Lately, there’s been a growing discussion about the role meat plays in our agricultural industry, about pros and cons of meat production and the resulting environmental impacts. Younger people are most aware of this impact, and are seeking to consume meat in a more responsible way.
One policy proposal is to place a tax on meat consumption. It is a controversial idea, and must be explored from both sides to see if it would be truly helpful for the sustainable cause, or would simply prove to be too heavy a burden for the food production industry to bear.
Pros
Taking Action
The meat industry poses major problems for the environment. There is no denying this fact, and the solution is to try and lessen the impact over a period of time. When something costs more, it may lead to less consumption, thus lowering the impact.
Many feel this is a crucial task that should be backed with clear governmental policies. Simply by moving in a certain direction, the government can help the cause of moving away from meat.
Adapting The Policy
Government policy is a trial and error process, and it comes with a certain learning curve. This approach to taxation allows for changes to be made, as the policy won’t be set in stone and can altered to suit the needs of the future. Rates can be raised or lowered, depending on demand. At the same time, you can add allowance or target a wider group of farmers for years to come.
More Public Funding
Greater tax income means more room for public funding. This gives the government a chance to fund more programs, targeting more areas that are related to farming and the meat industry as a whole, such as environmental impact reduction programs and animal welfare.
This is especially crucial when policies change the nature of an industry that easily could lead to the expansion of e.g. lab grown meat and cultured meat production, of which negative impacts are not known at this stage yet. Governmental programs will need to be ready to mitigate any possible negative effects. It can be difficult to establish new governmental policies, so this will take some time, even when there are enough funds.
Cons
More Expenses
Business owners are already pressured from many sides, a reality that often drives newcomers away from the field. This is not only damaging in terms of business ideas that are never realized, but also in terms of the environment. Too often, only big businesses are able to enter the field, and they are also the biggest polluters.
The market should never be a zero sum game. Money that stays in accounts could and should become income to create jobs for hundreds if not thousands of people.
Disrupting The Industry
At this point, there are millions of people who depend on the industry, and most are not even working in the field. Bank loans and market futures will also suffer if the industry is put under any additional pressure.
Of course, it is ultimately the government’s prerogative to tax its people. However, it is important to note that the government should try to figure out in advance what the unforeseen consequences of a policy might be. As is the case with most things in life, it’s all about maintaining proper balance.
The Moral Argument
Philosophical questions also arise in regards to how this matter should be approached. The question stands: how much right does the government have to interfere with the dietary choices of its citizens?
Conclusion
There are both pros and cons to this policy suggestion, and every aspect should be carefully considered before a decision is reached.