Not the person you are replying to, but that is severely underestimating the amount of factory farming. They are the dominant method of production

Based on the EPA’s definition of a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (i.e factory farm) and USDA census data:

All fish raised in fish farms were considered to be factory-farmed. More than 98% of hens and pigs. For chickens and turkeys, the share was more than 99%. Cows were a bit more likely to be raised outside in fields, with greater space and freedom. Nonetheless, 75% were still fed in concentrated feeding operations for at least 45 days a year.

https://ourworldindata.org/how-many-animals-are-factory-farmed

And even those that are not considered factory farmed don’t always look how one may think, for instance non-factory farmed cows still use plenty of grain feed

Currently, ‘grass-finished’ beef accounts for less than 1% of the current US supply

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad401

None of this is not limited to the US by any means. For instance in the UK:

There are more than 1,000 US-style mega-farms in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, including some holding as many as a million animals

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/18/uk-has-more-than-1000-livestock-mega-farms-investigation-reveals

Factory farming is unfortunately what scales well. If we want less factory farming we need the industry itself to be smaller. That is no impossible goal. Germany, for instance, has seen its overall meat consumption fall over the last decade

In 2011, Germans ate 138 pounds of meat each year. Today, it’s 121 pounds — a 12.3 percent decline. And much of that decline took place in the last few years, a time period when grocery sales of plant-based food nearly doubled.

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23273338/germany-less-meat-plant-based-vegan-vegetarian-flexitarian

Yep, and even larger can be overcome too. If you look AOC’s 2018 primary upset, she was outspent by over 10x

Insane outspending can be overcome. Obviously it makes the fight harder, but money is not everything

Because they massively outspent Zohran in the primary and still lost. Vote because you can still overcome this. They want us to give up and think we can’t. Don’t do their dirty work for them

Hope does not mean blind hope. It does not mean you will always win. It means knowing that you can

Always try. No matter how hopeless it seems, you always have the possibility to win a seemingly impossible fight. This a shining example of overcoming and winning big

Giving up is a guaranteed loss. That is what they want us to do. Never give in

They poured millions and million and massively outspent Zohran and still lost. Zohran had no name recognition, and was virtually a nobody in February. The establishment worked hard against him and still lost. They rolled out shameless endorsement of Cuomo after shameless endorsement (like Bill Clinton, apparently). The establishment didn’t lose for a lack of effort. This could happen anywhere next

If they ignore it, the progressives are starting to get ready to take it in the primaries themselves. There’s been an increase in young progressives running for state & local office following these results

(https://bsky.app/profile/amandalitman.bsky.social/post/3lsflzpcjlk2i)

A historically massive over performance of the polls and how the candidate (Lander) who is third on the first round is also a progressive

Few polls had Zohran winning. Even the polling that had Zohran winning had him losing the first round vote by a fair amount and only flipping to win in the 7th round. No polling had him winning the 1st round. He’s just won the first round by like 7% of the vote. He’s not far from 50% of the vote outright on round one

We won’t have the official results from the later ranked choice rounds until July 1st, but just ~60% of Lander’s #2 votes alone would push him above 50% even if all candidates below Lander went 100% Cuomo for #2. Lander cross endorsed Zohran and told his supporters to rank Zohran #2

If they get him on state charges, only the Minnesota Board of Pardons can do that. Which consists of the Governor Tim Walz (D), Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court (appointee of Walz), and Minnesota Attorney General (D)

Yes, there is no update on their website’s newsroom press releases is what I am saying. Last one was posted online a day before they tweeted this one

They did not post on their newsroom or anything yet as far as I could find, just their official social media accounts

LAPD posted a screenshot of the text originally. See the link in the body https://xcancel.com/LAPDPIO/status/1931538326600995262#m

This is all circling around and missing the point I am making. The problem I am point out is about the logical reasoning. If logical reasoning is flawed when applied to something else, then it should not be used

This conversation is going in circle, so just going to end this here

Unfortunately this is far from a US only thing. It is worse in the US, but it’s still everywhere. Factory farming is rather high globally, including Canada where I’m going to assume you are from based on your instance

It’s estimated that three-quarters – 74% – of land livestock are factory-farmed. That means that at any given time, around 23 billion animals are on these farms.

