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.
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?
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”.
Plant based diets are globally around 30% cheaper than other diets and it’s adoption not only can be healthy, but it would be sustainable for the planet.
this study is too narrow to make such a claim
How is it too narrow? They have considered data from more than 150 countries.
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.
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?
you didnt specify. you made a very broad claim which is not supported by the narrow study.
Specification is not needed, even you assumed these were retail costs from the get-go,
on the next sentence you conflated retail costs with consumer cost
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”.
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.