101–110 of 319 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pro-choice. The exact same argument is used for requiring companies and insurance plans to pay for abortion.
That doesn't weaken the argument, it just calls into question the argument that employers should pay for abortions.
"The company estimates that the policy will save 445.1m pounds of CO2 emissions ... by 2023." That's 202,000 kt over a 5-year plan. Global fuel-based emissions in 2015: 36,061,710 kt CO2. In other words, they think they are so important as to "save" about 0.1% of global CO2 annually just by refusing to include meat in the menu of their own events and employee-expensed meals. I doubt the magnitude of their estimates.…
Why does it make sense to compare global CO2 emissions to WeWork's CO2 emissions? One company with one decision making an 0.1% reduction on global CO2 annually sounds pretty darn good to me.
I can't eat a lot of types of food due to allergies. Meat is one of the few things I still can eat without issue. Yes, there are actually people out there (hi, me!) that actually cannot eliminate certain foods from our diets without getting sick. This policy would prevent me from being able to work at that company, for recognized medical health reasons, because I would not be able to do legitimate expenses of food re…
I would assume there will be accommodations made for folks with dietary restrictions that require them to eat meat, whether that’s through a simple waiver or a massive lawsuit.
> co-founder Miguel McKelvey said the firm’s upcoming internal “Summer Camp” retreat would offer no meat options for attendees. Maybe if they care about the environment perhaps they should skip the summer camp retreat and donate the money to charity? It certainly is not an essential thing to be doing.
Being a vegetarian is exactly as equal a choice of freedom as being an omnivore or carnivore. This feels wrong to push this lifestyle on people. Of course one can always just not do business with We Work.
I have no problem recognizing climate change and the impact humanity has had on climate change, but for some reason my brain dismisses a vegetarian diet for the sake of affecting climate change as an absurdity. I don't know why. I feel I am open minded out other things related to climate change, or vegan/vegetarian-ism. I don't doubt the science behind it at all, I just find it silly for some reason. I raise livestock on my own land for food and also hunt, maybe that bias has something to do with it.
- WeWork isn't forcing employees to be vegetarian (it's not like a hiring requirement)
- most companies have restrictions and rules surrounding their expensing
- WeWork has decided they won't reimburse meat (employees can still buy meat)
Should we force WeWork leadership, despite their rights to hold moral positions, to pay for something they don't want to pay for?
This is the anti-humanistic mindset that prioritizes "no impact" on nature above all else, instead of prioritizing human well being / human flourishing, which itself would account for environmental stewardship, but not to the level of sacrificing health to avoid eating animals (the healthiest option).
Why is speciesism acceptable but not racism?
Do you swat at mosquitos or flies when they bite you?
Explain to me how you think different races compare to each other like a human compares to a cow? We are superior to the cow in so many ways... is that your opinion of races?
I think it is immoral to not hold humans in higher regard than animals, and do what is necessary to prioritize the well being of animals above humans where there is a choice to be made.
Also, I am absolutely in favor of treating animals as humanely as possible... though I won't go so far as to not eat them.
Maybe some group of humans will evolve over time to thrive without eating animals... but we haven't so far.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like it or not, this is the side of history that will eventually win out. In 50-100 years from now, expect this kind of arrangement to be very common with American companies.
What’s a good way for me to bet you $1000 that you’re wrong? This statement seems so interesting. What’s the basis for this thought process? Isn’t the trend for meat consumption to increase with wealth so as the world develops, more meat will be consumed. [0] [0] https://ourworldindata.org/meat-and-seafood-production-consu...
The downside is that you won't get your money. It'll go to charity. But you'll be able to prove your point to your great-great-grandkids!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly is the hypocrisy? Eating only meat is a very restricted and strange diet while excluding only meat can be a perfectly healthy diet. You're trying to make these equal opposites but they're not. Sort of like how not serving alcohol is acceptable but serving only alcohol (not even water) would be outrageous.
The fact that they are limiting people's choices and free will to eat meat and write-off (financial incentive) is the core problem.
Being a vegetarian is exactly as equal a choice of freedom as being an omnivore or carnivore. This feels wrong to push this lifestyle on people. Of course one can always just not do business with We Work.