The particular industry that’s being nationalised is American flags produced for US government consumption. (The nationalisation part)
They’ve decided to legislate because they don’t like the optics of some foreign made products. (This isn’t an invisible hand; it’s opaque)
How is that justified in a supposedly capitalist society when China can produce flags of the same quality but at a cheaper price?
Edit: maybe protectionism is a better word than nationalise, end effect is the same; The government of a capitalist country is directly interfering with the market.
Yeah I probably should have, thanks for those links.
The existence of products designed to inject B12 is different to what I interpreted the person who I replied to was saying though.
I understood them as saying that farms are injecting B12 into animals so that meat gains some kind of nutrient that isn’t naturally occurring or not occurring at an appreciable level.
I have no doubt animals have all kinds of vitamin deficiencies and receive supplements to improve the over all health of the animal and the nutritional value of meat.
But is this the reason they are injecting B12?
Obviously I’ll read more on it.
EDIT: so the very first link basically confirmed what I just said, when an animal is deficient in B12 farmers inject it to make it more healthy. They aren’t injecting B12 into animals because animals just don’t have B12…
Yeah what you’re describing is basically humans make morals.
The problem you should have with this is that currently society is fine with eating animal products.
Many societies were successful because they ate meat.
How do you reconcile a situation where you believe humans are the source of morals but you disagree with a particular moral created by humans I.e. that it’s ok to eat meat?
Vegans. Vegans are claiming there are moral facts when they say that I am wrong for consuming animal products.
Although I’ve had discussions with vegans who claim they aren’t moral realists, I can’t recall a satisfactory argument for a moral anti-realist vegan position.
I’m not a moral realist. So I don’t believe in moral facts I.e. that murder is ‘wrong’ or being charitable is ‘right’
It’s kid stuff (IMO) to believe in mystical rights and wrongs of the universe. The universe does not care one iota that you cease to exist tomorrow or if all humans were to become extinct (IMO).
If you disagree please point me to the source of your morals, how do you know what’s right and what’s wrong?
I can deny the importance of human experience (the heat death of the universe will erase all traces of our existence and impact) without wanting to kill humans right now.
How did you conclude the experiences of animals matter?
How do you know animals are having experiences?
How do you know human experiences matter?
I don’t claim to have any answers to the above but I’ve never heard a satisfactory answer to these questions other than ‘I just believe it is so’ and if it boils down to my belief versus your belief I have to conclude that neither one of us actually has any idea.
If you’re suggesting you can get enough b12 purely through a diet without animal products, supplements or fortified food you’ve misunderstood nutritional science.
What I’m railing against is this; vegans say that omnivores eat meat only for taste pleasure and that’s a straw man argument.
No one just eats meat for taste because there is also a nutritional component. In the same way vegans have to supplement with B12 to be healthy so they recognise that things must be eaten beyond just taste pleasure.
There are lots of reasons why this is a boon for trump but here’s one:
Failed assassination attempts make your political opponents impotent.
From this point forward in the campaign Biden has to hold trumps assassins accountable and use state resources to condemn the actions taken against trump. Effectively your opponent has to support you otherwise they look like they are consenting to the assassination attempt.
What can the Biden campaign really say to counter this narrative? ‘Hey you probably shouldn’t have invited violence because you’ll reap what you sow’ - that’s terrible strategy.
Instead they have to condemn all political violence, ensure trumps safety and effectively congratulate him for surviving.
Bad days for Biden’s campaign. No worthy challenger to Biden will take the mantle now.
The particular industry that’s being nationalised is American flags produced for US government consumption. (The nationalisation part)
They’ve decided to legislate because they don’t like the optics of some foreign made products. (This isn’t an invisible hand; it’s opaque)
How is that justified in a supposedly capitalist society when China can produce flags of the same quality but at a cheaper price?
Edit: maybe protectionism is a better word than nationalise, end effect is the same; The government of a capitalist country is directly interfering with the market.