuts.
In both cases, big manufacturers will likely keep their profits, small farmers will be impacted more and may go out of business, and public health will be at risk.
Where am I wrong? I have no economic expertise and no data, and the government should have both, at least in theory.
I did some math and logistics on the subject. Rather than repost it again, I posted it as a top level comment in this thread.
https://lemmy.world/comment/10829248