I think every important response has more or less been made after reading 2 pages, but I already logged in just in case, so I may as well add my 2 cents (that's a weird expression).
I hope you actually read all your comments like you said, Bob, because with a thread this long, I usually assume nobody will read my post and pass by.
It seems to me that the only really serious question you raised in why we aren't using cultured meat. People have already responded the present problems, and people have said that if we put money into it, it will be economically viable in the future.
So here's what I would like to add, which may have been said on one of the pages beyond page 2. I suspect you already know this, but either did not think about it or don't care or just decided to leave it out of the video or have a counterpoint.
Maybe we could make cultured meat economically viable, and maybe it has all sorts of advantages, but any money we put toward it is taken away from somewhere else. Maybe shoving tons of money into that area of research isn't the best way to use the world's resources. Maybe it is a good idea, but I'm just saying that the opposite might be true.
I was considering saying that the free market would be putting more money into cultured meat if it were the best use of that money, or at least it would tend toward the right amount of money over time or approximate it. But then again, there are all sorts of situations where free market doesn't work (ignoring the fact that humans aren't entirely rational) like tragedy of the commons. I don't really know exactly which category this falls into.
Also, yes, this argument could be used for just about anything. I'm just bringing it up.
This got awfully long. I'm not sure if anybody will actually read this. 2 cents. There you go.
I hope you actually read all your comments like you said, Bob, because with a thread this long, I usually assume nobody will read my post and pass by.
It seems to me that the only really serious question you raised in why we aren't using cultured meat. People have already responded the present problems, and people have said that if we put money into it, it will be economically viable in the future.
So here's what I would like to add, which may have been said on one of the pages beyond page 2. I suspect you already know this, but either did not think about it or don't care or just decided to leave it out of the video or have a counterpoint.
Maybe we could make cultured meat economically viable, and maybe it has all sorts of advantages, but any money we put toward it is taken away from somewhere else. Maybe shoving tons of money into that area of research isn't the best way to use the world's resources. Maybe it is a good idea, but I'm just saying that the opposite might be true.
I was considering saying that the free market would be putting more money into cultured meat if it were the best use of that money, or at least it would tend toward the right amount of money over time or approximate it. But then again, there are all sorts of situations where free market doesn't work (ignoring the fact that humans aren't entirely rational) like tragedy of the commons. I don't really know exactly which category this falls into.
Also, yes, this argument could be used for just about anything. I'm just bringing it up.
This got awfully long. I'm not sure if anybody will actually read this. 2 cents. There you go.