40
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago

So you are against any lobbying? Green campaigners are lobbying for personal gain because they want a habitable planet. Even if you have a vested interest, surely you are allowed to have an opinion? If you have an opinion surely you are allowed to express it? If you are allowed to express it, surely people are allowed to listen to it? Should politicians be insulated from all industry voices, even if they have a valid point?

Just seems weird that no one really cared about it until this guy popped up on the radar.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

green campaigners qre lobbying for personal gain because they want a habitable planet

That's... like the opposite of personal gain

[-] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago

How do green campaigners not gain from it?

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Personal gain is when you yourself profit from something way more than other people do. In this case - getting boatloads of money for something that ultimately doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

[-] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago

Personal gain in the case of green lobbying is a subset of universal gain. Exactly the same as Vince's case. It doesn't follow the he will profit more than anyone else, as anyone else can supply meat-free food too.

[-] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago

Except you say that there is universal gain from allowing dishes to not contain meat. When there is not, if it isn't even worse. So now the lowest bidder will simply give you a less nutritious meal because they care about money not the students. And this is exactly why a law like this existed. So that a catering company won't just feed people potatoes mixed with potatoes 100% of the time.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[-] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago

Cool. Do you trust a random catering company to get it right for millions of students? To maintain the exact diet that's needed to get every nutrient, at a kitchen that hires random cooks and asks them to make food for 200 people at a time?

In reality, cooking a meat based meal is easy, fast and scalable. Cooking a plant-based one and only doing that isn't. There is a reason why laws exist - and this one exists because they were cheapening out and serving substandard meals. So they made it mandatory to at least contain some protein in the form of meat.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Nah the whole foods plant-based diet meals will be 30% cheaper

Sustainable eating is cheaper and healthier - Oxford study

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

this study is about individual purchasers, not institutions.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Meat is only cheap because of the subsidies provided to the industry. It's expensive in environmental terms too. There are many sources of protein that don't have either drawback.

Subsidy example: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/applications-open-for-new-4-million-fund-to-support-smaller-abattoirs

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

Except that the law says the meals have to be nutritious to a set level. So no, they can't do that.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2024
40 points (84.5% liked)

United Kingdom

4047 readers
455 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS