• goedel@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    they only compared retail costs. they didn’t account for people who get food for free or near free through poverty subsistence programs or hunting or fishing or farming their own. it basically didn’t cover poor people at all.

    • lalo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Retail costs are still costs and plant based diets are globally around 30% cheaper than other diets. Where did I specify consumer (or any other particular) cost in my claim? Do you actually think the government giving free food means the food is cost free as well? Do you think self-sufficient people will affect the measure of the cost of food?

        • lalo@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          24 hours ago

          Specification is not needed, even you assumed these were retail costs from the get-go,

          they only compared retail costs

          on the next sentence you conflated retail costs with consumer cost

          they didn’t account for people

          which of course they didn’t, retail costs will be the same even if the person getting the items isn’t paying for them.

          When someone says “this is 30% cheaper now”, any reasonable person would understand that they’re referring to the retail cost, not the consumer cost unless otherwise specified. Like “this is 30% cheaper on my food stamps”.

          • goedel@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            21 hours ago

            it seems like you understand exactly what i’m saying, but you need to somehow paint yourself as right and me as wrong. fine.

            have a nice day.