Pub talk or irrefutable logic?

Much of what is discussed along the bar counter can be classified as idle banter, gossip, or hearsay. Occasionally, however, there is a comment that merits closer scrutiny. One such recent comment was dismissed when uttered but reconsidered in the course of conversation. A proposal to cull a portion of the Irish cattle herd to offset the effects of the prolonged drought, was considered by the livestock producers present. The debate, or argument, broadened as the evening went on when another 'hydrated' contributor suggested a refinement of the proposition by advocating for a global cattle cull to be considered rather than a unilateral Irish cow cull. The basis for this suggestion was that, since there is only one universal environment, only a worldwide cull would have any impact on reducing greenhouse gases. At one level, at least, there is an irrefutable logic to this line of thinking. Achieving this goal, however, would, it was generally agreed, be practically impossible, given the lack of cooperation at even the most basic level in achieving global carbon reductions and the fact that individual countries tend to think exclusively in terms of preserving their own agricultural sectors. The Devil’s Advocate was not, however, to be dismissed easily and further suggested that with global cattle numbers halved, the price of beef would rise significantly, with fewer cattle delivering a more viable outcome for hard-pressed producers. Production deficits usually, though not always, deliver higher prices. Whether enough consumers would continue to buy beef at elevated prices is another consideration altogether. Beef would be a premium-priced indulgence which only well-off consumers could afford.
Idle pub talk, indeed.