Factory Farms

Jason P

riotgrl wrote:

Jason P wrote:

For $700K you ban buy a three bedroom house in LA in a subdivision with a small backyard. For $700K you can buy a three bedroom house with 80 acres of farming land in Iowa.

What's stopping us?

Money? You can't live the American dream of huge houses, big cars, and more stuff if you're a farmer. I live in a farming state and no one here, at the farming level, makes the big money. And for the past 100 years we've become a more industrialized nation and less of an agrarian nation. How will people become farmers when they don't even know the growing cycle of the fruits and vegetables they eat? So what's stopping them is not just money but a complete lack of knowledge about soil, growth cycles, etc. I have a small garden at home and I grew up helping my mom with her garden but I still didn't really understand how to get it going. Perhaps, I am misreading your statement but you make it sound like it should be easy to start a farm. Most of us can't do that, for a variety of reasons. So what's wrong with supporting someone who does know how to do it?

That's kinda my point. Farmers in the past have worked hard and saved up so they could send us to college and now we are good at making spreadsheet and analyzing data so all we can do is complain ... but not really be able to do anything about the problems we are analyzing.

I'd like to see 1,000 environmental activists get together and each buy 80 acres and start a co-op. Perhaps get some celebrities and philanthropist to help with the initial funding and start farming with natural corn seed, no pesticides, no anhydrous ammonia, no subsidies, etc. That's 80,000 acres. Then pull in more people and expand once once farming techniques are perfected and help new start-ups out.

It needs to be built, not complained about.

note: one of your earlier post said there is an over-abundance of soybeans but right now there is a shortage. soybeans are at an all-time high. The drought factors in, but the amount of farmed land has sky-rocketed in the last decade.

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

Everyone likes to support their local farmer ... But doesn''t want to be one.

I doubt that anyone crunching numbers on how the population is becoming urban dwellers have ever spent ten hours picking rocks out of a field and drinking out of a garden hose on their breaks. They are more keen on making PowerPoint slides and excel graphs in their cubicals. They probably have a vegetable garden.

Farming is hard and dangerous work. It's also high stakes gambling. And most Americans are not cut out for it due to technology advances.

DS is right, although patronizing. There is tons of land in America. It isn't a bogeyman corporation stopping us ... It's hard work. Most prefer to watch farming and logging and fishing from thie couch then to actually attempt it.

1. it's hard to compete against industrialized farms
2. urban farming is growing exponentially
3. it is hard work but given a level playing field - many people would jump at the chance ..

polaris_x

DS1119 wrote:

Give me more more more!

this pretty much sums it up ...

Jason P

polaris_x wrote:

1. it's hard to compete against industrialized farms
2. urban farming is growing exponentially
3. it is hard work but given a level playing field - many people would jump at the chance ..

Create your own playing field or do nothing and quit complaining. Hard work and initial investment can payoff down the road.

But even if the aforementioned plan is successfully implemented, the activists will be bitten by their own snake. With 80,000 acres and expanding, the farms will be too big and frowned upon by hipsters that have images of little farmhouse cottages by the creek and little baby goats and sheep frolicking around. With good intentions, they now have become The Man!

Even organic farming is boycotted by activists and hipsters once a farm reaches a certain size.

:fp:

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

Create your own playing field or do nothing and quit complaining. Hard work and initial investment can payoff down the road.

But even if the aforementioned plan is successfully implemented, the activists will be bitten by their own snake. With 80,000 acres and expanding, the farms will be too big and frowned upon by hipsters that have images of little farmhouse cottages by the creek and little baby goats and sheep frolicking around. With good intentions, they now have become The Man!

Even organic farming is boycotted by activists and hipsters once a farm reaches a certain size.

:fp:

you can't be serious!? ... in a world that's controlled by corporations - you think a level playing field can be achieved!? ... the fact people still talk about oil likes it's air should be an indication to you that isn't the case ...

try being an independent farmer and have some monsanto seed fall into your farm ... tell me how level the playing field is then when their high priced lawyers come calling ....

Jason P

polaris_x wrote:

you can't be serious!? ... in a world that's controlled by corporations - you think a level playing field can be achieved!? ... the fact people still talk about oil likes it's air should be an indication to you that isn't the case ...

try being an independent farmer and have some monsanto seed fall into your farm ... tell me how level the playing field is then when their high priced lawyers come calling ....

Then you have lost the battle with an attitude like that. Enjoy your poisoned rivers and cancer.

My plan was to create your own brand of natural seed and not rely on Monsanto. You in essence have said it will cost too much. You are stuck in a mental box and prisoner of the corporations.

Would it be much harder to try to implement my plan on abundant open fertile land or rely on a pipedream of urban skyscrapers producing mixed greens?

You need 1,000 committed activists and some wealthy donors. I'm sure Clooney could host a few diners and there would be tons of rich people that would befit this to be a noble cause.

