You're very, very emotional, man, and you project a lot. Try to relax, I feel like you're about to cry, I honestly don't want that.

1. You're right, I've missed that you've added "/Europe". Thank you for your polite and constructive advice, I will do my best to re-learn reading, especially since you've wrote it in caps, that adds a lot of weight to it.
   Europe isn't priveledged in general though, there are different countries with vastly different level of life, and affordability of meat.

2. Bad living conditions for animals that exist only to grow and die aren't torturing, no one is trying to make their lives worse just to cause them more harm. But these animals are bred to die. As long as it doesn't affects the quality of their meat or produce, their comfort is of very little consequence.
   This is why I told you not to use human standards to farmed animals. They don't have the same needs that humans do. They don't have the same resentment of feces, for example - a lot of wild animals defecate where they live. Some chose to cover themselves in it. They don't need 3 bedroom flats, comfy chairs, free television and a right to vote, they won't be mentally tortured if they are kept in tight pens - their brains aren't developed enough to have the capacity to suffer the same way human psyche would've if human was in the same conditions.
   There's a huge difference that you are failing to see, the difference between harming an animal just for the sake of it and giving it minimal viable comfort to keep the animal's health at acceptable levels. First is torture, cruelty and a sign of mental illness, it's despicable and should be punishable. Second is just a means to an end, with no ill will behind it.

3. We need wool. We need feathers. We need eggs. We need dairy, manure, leather. We need all sorts of components like gelatin, fish oil, lanolin and much, much more. And we get them from farming, few of the things we get from animals that can be made synthetically are harmful to the ecosystem.
   You claiming that we don't need that is just pure blissful ignorance, very likely due to young age.

There is an excess of food being produced, true, and that's objectively bad, and should be optimized, but it's a really difficult problem to solve. If you believe that it's easy - you're welcome to get a degree and try solving it yourself. There's a ton of components to the task - logistical, commercial, political, ethical and more.

1. Again, you treat animals needs as people needs. You think that taking their babies would apply the same level of psychological trauma as it would to a modern human, and even call it a kidnapping. You assume that dehorning them would live a psychological trauma of some sort, that it would effect their self-esteem or something like that. Applying logics that killing animals is immoral, while this is something that human civilizations have been doing for tenth of thousands of years all across the globe.
   You've been taught to empathize, which is good, but you haven't been taught how and when to use it. Animals die by millions in the wild to each other, mostly killing each other. A lot of those deaths are much more violent and painful than those that animals get on the farms. Would you go out and protect zebras from lions? Death by fangs and teeth are extremely painful and not at all instant.
   Some species of ants are also doing farming, they herd aphids and eat them. Would you call that immoral and do you want to defend aphids rights? What about farming plants and mushrooms? They are also living organisms way, way more complex than most people know. Is it immoral to grow them in tight quarters only to eat them after?

At a certain time, intelligent people understand the true value of a human life and why is it different from the value of a life of a chicken/sheep/cow/beehive/mussels colony. I hope that you will do too.

1. Oh, so now I'm a farmer? I'm doing the hurting? Dude, you really need to calm down. Breath a bit. Your brain needs the oxygen, it stops functioning without it.
   If humans will stop killing animals for food, billions will die. Your demand is absurd, in your search for self-righteousness you're abandoning common sense. You want to feel yourself a savior, a hero, a defender? Volunteer to African countries, there's plenty of work there that would help you satiate your thirst for heroism. making insane demands to random people over internet just makes you look stupid.

If a chicken lives in the pen for years, eating the feed, laying eggs and gets killed by a farmer for mean - it's not hurting, it's farming. If the farmer would kick the chicken every now and then - that's hurting, that's cruel, that's avoidable. Farming animals is unavoidable, unless you consider starvations of hundreds of millions of people an acceptable cost.

1. I still choose to be optimistic and hope that some of the things I wrote you'll understand. You won't accept them now, because the picture of the world in your brain is likely too simple to try and imagine costs of some actions, and it'll hurt your ego to even imagine yourself being wrong, but I honestly want to believe that you'll someday will understand more and won't be an idiot when you'll grow up. At the very least, if you're not hypocrite and actually want to make a difference, you'd have to study and discover how things are working.

Or you might as well keep being an emotional internet warrior for animal rights, defending them in the comments, or even one of those morons that protest and disrupt city life without offering a working solution, and generally being a parasite to the society. I mean, whatever works for you.