Hacker News Reader

Consumers probably don't know all of the conditions involved in making any of the products they buy. That information is generally not on the label, and even environmental and conditions based labels are often vague and hard to interpret.

Also in an economy of rising costs, people are going to choose affordable options even if they might be vaguely aware of worse conditions happening somewhere else, far away from the grocery store aisle where they are making that choice for their family.

Voters do care, in both blue and red states, they already passed laws in their state to this effect. This is the federal government invalidating those laws.

> If we are willing to use legislation, could we tax such gestation crates, and use that tax revenue to breed unconscious pigs? Or find a way to disable consciousness in their brain? Or fund lab meat?

This is the kind of "big government libertarian" thinking that you only find on HN. It's like virtue signalling but the virtue is contrarianism. What you've suggested is more complicated, less ethical, less effective, and likely to be opposed by just about everyone across the political spectrum.

Lmao, you did describe me so hard.

But I think I'd push back that this is less ethical.

All sorts of things are unpopular, but the masses can't logic their way through it.

Everything you suggested are bandaids