Do or do not. There is no try.

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

Then you have lost the battle with an attitude like that. Enjoy your poisoned rivers and cancer.

My plan was to create your own brand of natural seed and not rely on Monsanto. You in essence have said it will cost too much. You are stuck in a mental box and prisoner of the corporations.

Would it be much harder to try to implement my plan on abundant open fertile land or rely on a pipedream of urban skyscrapers producing mixed greens?

You need 1,000 committed activists and some wealthy donors. I'm sure Clooney could host a few diners and there would be tons of rich people that would befit this to be a noble cause.

Do or do not. There is no try.

good grief

at least I have you admitting what industrialized farming has resulted in ... poisoned rivers and cancer ...

as for the rest of your post - where did i say it will cost too much? ... ya, i guess if i can't afford to ward of monsanto's lawyers - i suppose it is too expensive ... way to put the blame on the independent farmer and totally disregard the reality ... you know for a fact that big agri controls policy and that the playing field is not level ... but sure, go on a rant about hipsters and feel good about defending something that's only sole purpose is to make huge profits ... talk about a pipedream ... feeding the world ... please ...

Shawshank

hedonist wrote:

I don't disagree; however, we live in a small condo nine floors up, with association rules in place as to what and how much we can have on our balconies. Genuine question - how would I grow fruits & vegetables & herbs, etc. (not to mention raising fish!) - to equal half or even a small portion of what we consume?

Believe me, if we had the land and means to do so, I'd love it...and I'm open to suggestions on how I could make it work within my own living situation.

Yes, as Polaris stated, in that situation you'd probably need to find a local co-op and then just grow whatever you were allowed to along your patio. It also depends on how big your condo is. At one time, I had a room that we used as an office/craft room...not but about 8X8 in size...I grew lettuce all year in there, along with tomatoes, broccoli, peppers and various herbs (not the smoking kind ).

Shawshank

polaris_x wrote:

i think his 50% number is a bit unrealistic ...

i think in your situation - you have to look for community garden plots ...

I don't disagree...it may be a bit unrealistic for some...but not at all for those with a typical house and a typical back yard. Of course you fall into issues with city ordinances in some situations...especially if you are looking at raising poultry...but even if that's the case there are farms that will trade out some weekend help here and there. You can also pay very reasonable dues at some farms that would probably equal your yearly outflow for supporting your own farm anyway, and still get the benefits as if it were your own.

Shawshank

polaris_x wrote:

the corn being bio-engineered today is growing more resistant to pesticides which means we have to continually create more and more toxic shit ... which all ends up in our ecosystem, our air, our water supply ... and as rates of cancer and other illnesses continue to rise - we sit there looking for a cure instead of looking for the cause ...

http://www.ehow.com/about_6300216_gmo-v ... ields.html

***DING DING DING*** We have a winner!! THIS is the root of most of the problems we face today when it comes to our overall health...especially since almost EVERYTHING contains corn in some form. We'd be better off smoking a pack of cigs a day than eating the poison they put in our food.

riotgrl

Jason P wrote:

riotgrl wrote:

Jason P wrote:

For $700K you ban buy a three bedroom house in LA in a subdivision with a small backyard. For $700K you can buy a three bedroom house with 80 acres of farming land in Iowa.

What's stopping us?

Money? You can't live the American dream of huge houses, big cars, and more stuff if you're a farmer. I live in a farming state and no one here, at the farming level, makes the big money. And for the past 100 years we've become a more industrialized nation and less of an agrarian nation. How will people become farmers when they don't even know the growing cycle of the fruits and vegetables they eat? So what's stopping them is not just money but a complete lack of knowledge about soil, growth cycles, etc. I have a small garden at home and I grew up helping my mom with her garden but I still didn't really understand how to get it going. Perhaps, I am misreading your statement but you make it sound like it should be easy to start a farm. Most of us can't do that, for a variety of reasons. So what's wrong with supporting someone who does know how to do it?

That's kinda my point. Farmers in the past have worked hard and saved up so they could send us to college and now we are good at making spreadsheet and analyzing data so all we can do is complain ... but not really be able to do anything about the problems we are analyzing.

I'd like to see 1,000 environmental activists get together and each buy 80 acres and start a co-op. Perhaps get some celebrities and philanthropist to help with the initial funding and start farming with natural corn seed, no pesticides, no anhydrous ammonia, no subsidies, etc. That's 80,000 acres. Then pull in more people and expand once once farming techniques are perfected and help new start-ups out.

It needs to be built, not complained about.

note: one of your earlier post said there is an over-abundance of soybeans but right now there is a shortage. soybeans are at an all-time high. The drought factors in, but the amount of farmed land has sky-rocketed in the last decade.

