I wonder if the cutoff point is more like 25,000 though, the number of broiler chickens raised in a shed. It’s unclear to me whether producers respond to small changes in demand by adjusting the numbers of broilers in a shed or only by adjusting the number of sheds in use.
If the cutoff point is more like 25,000, then this would imply that most veg*ns go their entire lives without preventing the existence of a single broiler through their consumption changes, while a minority prevent the existence of a huge number.
For what it’s worth, it seems likely that donations to AMF are similar since their distributions typically cover hundreds of thousands or millions of people.
Whether the cutoff point is 25 or 25,000 the expected value of avoiding eating meat remains the same. So, it shouldn’t affect one’s motivation to reduce their meat intake.
I think it’s sort of bizarre to suggest that out of 25,000 vegetarians, one is responsible for the shed being closed, and the others did nothing at all. Why privilege the “last” decision to not purchase a chicken? It makes more sense to me that you’d allocate the “credit” equally to everyone who chose not to eat meat.
The first 24,999 needed to not buy a chicken in order for the last one to be in a position for their choice to make a difference.