For the first situation, 3 h a day is a lot of time. I don’t think we should expect people to make such big sacrifices every day, at least if they work full time. People need leisure to stay healthy too. If it was 1h or 1:30h it would be reasonable to take the bike imo, but at 3h I’d cut them some slack. There are simply much more effective climate measures that we as a society should implement. They shouldn’t buy a new gas car if they can avoid it though.

For the second situation:

You want it so much, in fact, that not stopping there to buy a hamburger creates twice as much negative utility for you as biking instead of driving

But it also causes a lot more animal cruelty than the minuscule climate impact of one person commuting. Over the years, it would mean that many animals would have to endure an extremely miserable and painful life on factory farms with constant abuse and neglect, just to satisfy taste buds.

Compared to a warming of 0,00000000000000000001 °C or something like that, which has no measurable impact on any life on its own. Animal agriculture even has a larger climate impact than all cars on earth combined.

A more general analogy: By driving a car, you’ll do some miniscule harm to people and the environment. But if you’d knowingly chose to buy products that were produced in literal slavery conditions, and directly funded slavery that way, this would be a whole different ethical issue.

In reality, even if a person is addicted to burgers like a drug addict, they could easily buy plant-based burger patties that taste really similar to regular ones and make their own burgers. Vegan cheese isnt quite the same yet, but a little difference in taste certainly doesn’t justify torturing animals on factory farms. You still have essentially the same taste experience, especially after a small adjustment period.

In most countries, McDonalds even has plant based burgers available afaik.

If someone is literally starving and there’s only meat available, it can be argued that it would be vegan to eat it in that situation.

The definition from the vegan society is:

Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.

Is climate change cruel to animals? It’s not intentional harm, but it causes suffering. People will weigh that differently based on the ethical framework (deontology - utilitarianism spectrum).

Going on vacation by plane arguably isn’t vegan from a utilitarian perspective. Deontologists might still see it as vegan.

If someone needs to drive a car and can’t afford an EV, it’s not practical to avoid fossil fuels in this case. So that would be vegan either way.

I think the “avoiding as far as possible and practicable” principle also makes a lot of sense for the use of fossil fuels by environmentalists.

That gets difficult when billion dollar industries are involved, especially multiple. Some politicians will oppose the corruption, but the corporations will just fund the campaign of other politicians that are willing to act in their interest.

Transparency and a vigilant civil society with consequences for scandals can mitigate that somewhat, to varying degrees. But ultimately there’s corruption in every government at every level of governance. Capital interests always find a way, unfortunately.

Imo it’s just really easy to switch stuff like burgers, nuggets, chicken wings, chicken breast etc. over to a (good) plant-based equivalent, I don’t feel like I’ve lost anything by doing that. It would already remove a lot of environmental destruction and animal suffering without people going fully vegetarian or vegan.

Not saying those efforts can’t be done in parallel, but subsidizing vat grown meat is necessary as well.

Yes, I agree with that and I’ll be happy when it gets affordable.

I have family members that are meat eaters, but they are often surprised how good some alternatives are nowadays when I give them new stuff to try. It’s true that some aren’t good, though. It really depends on the product. Most people haven’t tried the good ones in my experience, or don’t have them available in their region yet.

The official statistics here in Germany are that plant-based sales increased by about 15% year-on-year, and more than doubled over the last 5 years alone. It’s certainly catching on here.

Most vegetarians and vegans will be happy about positive changes. They aren’t the loudest ones, however. Similar to feminism, the most radical opinions get much more attention relative to reasonable ones. Especially by those opposed to it.

When I was a meat eater I also saw it as an all-or-nothing choice though, as if I need to fully commit all at once, which was daunting to me. Then I tried to be vegetarian for a week which was surprisingly easy. Then I had a foot in the door, decided to continue, and replaced eggs and milk as well in the following weeks.

Some people might have an easier time replacing single foods, like buying plant-based patties instead of meat ones, or just trying out a few plant-based alternatives, and that’s great too.

It’s still from factory farms with very cruel living conditions, which is why it can be so cheap.

Plant-based meat alternatives have also become much tastier, cheaper and available, especially over the last decade. Cultivated meat will be great for steaks and stuff, but for many things we already have replacements that are quite good.

Some store brand meat alternatives have already reached price parity with factory farmed meat here in Germany, and this will continue as the industry scales up.

They’re using the money they got from their customers to lobby politicians to keep doing business as usual. They have so much power because people vote with their dollar, for them, and not for sustainable alternatives.

Blaming politicians while continuing to fund these industries won’t lead to anything.

And when it’s the only way to keep their family from starving, for example, people will consent in droves, securing supply.

I feel like if a child with a similar level of cognition as the cow harms other children, most people will say they have no moral agency yet, and will still see harvesting their leather as immoral.

There are two ways to resolve that inconsistency…

And the good thing is, when demand for (human) leather is higher than supply, people will just breed some more humans, keep them on farms, use their labor and sell their leather. With nothing going to waste, just the beautiful circle of life.

We’ve gotten quite efficient at doing that so there’s plenty opportunity to have more jobs, make a profit and to provide a product at an affordable price point, at the same time, all with human leather farms. Just have to compromise on welfare and sustainability step by step for more profit, but humans are already really great at ignoring such things when it’s advantageous to them, so most won’t ask any pesky questions anyways. We just have to normalize human leather (from factory farms) and everything will be great.

What makes you think that processing food through an animal is healthier than through a factory?

You have to compare the actual nutrients contained in the product to draw any conclusion about health effects, and the macros are fairly similar for the plant-based versions compared to a given meat product.

The average person (in developed countries) eats significantly more meat than the recommended upper limit by nutrition organizations.

If you just go by the naturalistic argument, you’d conclude that processed drinking water is worse than untreated water, and that vaccines are worse than “perfectly natural” diseases. It’s a common logical fallacy.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

But that breeds diseases like avian flu and swine flu that will eventually kill loads of humans when they become human transmissible. It’s all just a bit delayed this time.