this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
550 points (100.0% liked)

196

16488 readers
2115 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

They're usually shredded alive almost immediately because they're seen as "waste" since they don't lay eggs

For some more context:

Why the egg industry 'shreds' baby chicks alive (NSFL)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

the fact that demand absolutely influences supply?

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"influences" is a pretty weasley word. show me a formula that actually (as in, verifiably) predicts how "demand" (a pretty weasley word itself) influences supply (probably the only concept for which we will be able to produce quantifiable numbers)

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

ok, here is my formula:

d = s

It's pretty reliable.

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

how do you quantify demand and can you show me a case where it has ever been true?

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

ok, I used to eat animal products, but then I decided it wasn't nice and so I stopped supplying them to myself.

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

but global supply has increased since then. you also haven't quantified demand.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

demand was when I wanted a hamburder. me wanting a hamburder is 1 demand.

1 demand = 1 supply.

I don't see why you would compare that to global supply. I am not equal to the global population. That was a very illogical leap you took.

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

can you see how your want is not quantifiable? how much did you want a hamburder? could you have wanted it less? would that have decreased the supply? this is pure storytelling.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

I just quantified it, why would you say I didn't? Everytime I wanted a hamburder I supplied one to myself. There were no degrees of wanting at all, I either did or didn't.

And this isn't storytelling, this is literally what happened. You're the one trying to muddy the waters.

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

has anyone else ever been able to repeat your results?

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

so your want is binary either you do want it, or you don't, and there are no degrees?

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

i think most people have degrees to all of their feelings.

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

a moment of introspection here will show you that, in fact, this is about as close to the truth as you're ever going to get. all economic theory is storytelling. you happen to like some particular stories better than others, and so you choose to believe them (and even repeat them as though tehy are true). but they are not True in an objective sense. there is no scientific experiment that can be constructed to test these claims which would satisfy the skepticism of a critical rationalist inquiry.

that's fine. i believe (or act like i believe) lots of stories that i can't prove the truth of, which are actually unprovable. we all do. just don't try to pretend it's science.