Skip to Main Content

PETA Pig Pesters President

Written by PETA | August 17, 2011

When President Obama held an economic forum in Peosta, Iowa, on Tuesday, PETA supporters were there getting piggy with it.

A staffer was passing out leaflets at the forum when a group of enthusiastic young people ran up to her and offered to help with the demonstration. One donned the pig costume, and the others handed out leaflets explaining the benefits of a tax on meat.

Because meat is a leading cause of climate change and drives up health-care costs by contributing to cancer, diabetes, and heart disease, among other illnesses, it only makes sense that meat should be subject to a “sin” tax just like alcohol and tobacco.

Taxing meat would not only help balance the budget, it would also encourage people to cut the pork out of their diets, saving countless lives—both human and animal.

Written by Michelle Sherrow

Commenting is closed.
  • Frankie says:

    Thanks for the great info dog I owe you bgiigty.

  • Jadewarlock says:

    For starters, we are already taxed on food. Secondly, unless you are willing to advocate a tax on luxury vegan foods (and I doubt it)… SHUT UP!

  • Zee Kallah says:

    YEAH! Let’s tax every sin! lol

  • DiaMed says:

    Having a tax on meat is a great idea. If you actually do have compasion for the poor you would realize that eating a plant based diet would elimate world hunger. If we stopped using all of our resources to produce meat we could feed the world. It takes 7-16 lbs of grains to produce 1 lb of beef. A pound of potatoes takes 99.6% less water to produce than a pound of beef, and 97% less than a pound of chicken.

  • GP says:

    For every kilogram of high-quality animal protein produced, livestock are fed nearly 6 kg of plant protein. Grains and legumes are cheap. They’d be even cheaper if the land used to produce soy and corn for livestock was planted with human food crops. This is likely true even if the government ever eliminated subsidies on corn and other grains. Meat prices are held in check by the government through subsidies and purchase programs. If these were eliminated, the meat cost would sky-rocket. The grain prices would fall, although only slightly because they are cost-controlled also. If people started eating a more plant-based diet due to the high cost of meat, the health care costs in this country would plummet. Taxing meat makes it less attractive to the pocketbook at the store and has an added benefit of lowering the overall costs of health care due to animal products’ effects on health (see The China Study, etc). The USDA is the agency that tells the people what to eat. However, their primary goal is in the agency’s name – US Dept of AGRICULTURE. They promote agriculture in this country. That means meat, dairy, eggs. The lobbies and their shills have created layer upon layer of subsidy programs to make animal agricultural products cheap and plentiful. Do not mistake this for them looking out for your well-being. It’s really a win-win if you decide to take off the blinders and see that the government really isn’t interested in the people’s well-being. It’s all about power.

  • Caitlin says:

    Seeing as a vegan/vegetarian diet is far cheaper than meat already, I don’t see why a meat tax would hurt the poor that much, Tom. I’m poor and get a lot more bang for my buck buying beans and protein-rich veggies than I would from buying rotting corpse.

  • Mich says:

    @Tom, actually a vegan diet is cheaper than a meat-based diet (assuming you avoid convenience foods like microwaved meals, which are expensive whether or not they contain meat). Rice, beans and pasta are all relatively inexpensive compared to meat, and these are all way healthier than meat. From meat you get cholesterol (none at all in plant-based foods), saturated fat, and zero fibre. My grocery bills have gone down significantly since going vegan.

  • Christopher says:

    This could have consequences…. Meat lovers could begin rioting…

  • Tom says:

    So you want to tax food. (even though it goes against your sensibilities meat is still food). That would be a regressive tax that would impact the poorest among us trying to get the necessities of life. You claim to have compassion for everything thing else, where is your compassion for the poor?