It can, if some laws are changed. Which is possible, although the largest video game producers will probably raise hell to not release any control they have.
I once tried to apply for unemployment benefits for a period of 3 months between jobs. I now have a whole folder with all the documents I was sent. My application was, of course, denied.
I am not expecting every person on earth to stop consuming meat immediately. If some people in Mongolia have some cows and sheep on their farm, sure, that is already so much better than factory farming. Factory farming makes up about 90% percent of worldwide meat production, and that is the main thing people are talking about when discussing meat production. Factory farming is responsible for massive ecological damage due to animal waste, ie their shit and cows farting methane, on top of being extremely cruel. And then there is the overabundance of antibiotics used to keep the animals somewhat healthy ("healthy" is really a stretch here), which helps diseases build immunities to those antibiotics.
As for cost, meat is heavily subsidized (at least where I live), so we are all paying part of the cost for it through taxes. It is not as cheap as you might think when seeing it in a supermarket.
As for stopping exploitation of animals, that will never happen. It's wishful thinking.
That's just baseless conjecture, just because you lack the imagination to think of a world without or at the very least way less exploitation does not mean it cannot be achieved. And I'd rather have little exploitation than a lot, it's not a binary choice between "changing nothing" and "completely removing exploitation, which is impossible, so let's just do nothing".
There is a difference between not doing something that is purely done for enjoyment (eating meat, you can live perfectly fine and be healthy without) and not taking medication. Additionally, vegans want to stop exploiting animals for human benefit, so they are in favor of not doing animal testing anyways.
Of course force may need to be used when people act criminally. In case of tax evasion, that may be seizing the amount owed and/or imprisonment in severe cases.
Say someone steals from a store and the owner demands it back, but the thief says "nu-uh", what then? Is it morally permissible to use force to get your property back?
Ah yes, the well known connection between "let's have a very high tax bracket for billionaires" and "let's literally go and murder rich people because I don't like them lol", you got me. Oh, and sanctioning criminal behavior with prison = psychopathy, got it.
A billion dollars is so incomprehensibly more than anybody needs, no matter the size of their family, that there really is no reason to take these things into account. As for who decides what is enough, it's the people allowed to vote.
As for the donation example, yes, that is worse, since for every billionaire that miraculously donates some of their wealth, there are loads who don't. So better tax them all than hope that maybe a couple of them decide to be nice for once.
Shock diamonds my beloved