With US beef prices soaring to record highs, you might think that South Dakota cattle rancher Eric Gropper would be celebrating.
Yet while the cost of the meat in US supermarkets is now 12% higher than it was a year ago, a rise more than three times the rate of general inflation, Gropper says that he and all the other beef farmers aren't making any more profit than usual.
50 Comments
cymbal_king@lemmy.world · 79 pts · 20h
The details the article covers are interesting, but not one mention of what is causing record droughts and how the industrial cattle industry contributed to the climate crisis. The end of the article made it seem like a return to normal for the cattle industry is inevitable, but it really is not a sustainable feature of our culture.
Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 28 pts · 19h
I buy beef like once a year, if that. Its too expensive, horrible for the environment, and honestly, after so much time without it, I dont ever crave it.
This is good news to me. Reduce the market. I made a roast veg dish last night for supper using lentils and einkorn (a grain). My husband refuses the fake meat products, but has no problem with lentils, beans, and the uncommon grains I use.
Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 19h
I have seen cases of climate experts saying instead pushing large scale veganism a more realistic idea is just eating A LOT less beef. Outside of a random cheese burger I dont eat much myself. Don't want to end up constipated like Hank anyway
Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 16h
yeah exactly.
I am not vegan. Not even close. I used homemade chicken stock to cook those lentils and grains last night. But incorperating more plant based foods into ones diet isnt a bad idea. The bean is so powerful.
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 16h
Is that because of the cultural kneejerk reaction to veganism? Kind of how people agree with the concepts of socialism and communism until you use those words in front of them?
FatVegan@leminal.space · 5 pts · 12h
Probably. It's the whole: let people enjoy things. But their enjoyment is pretty fucking sick.
Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 11h
Not sure. Personally I don't subscribe to veganism because I believe what we considering suffering is usually based on the concept of beings born with a spine/central nervous system. If youre born a vertebrae only you are worthy of not experiencing "pain". To me it seems as arbitrary as not killing a being because its considered cute
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net · 1 pts · 7h
I'm vegan because of what causing in others what I perceive to be suffering in turn does to me.
FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 10h
Maybe I'm not understanding your point about veganism or maybe your understanding of veganism is incorrect.
Also, it seems to me that all living beings, including insects, do not want to be harmed or die. Ever try squishing an ant and have it run every which way to avoid your thumb, or swat a fly that just won't be swatted? Egg-laying hens are tortured in the commercial egg factories. The dairy industry (probably as cruel as the egg industry, honestly) is why we have veal, which seems super cruel. I don't like being involved with it at all.
I'd like to be vegan, and I'm trying to work my way toward it.
Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 10h
I look at plants biological/chemical response to tissue damage as no different to our neurological response to it. Fundamentally all organisms avoid tissue damage to pass on their genetics to the next generation. Thats a fundamental aspect of all life. The only reason we look at plant/fungi pain differently is because we dont respond to tissue damage the same way as they do. Personally i dont see plants moving energy to areas of tissue damage or releasing chemicals as a distress response any different than vertebraes own responses to tissue damage through what we consider "pain". Its all based on a level of similarity we give certain organism to oursleves.
Here's my example. if a society that is a type 5 civilization on Kardashev's scale started to eat humans it would be along the same scale as us eating plants. Not eating beings with a gap so huge in intelligence isnt any different than not eating dogs because we find them cute. Its all arbitrary with no real logic. Limiting suffering based on intelligence or a nervous system is as arbitrary as limiting it based on cuteness or brain size. We just choose to give certain organisms more empathy because we consider them closer to ourselves but isnt that selfish? Youre only worthy if we consider you close to humanity
Edit: that being said id be more than happy to hear your thoughts on the flaws of my argument
FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 8h
It literally dawned on my dumb ass that you were talking about plants like a half hour later. It's one of the reasons why I think trees might be the highest form of existence before nirvana. They don't have to inflict harm or pain to survive (they live off the rain, sun and soil).
