_portrait.jpg){kind=link}
I'm torn on this one. I want immigrants to be able to come to the US, but I don't want them exploited in anyway. If these workers are deported it would shine a light on the industries that exploit them very quickly. It would be at the expense of the current workers. I wonder what they're currently making pay wise.
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
258 points (99.2% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
4212 readers
1779 users here now
Rules:
- If you don't already have some understanding of what this is, try reading this post. Off-topic posts will be removed.
- Please use a high-quality source to explain why your post fits if you think it might not be common knowledge and isn't explained within the post itself.
- Links to articles should be high-quality sources – for example, not the Daily Mail, the New York Post, Newsweek, etc. For a rough idea, check out this list. If it's marked in red, it probably isn't allowed; if it's yellow, exercise caution.
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a comment removed, you're encouraged to appeal it.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the comments.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out [email protected] (also active).
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Wow, Trump is woke?!?!? First making every US american legally a woman and now turning people vegan? Smh my head
Lol, Trump accidentally causing the a massive increase in veganism in the US is hilarious
Now the agribusiness giants can buy those farms up cheap.
What an amazing and totally unintended coincidence
Hans Breitenmoser, a farmer, says the ‘dairy industry will die a horrible death’ if undocumented workers are deported.
When Brexit came into force and "migrant" (i.e. low paid Eastern European) fruit pickers were kept out of the UK, farmers here struggled https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/farmers-brexit-kent-government-brits-b940026.html
If apparently we can't afford to produce food without exploiting low paid immigrants then either the people running the farms are money grubbing dickheads or there's something very wrong with how society functions.
Here in US i think it's more complicated than that. The farming is very large scale, most of the work is done by machinery. Some of the crops though need to be picked by hand. There is a migratory (within the US) workforce that moves to where the seasonal work is. Farm hands that sleep in a loft in the barn and see the crop through from seed to harvest isn't a thing. I learned this because I had friends who did this. Live in a tent, get paid for what you produce, move on to the next crop. No federal taxes, low cost of living. Apples in Washington, oranges in Florida, blueberries in Maine, clean fish in Alaska.I even met people who worked on crab boats and couldn't understand why it was so dangerous until I saw the TV show Dangerous Catch. Americans would rather work at Walmart. Immigrants will happily do it then head back home where the money they earned will go farther. NAFTA stole a lot of the agricultural work from Mexico, they're doing the same work just further from home. I don't know for sure but they may not be getting paid any less than an American that does the same job.
Caveat: I garnered this information a long time ago and may be outdated. IMO US immigration laws need to be updated and enforced. Political polarization is making this impossible. Being honest about the situation is the first step.
Other caveat: not an expert at anything
"Looks at fields where migrants usually pick vegetables"
I got bad news for ya bud.
Time to tap into the seed vault? Terrible flavor, amazing roughage.
The article discusses that. H-2A visa programme can be used for seasonal work.
The entire animal husbandry industry all the way through slaughter, requires workers that show up daily.
I suppose it might be possible to have seasonal slaughters but milk and all the subsequent dairy products are done.
And any vegans that think is for the best, keep in mind it involves a genocidal like slaughter of all those dairy animals occurring within hours of workers being unavailable.
Feel free to show you really give a shit about these animals by getting ready to purchase them from these farmers and care for them for the remainder of the animal's life.
Dairy cows are slaughtered for meat once they're no longer productive enough anyway, aren't they? Either way they're going to die.
https://thehumaneleague.org.uk/article/how-long-do-cows-live-naturally-vs-on-factory-farms
You didn't think they got to retire in a nice meadow, did you?
And any vegans that think is for the best, keep in mind it involves a genocidal like slaughter of all those dairy animals occurring within hours of workers being unavailable.
Ok, but they'd probably it would be only once, instead of the current unending cycle.
shrugs They're the ones that voted for this shit. It's just a shame the rest of us have to live with the outcome.
It's never a shame when a dairy closes.
Nobody ever told me there'd be unintended consequences to my actions /s
It's almost like attempting to enforce policy without nuance can have drastic consequences.
Who could have guessed! Maybe it should be illegal to vote without a Bachelors...
making it harder to vote is actually the problem tbh
I know plenty of people with degrees who are dunber than a bag of hammers and less than half as useful.
Our world is complex and many people are all too eager to remind us that they really are just animals shoved into t-shirts and pants. Unfortunately, the solution will never be to take anyone’s voice away so we’re going to be stuck in some shitty places like this until we can figure out to make this shit work better.
Universal suffrage would be under direct attack if such a thing were imposed. However, it would make more sense for people who wish to run for public office to have such a condition, with allowance made for relevant life experience in lieu of a formal education.
It's about time!
Good thing America stored all that cheese.
We already took care of the cheese, it's not there to fall back on anymore! The cheese caves are over!!!! We're living on borrowed cheese!!!!
And salt too.
Anyone could have seen that coming.
