Meat production should be significantly reduced

My thanks to my opponent for initiating this debate. My opponent contends that meat production should be significantly reduced. I contend that meat consumption should be significantly reduced instead, as the market for meat consumption is presently too large, and its economic impact too great, for our economy to bear an imposition upon its production. My opponent begins by stating that meat is a very inefficient form of nutrition. He also contends that there is a significant correlation between the consumption of red meat and various deleterious health effects, and that meat does not store as well as non-meat food products. All of these are excellent reasons not to consume meat. My opponent, however, calls for significantly reduced meat production. I intend to show why this is a bad idea. Meat consumption has steadily risen within the United States over the past several years, and shows no sign of abating. [1] [2] The value of the beef industry alone in the United States in 2006, for example, was $74 billion dollars, with approximately $2 billion dollars of export value. [3] Although meat exports are not as great as meat imports, the United States has certainly managed to hold its own. [4] Many jobs depend upon this trade, including the jobs of animal breeders, animal handlers, slaughterers, food scientists, and packagers. [5] To suddenly significantly alter, for the worse, the productivity of the trade on which these individuals rely for their livelihood would be reckless. Especially in a struggling economy. [6] Moreover, a significant decrease in production without a correlating decrease in consumption would not reduce demand but rather raise the value of meat, as the supply would no longer be sufficient to meet the demand at its pre-reduction rate. [7] This would result in prices for meat being raised. As a consequence, many people would find it more difficult to afford a food products that "supply varying amounts of ... key nutrients, including iron, zinc, magnesium, vitamin E, and B vitamins (thiamin, niacin, and vitamins B6 and B12)." [8] [9] One should not underestimate the dangers of starving a significant (reflecting decrease in production) portion of the population of meat. After all, the proteins in meat were responsible for the development of the modern human brain, and with it, modern civilization. [10] [11] Inefficient though its consumption may be, one could only imagine a society where meat was too scarce for many people to afford. Perhaps in time, if our consumption of meat sufficiently diminishes and our alternative protein source (tofu, for example) industries take off enough to replace the lost productivity of the meat market, we can talk about reducing or even eliminating meat production. For now, however, we must let them eat steak. As for my opponent's contention that meat production should be halted for environmental reasons, perhaps better business practices would suffice? [12] [1] http://www.hsus.org... [2] http://jn.nutrition.org... [3] http://www.ers.usda.gov... [4] http://www.ers.usda.gov... [5] http://www.bls.gov... [6] http://www.bls.gov... [7] http://en.wikipedia.org... [8] http://recipes.howstuffworks.com... [9] http://www.powerofmeat.com... [10] http://berkeley.edu... [11] http://www.beyondveg.com... [12] http://www.ses-corp.com...