[…]

Combine land animals and fish, and the final estimate comes to 94% of livestock living on factory farms

https://ourworldindata.org/how-many-animals-are-factory-farmed

It is a pervasive myth, supported by misleading industry advertising, that Canada does not have factory farms. Canada does, in fact, have factory farms, with the average chicken farm housing as many as 36,000 chickens.

https://mercyforanimals.org/blog/canada-chicken-farming-2024/

Like many Republican lead US-states, various conservative lead Canadian provinces have also tried put Ag-gag laws in place to limit filming of factory farms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ag-gag#Canada

That is missing what I am saying entirely. Argue with the logic, please, instead of a false interpenetration. The exact categories are not relevant to what I am saying at all. What matters is that the reasoning could be used to justify difference between categorization of humans that you think shouldn’t be morally relvent

Those are examples of the conclusion the flawed logic (difference = inherently justifying different treatment) could be used to justify. So I am saying we should reject the premise because of what the same logic can justify

This is rather circular reasoning. You are saying humans only matter because some humans say only humans matter

If we can just declare ethics excludes any group inherently because I said so, then that can lead to pretty bad conclusions

Not the person you are replying to, but that’s not what the point of the name the trait question is about. It is not about distinguishing between species

Why are humans morally considered is not asking why humans are human. Asking why one doesn’t morally consider chickens is not asking why chickens are chickens

It is about distinguishing between what matters to ethics. It’s not a trait that makes them chickens vs humans. It’s about a trait or set of traits that makes someone morally considered

Declaring that humans and chickens are distinct is not sufficient to say to they deserve radically different ethical consideration. Otherwise you are just saying that difference itself = justifying different ethical consideration, which is highly flawed. You could for instance, use that to say any group of humans are distinct in some way and thus deserve different moral consideration. Be it by gender, skin tone, etc.

Since you asked that made me actually reverse image search it to double check it was originally where I thought it was from. It was not, and now I am not sure where exactly it’s originally from. The oldest version I found was from a blog from 2008, but on that post the file metadata says the photo was from May 11th, 2004

The factory farming definition they use is more specific than that. It’s based on the numbers per location

There’s not really much crab farming in the US in general. It’s basically all wild caught which has it’s own negatives to the environment like overfishing. It’s more of a thing in other parts of the world like South East Asia

Still at fairly high densities from what I can tell though not necessarily always as insane as the photos I showed earlier

The definitions of factory farming they use here are based on the number of individuals per location. There are other metrics you may object to for the rest of that 25% too

For instance

Despite the consumer demand, however, approximately 95% of the cattle in the United States continue to be finished, or fattened, on grain for the last 160 to 180 days of life (~25 to 30% of their life), on average

https://extension.psu.edu/grass-fed-beef-production

I should also note that without demand for US beef and dairy production and consumption decreasing that’s not something that can change all that much because there just isn’t enough land for it

We model a nationwide transition [in the US] from grain- to grass-finishing systems using demographics of present-day beef cattle. In order to produce the same quantity of beef as the present-day system, we find that a nationwide shift to exclusively grass-fed beef would require increasing the national cattle herd from 77 to 100 million cattle, an increase of 30%. We also find that the current pastureland grass resource can support only 27% of the current beef supply (27 million cattle), an amount 30% smaller than prior estimates

[…]

If beef consumption is not reduced and is instead satisfied by greater imports of grass-fed beef, a switch to purely grass-fed systems would likely result in higher environmental costs, including higher overall methane emissions. Thus, only reductions in beef consumption can guarantee reductions in the environmental impact of US food systems.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad401