I think the bankruptcies are probably necessary, but as harsh as I am about rural red voters, I don't think we should be "positive" about these farms going under. They're small businesses owned by hard-working poor people who've put their entire lives into something that, in many cases, has virtually zero equity.
And why isn't exporting half our food a good idea? That means our farmers are efficient and productive and have more sustainable businesses.
Of course it is. I suppose that is why the Republicans are trying to reduce the total population by putting an end to abortion....
Good point. If enough of our soil gets exported, the earth will get all wobbly and likely fly out of its orbit.When we export commodities we are exporting our soil. We need our soil to remain here.
When we export commodities we are exporting our soil. We need our soil to remain here.
When we export commodities we are exporting our soil. We need our soil to remain here.
Not to mention that helps these farmers make money to keep their farms afloat, and help feed people in other parts of the world. Also gives those people things to eat that they might not be able to grow there.
huh?
Feeding the world is part of our diplomatic strategy. We really don't care about the people.
I'm not so sure it is a 'diplomatic' strategy as much as it is a capitalistic strategy. Our capitalists like the money that flows in from feeding the world.Feeding the world is part of our diplomatic strategy. We really don't care about the people.
When commodities are consumed by Americans here, where does it go if it "remains here"? Hint: It doesn't stay in the fields.
Well, the bananas I eat have a little sticker on them that say they're from Hondurus. The canned Mackerel that I used to buy before tariffs skyrocketed the price is from China. I don't think either of those places are exporting those things because of a diplomatic strategy. They do it to make money, and I buy those things because I like eating them, and bananas aren't grown in the United States (that I'm aware of).
I'm not so sure it is a 'diplomatic' strategy as much as it is a capitalistic strategy. Our capitalists like the money that flows in from feeding the world.
I suspect most of our politicians would rather the rest of the world starved. It would be way easier to take over the world if the world didn't have so many people.
I heard somewhere that there was a hunger problem in America.
The productivity of the soil should benefit us, not foreigners.
Of course -if- we did have 26 billion people to feed, they would be standing on the fields that we would need to feed them....I heard recently that there is enough food in the world to feed 26 billion people. The problem isn't that there isn't enough, but what is done with it. Left in the fields because it wasn't profitable to harvest, or thrown away at restaurants because it was leftover from the day's business, or thrown away at home because the people thought they would eat it, but changed their mind. Even grocery stores throw away food that is past its expiration date, even though still perfectly edible.
Surprised you've never heard that.
I heard somewhere that there was a hunger problem in America.
The productivity of the soil should benefit us, not foreigners.
Of course -if- we did have 26 billion people to feed, they would be standing on the fields that we would need to feed them....
Productivity follows profitability.
For Monsanto maybe.