My only response to the difference between eating something like, say, lettuce is that I can cut it down to eat off it and it grows back, where I can't cut down a beef to the hooves and have a cow grow back. But yeah, I have to eat to survive, so vegan at least would free me of doing some of the harm I must cause in the world.
Are there any Buddhist monks out there that can weigh in with an official position on all of this to help a new practitioner (me) out?
Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 8h
But muscle grows back depending on how much energy it consumes. The only difference is we're fully aware that that happens. If we cut down a tree to its roots its no different to eating a cow to its hooves. Plants are aware because they also need to consume organic matter to live and evolve to do so. If you burry a human corpse under a tree they leech the nutrients that make up the human body to grow stronger and pass on its genes. Parasitic or symbiotic plants and fungi consume live organisms to survive. Is that not an indication of a willingness to survive and therefore a form of consciousness?
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 1h
no, they're not
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 1h
hardly any calves end up as veal at all.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 1h
this is some wishy-washy phrasing. henry the eighth didn't want an iphone.
HubertManne@piefed.social · 2 pts · 16h
Yeah I can't even say we eat it once a year now. More like circumstance. we don't eat out but im surprised burger places are not pushing chicken.
wanderingmagus@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 5h
They are, there's "huge deals" on chicken burgers, chicken strips, chicken wraps, fried chicken, chicken tenders, "chicken fries", chicken sandwiches, McChicken, chicken tacos, chicken burritos, and every other version of "chicken" there is - and a lot of offerings where the meat is nondescript have dropped the meat type in the description in favor of just "mini tacos", "classic tacos", "meat and bean burrito", "chili", etc, at least as far as I've seen. The biggest pushers seem to be Taco Bell, Carl Jr, and Jack in the Box.
pressedhams@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 17h
But you could end up in a gallery showing in Dallas!
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 17h
I try to eat beef way less these days, I should only eat beef once or twice a month
Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 16h
I realization I had many years ago, was noting our ancestors even just 100 years ago, did not consume meat at every meal. It wasnt possible. Just because one can, doesnt mean one should. It's not been common to have meat at every single meal until the last 50-70 years or so. Your great great gran pappy in WW1 wasnt shoving mcdonalds hamburgers down his throat multiple times a month. He was eating what was available with the seasons.
I fact checked myself and it says british soliders were provided with 6oz of meat a day. so, bad example. but, like on the regular, it wasnt the norm. especially if you look at other cultures.
FirstCircle@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 16h
Maybe, but surely not all beef.
Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 16h
true. The article I found mentioned tinned fish and pork
FirstCircle@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 12h
Tinned fish ...ugh ... OTOH people eat sardines. I guess. Somewhere. I suppose those WW1 soldiers didn't have access to Spam yet. Spam is gross but I would eat that before I'd eat dead fish in a can.
Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 11h
tuna is really popular in a can, I dont eat any fish, but yeah, dont think war time rations are exactly gormet
catharso@discuss.tchncs.de · 20 pts · 20h
afaik it's because the cattle demand more money now for selling their bodies.
Mihies@programming.dev · 8 pts · 20h
How selfish of them, they apparently don't care about DOW at all
jesusactuallyhateshorses@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 18h
I hear they are unionizing.
Ripley_Tripley@lemmus.org · 15 pts · 16h
Despite the dilemma of drought and disease, no one is also mentioning how a lot of our materials that are being used to take care of the cattle are imported from another country. The vehicles, fencing posts, barbed wire, possibly medicine, parts for the vehicles, etc. Part of it costing more from buying materials to take care of the cattle, nothing is barely made in house and if it is, its once again coming from somewhere else to take care of what little product they have.
WesternInfidels@feddit.online · 8 pts · 17h
In other words, in spite of a worrying amount of consolidation, the beef market is (for now) still a functioning, competitive market, and the players within it do not have the power to unilaterally increase their margins. Huh.
