The impact to quality of life could be minimal. Right now, today, there exist plant-based burgers (Beyond) and even steaks (Juicy Marbles) that are in every way superior to the average offal-based "meat" you get from the average fast food joint. Granted that you can't replicate the very nicest of fine cuts with plants - yet - but how often are you really eating rare sirloin for lunch anyway? Right now the plant based alternatives are more expensive than animal meats, but this is an economic artifact that would evaporate in a hypothetical world where meat consumption was de-normalized (and meat subsidies halted!).
Perhaps you mean it's counterfactual because you don't think it's a social norm that has a hope of being challenged. I think that's defeatist. Vegetarianism is practiced globally. You must begin from the following perspective: this is an indulgence, not a necessity for survival or even a requirement for a happy life. Raising an entire animal only to slaughter it for consumption is wanton extravagance of both physical and moral resource. Its practitioners deserve no subsidy, financial or social. Most people would be quite put off their meat if forced to viscerally confront the reality, but are carefully insulated from it - usually by simple distance and pleasant marketing, but in some places by actual legislation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ag-gag
In short, like most of the evils of world today, it's not a necessary evil. Just a lazy, can't-be-bothered-to-change, would-upset-the-current-economic-order evil.
The impact to quality of life could be minimal. Right now, today, there exist plant-based burgers (Beyond) and even steaks (Juicy Marbles) that are in every way superior to the average offal-based "meat" you get from the average fast food joint. Granted that you can't replicate the very nicest of fine cuts with plants - yet - but how often are you really eating rare sirloin for lunch anyway? Right now the plant based alternatives are more expensive than animal meats, but this is an economic artifact that would evaporate in a hypothetical world where meat consumption was de-normalized (and meat subsidies halted!).
Perhaps you mean it's counterfactual because you don't think it's a social norm that has a hope of being challenged. I think that's defeatist. Vegetarianism is practiced globally. You must begin from the following perspective: this is an indulgence, not a necessity for survival or even a requirement for a happy life. Raising an entire animal only to slaughter it for consumption is wanton extravagance of both physical and moral resource. Its practitioners deserve no subsidy, financial or social. Most people would be quite put off their meat if forced to viscerally confront the reality, but are carefully insulated from it - usually by simple distance and pleasant marketing, but in some places by actual legislation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ag-gag
In short, like most of the evils of world today, it's not a necessary evil. Just a lazy, can't-be-bothered-to-change, would-upset-the-current-economic-order evil.