I don't expect a dairy farmer to know better, but of course he means "plant-based", not "vegan". "Plant-based" is a functional description, while "vegan" is a set of moral values and their ethical consequences. The dairy farmer isn't saying that everyone has to renounce animal abuse. They are simply saying that it won't be economical to commit atrocity for money any longer.
I don’t expect a dairy farmer to know better, but of course he means “plant-based”, not “vegan”. “Plant-based” is a functional description, while “vegan” is a set of moral values and their ethical consequences.
Since the farmer is talking about the outcome as opposed to the justification is there anything functionally different between "plant-based" and "vegan" here? As in would the diet of the vegan and someone eating only "plant based" look different in any way?
Jerkface is making a remark on the character of the farmer. A harsh one based on his profession, more-so than the outcome of the meaning of his words… dairy is not as immaculate as most were led to believe.
Neither of them really describe "a" diet. I don't consume alcohol. Is that a diet? You don't consume antifreeze, even though it tastes really really good. Is that a diet? "Not consuming animal products" is not a diet.
"Plant-based" is a characteristic of an infinite number of diets or other practices; those that exclude animal products. "Vegan" is a characteristic of a person; one that conducts themselves according to a specific moral perspective on interactions with animals. A diet is vegan iff (ie if and only if) there was a moral question in its practice. It describes the justification, and using it to talk about only the outcome is exactly what I am saying is incorrect.
Y'all should be more honest with yourselves and admit that veganism is a religion. Your god is cattle, like you.
Neither of them really describe “a” diet.
A diet is the term used to encompass what someone consumes for food or drink. Its a basic term with a clear definition.
“Plant-based” is a characteristic of an infinite number ....
Okay, I got it now. You're not really making any salient point. You're just splitting hairs with wordplay and being intentionally obtuse and apparently being unable to answer a straight question. You're coming off as incredibly smug and arrogant.
Veganism is a moral philosophy that rejects the exploitation and commodification of animals.
Plant-based diets may also be vegan or vegetarian but do not have to be as one may choose to eat plant-based due to personal health concerns and not animal rights ones for example.
With your provided definition of "plant-based" @[email protected] 's response would be wrong then. There's no room in the farmer's assertion for the "plant based" or vegetarian definition, but only vegan. The farmer's statement isn't saying "we'll have to reduce our consumption of animal products" but instead "we will have to reduce our consumption of animal products to zero".
I feel you're intentionally trying to misunderstand the argument.
Veganism is specifically about the moral implications of commodifying animals - plant-based is about consuming plants - so while all vegans are plant-based not all plant-based folk are vegan.
In really simple terms:
Imagine two kids who don't eat ice cream:
The first kid doesn't eat ice cream because they really love cows and don't want them to be used to make milk for ice cream. This kid also won't wear leather shoes or go to the zoo because they don't want any animals to be used by people. This is like being vegan.
The second kid doesn't eat ice cream just because the ice cream store closed down and there's no ice cream to buy anymore. This kid would still eat ice cream if they could get it, and they're fine wearing leather shoes or going to the zoo. This is like being plant-based because of economics (what the farmer was talking about).
So even though both kids end up not eating ice cream, they're doing it for very different reasons. That's what @[email protected] was saying - the farmer was talking about a future where people would eat plant-based food because animal products would be too expensive to make, not because everyone suddenly decided to become vegan and care about animals.
I feel you’re intentionally trying to misunderstand the argument.
I feel like you and jerkface are answering a question I didn't ask injecting your own morality, and refuse to answer the question I did ask. You can go back up to my post 3 or 4 earlier in the thread. I said the following:
"Since the farmer is talking about the outcome as opposed to the justification is there anything functionally different between 'plant-based' and “vegan” here? As in would the diet of the vegan and someone eating only 'plant based' look different in any way?"
Inside this discussion I don't care why the outcome is the way it is. The farmer doesn't care for this statement in his interview.
In really simple terms: Imagine two kids who don’t eat ice cream
I didn't ask for any of that. I asked for this:
So even though both kids end up not eating ice cream,
Thank you. That was my original point with my original question with my first post to this thread.
they’re doing it for very different reasons.
I don't care about the reasons why. The farmer doesn't care why (for his statement). Neither of us are saying people are making a political or or moral decision. The farmer is saying that the lack of labor will force the outcome to appear as the same result of a vegan diet.
That's all. All the extra vegan politics/philosophy/morality is irrelevant to this thread.
Idk to me it seemed like @[email protected] was just trying to explain the difference between vegan and plant-based - hence "I don't expect a dairy farmer to know better, but of course he means "plant-based", not "vegan". "Plant-based" is a functional description, while "vegan" is a set of moral values and their ethical consequences."
"Since the farmer is talking about the outcome as opposed to the justification is there anything functionally different between 'plant-based' and “vegan” here? As in would the diet of the vegan and someone eating only 'plant based' look different in any way?"
So by your logic if he was a pig farmer instead and said "In the future everybody would be Muslim because we wouldn't be able to grow pigs" - you'd say that's splitting hairs since the outcome is functionally the same?
Maybe don’t vote for an Orange Turd next time because I know you farmers did.
Nobody ever fucking asks them who they voted for and why.