I wouldn't tell you that Impossible Foods' "Ground Beef From Plants" is exactly like real ground beef. But it's pretty good. Unfortunately it's not cheap, either.
chuckleslord@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 17h
No, it means the monopoly exists at the meat processing step. Owning all the land for cattle raising was expensive, so investors targeted the processing step instead, fucking over both the ranchers and the consumers.
WesternInfidels@feddit.online · 7 pts · 17h
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 15h
For ground meat, I've been going with pork, chicken, and turkey. You don't even have to drain them after browning usually (more so the poultry, though I've found ground pork is much leaner than beef, too). Price-wise they've all been creeping up and pork isn't that far behind beef (even saw a few times where the pork was the same price as the beef) but chicken/turkey are usually a few bucks cheaper per package.
IamSparticles@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 13h
My wife and I cut way back on red meat a few years ago, on doctors' recommendations. So yeah, we use a lot of ground turkey and chicken.
FirstCircle@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 16h
This is all that I buy when I want something ground-beef-like for cooking. It's not cheap (not super-expensive either) but it's highly uniform and the taste and texture are fine with me. There used to be one or two other brands of plant-based "beef" at Winco but now there's only "Impossible" so I'm curious about what's going on in the artificial meat part of the market.
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 20h
This is just a long and drawn out way of saying “the meat industry is undergoing a lot of supply-side shocks”
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de · 5 pts · 10h
Somebody is a damned liar. I know a few different small cattle ranchers (like 10 to 30 cows). They are absolutely making more.
a9249@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 19h
Monopolies or Oligopolies will do that, yes. Can't sell high because only a few players that all price identically; cant buy low because only a few players that all price identically. Capitalism without competition is feudalism.
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 17h
There's plenty of competition at the rancher level. That's not the issue. The bottleneck is the meat processors. That's where the oligopoly is. All the beef at the grocery store goes through a couple of major processors.
You can get beef for cheaper wholesale or buying beef shares. Even with processing from a smaller place, you're looking at $8-10/lb for buying a whole beef, which is way cheaper than the grocery store. You just still need a place to keep 400+lbs of beef frozen.
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 17h
It’s time to trust bust the meat processors to oblivion
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 16h
Absolutely it is. We desperately need a return to the small local processor model that we used to have. As well as a pretty drastic cut in meat in general back to mid century levels.
In 1950, meat consumption was around 138lbs per person per year (with a population of 151 Million). In 2025 it was 226lbs per person per year with a population of 342 million. Going back to 1950s level of meat consumption would eliminate over 30 Billion pounds of meat per year, be WAY better for the environment, and drastically cut prices because demand would match actual supply.
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 16h
Well said. I agree with you on this, there’s a reason why I became a flexitarian
Taldan@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 16h
They're currently losing tons of money, as per the article. Busting up the meat packers will not help current supply issues
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 16h
Busting up the meat processors can help somewhat
FirstCircle@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 12h
Interesting you should mention this. There must have been a beef price "crisis" at the retail level back in the early-mid 70s, because now I remember my parents buying something like a side of beef, having it cut up and packaged, and freezing it at home. They might have actually bought a separate freezer just for this endeavor. I'd totally forgotten about this until now and have never heard of anyone doing a similar thing ever since. They really seemed to think they were beating "The System" at the time but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't even break even given the freezer storage needed.
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net · 1 pts · 16h
Capitalism always does this, this isn't feudalism this is just capitalism. There's so much pro-capitalism propaganda out there that our idea of what capitalism is supposed to be like is the exception to the rule instead of the rule itself.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 10h
Did you read the article? Even the magacorps are losing money. This whole situation is the direct result of inflationary tariffs. You know, the exact things that everyone said would happen when the tariffs were introduced.
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 17h
It’s time to trust bust the meat processors to oblivion
It’s the beef processor’s fault
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 10h
That’s a whole lot of words to describe what we knew as fact hundreds of years ago: tariffs are always inflationary.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 4h
arnt we mostly importing beef anyways.