Does The Usa Have A Moral Obligation On End Meat And Dairy Subsidies?

1394 Words6 Pages
Does The USA Have a Moral Obligation to End Meat and Dairy Subsidies?
In this essay, I will defend the argument that the United States has a moral obligation to abolish meat and dairy subsidies in order to mitigate the adverse affects of climate change. Cows and other livestock emit a large portion of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere, more than the entire transportation industry. Yet, the meat and dairy industry has faced few if any regulations to attempt to decrease these emissions. By abolishing these subsidies, the production of meat and dairy products would decrease and this would lead to a decrease of methane emitted into the atmosphere at no adverse cost to the human population. Clearly, decreasing the amount of methane in the atmosphere is favorable in our attempt to mitigate the effects of global warming which would decrease future human suffering. I argue that if a policy will help the human population avoid serious human suffering from climate change without any serious adverse effects on the population, than the United States has a moral obligation to enact that policy. Abolishing meat and dairy subsidies is one of these policies and therefore the United States has a moral obligation to abolish meat and dairy subsidies. I will raise an objection to this argument on the basis that it is not guaranteed that the ending of subsidies to the meat and dairy industry would lead to a decreased production of meat and dairy products in the long
Get Access