this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
265 points (92.9% liked)

Data Is Beautiful

6884 readers
235 users here now

A place to share and discuss data visualizations. #dataviz


(under new moderation as of 2024-01, please let me know if there are any changes you want to see!)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 24 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

Monetary cost is the wrong y-axis here, as it optimizes only for mega-scale farming without taking its real costs in consideration. It should be ‘true cost’, which also accounts for environmental-, animal- and climate mitigation cost.

[–] techMayhem@lemmy.world 23 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think this is what it's meant to be about. "How do I afford a good amount of protein with not much money?", is the question it's answering.

It reminds me of a Reddit post I read several years ago where someone shared their advice on how they managed to live under extreme poverty. They spent a good amount of time talking about what foods are the most cost effective to buy and this chart lines up with what they have been saying pretty well.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 1 points 5 months ago

Yeah I don't think this covers externalized costs

[–] alyth@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] iaMLoWiQ@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago

Indeed. I pay taxes that will become subsidies for a lot of those things in the charts, especially those I don't even consume.

[–] bluemellophone@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That goes from a nice little graphic to a socioeconomic PhD.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org 2 points 5 months ago

Selfish people don't care about those factors. The existing graph has a better chance of swaying them.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

That's nice for scientists and policy makers. Not so useful for people buying things at the store.