At no point will any fewer cattle be ‘processed’ for meat because of this decision.
What does change is the utility ratio of the beasts. Well use less of each beast making the tragedy of their death more meaningless.
Leather is far more environmentally friendly than plastics, with a small caveat for the tanning process’ chemicals, and emissions from the beasts themselves (though that’s attributable to beef production.)
Leather doesn’t degrade into micro plastics.
So unless Apple is also reducing its beef consumption* by the equivalent amount it’s pointless.
Making cows(not beasts) less viable to grow because they are more expensive because the farmers aren’t getting money for their other body parts is a win!
Less leather bought = more expensive cows = less people able to afford cows = less cows murdered.
Yes, the person did take that into account. That was the whole point. If leather can’t be sold, meat prices will have to become higher (if farmers are not to get less money per cow). This will lower demand for meat, and less cattle will be raised.
Leather is a byproduct of the beef industry.
At no point will any fewer cattle be ‘processed’ for meat because of this decision.
What does change is the utility ratio of the beasts. Well use less of each beast making the tragedy of their death more meaningless.
Leather is far more environmentally friendly than plastics, with a small caveat for the tanning process’ chemicals, and emissions from the beasts themselves (though that’s attributable to beef production.)
Leather doesn’t degrade into micro plastics.
So unless Apple is also reducing its beef consumption* by the equivalent amount it’s pointless.
* yes, it’ll be non-zero.
Guess we should all eat increasingly less beef then
Yes.
This is wrong in so many ways.
Making cows(not beasts) less viable to grow because they are more expensive because the farmers aren’t getting money for their other body parts is a win!
Less leather bought = more expensive cows = less people able to afford cows = less cows murdered.
You’re not considering that the meat will still be sold, and the leather doesn’t actually decide how many cows are killed more than the meat does.
Yes, the person did take that into account. That was the whole point. If leather can’t be sold, meat prices will have to become higher (if farmers are not to get less money per cow). This will lower demand for meat, and less cattle will be raised.
It means I’ll be eating beef while poor people won’t.
Probably the dumbest boast I’ve read all day.
Glad you liked it. Cows are tasty especially wrapped in bacon. Don’t bother downvoting me, I have votes values hidden so I don’t even see them. lol.
Cool.
Meat will be replaced by meat replacement products. There’ll be less demand for meat, and there’s also less demand for leather. Good for cows.
You’re not understanding what I said at all.