Isn't it better to do SOMETHING even on a small scale rather than nothing? I'm sorry, I feel as if I am not understanding you. Are you saying do something on large scale? How is that possible unless, as you stated, you have lots of money, most likely from celebrities etc. My 8x8 raised bed garden was a start, maybe not much, but at least it's something. Having grand ideas about huge projects are daunting for most people and will not be undertaken.

Also, I understand that there is a shortage of soybeans but to me that's not a real problem as most soybeans are used in processed food and non-food items, as is corn. It's not real food lke eating a tomato. LIttle impact upon me as I don't eat processed food so that cost increase will be passed on to those people who eat that stuff, I suppose.

Jason P

polaris_x wrote:

good grief

at least I have you admitting what industrialized farming has resulted in ... poisoned rivers and cancer ...

as for the rest of your post - where did i say it will cost too much? ... ya, i guess if i can't afford to ward of monsanto's lawyers - i suppose it is too expensive ... way to put the blame on the independent farmer and totally disregard the reality ... you know for a fact that big agri controls policy and that the playing field is not level ... but sure, go on a rant about hipsters and feel good about defending something that's only sole purpose is to make huge profits ... talk about a pipedream ... feeding the world ... please ...

Where did I blame the independent farmer? I faulted human perception. And there are 10,000 things that can be linked to cancer rates.

Food is cheap right now. Going organic requires more resources for lower production, thus a higher price. When the economy is good, profits are good. Right now, when people are looking to cut costs, organic doesn't make economic sense. But people have food.

I think your article mentioned 33,000,000 US citizens are starving right now. How many more would be starving if everything was organic and there were no factory farms?

Shawshank

riotgrl wrote:

Food waste in America is ridiculous!

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/tristram_stuart_the_global_food_waste_scandal.html

Not enough space to grow/pasture animals? This is how much you need

http://1bog.org/blog/live-off-the-land-2/#more-12807

Even that is more than you need. There are so many ways to cut down on space. Even with the fruit trees...you could technically get up to 12 of them in a single back yard of a typical home by multi-planting complementary varieties. For example here in Texas you can plant 3 or 4 different varieties of peach trees in a single hole, so you can mix up the types to give you early season yield, mid-season, and late season. You could technically get peaches about 9 or 10 months out of the year. You can also plant trees that are complimentary to each other, peaches, plumbs, etc...in cooler northern regions your options are even greater with apples, cherries, etc. High density planting actually helps the trees yield better fruit and it keeps them smaller and much more manageable. If you have a 30' wide backyard, you could actually plant 12 trees along the back wall and create almost a hedge type border.

When it gets to vegetables, like I said earlier, Aquaponics is the way to go...you get by far the biggest yields and the most nutritionally dense food you can imagine...not to mention you also get fish as well. No tilling, no soil, no fertilizer, no weeding, and an absolute minimum of space requirement. In this type of system you can have your food grown in tiered containers, therefore minimizing space requirements and maximizing yield.

polaris_x

Shawshank wrote:

I don't disagree...it may be a bit unrealistic for some...but not at all for those with a typical house and a typical back yard. Of course you fall into issues with city ordinances in some situations...especially if you are looking at raising poultry...but even if that's the case there are farms that will trade out some weekend help here and there. You can also pay very reasonable dues at some farms that would probably equal your yearly outflow for supporting your own farm anyway, and still get the benefits as if it were your own.

ya ... lots of cities now will let you raise like 2 or 3 chickens ... and urban farming is growing at a ridiculous rate ... there are so many plots in the middle of nowhere now that have people growing their own food ...

DS1119

riotgrl wrote:

Why can't the local farmer keep up with demand? That is a fallacy perpetrated by factory farms like Tyson and Smithfield to keep people tied to their inferior, cancer causing products.

Really?

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

Where did I blame the independent farmer? I faulted human perception. And there are 10,000 things that can be linked to cancer rates.

Food is cheap right now. Going organic requires more resources for lower production, thus a higher price. When the economy is good, profits are good. Right now, when people are looking to cut costs, organic doesn't make economic sense. But people have food.

I think your article mentioned 33,000,000 US citizens are starving right now. How many more would be starving if everything was organic and there were no factory farms?

again it boils down to what information you are going to go by ... i basically disagree with your entire foundation ... industrialized farming DOES NOT increase yields ... it's a myth propagated by big agri ... the fact is organic farming as similar yield while a) using way less resources b) no pesticides and thus lesser impact on environment and c) is more nutritious ...

and why must everyone always think cheap is good!?? ... how short-sighted is that? ... does quality not matter? ... impact to environment? ... sustainability? ... fair wages? ...

DS1119

Jason P wrote:

DS is right, although patronizing.

Sometimes that's the only way to be when people have their heads so far up in the clouds it's ridiculous.

A lot of people have these grand ideas of the way shit should be...do they do it? Nope. Will they fund it? Nope. Just all talk about the way THEY view things should be.

Jason P

polaris_x wrote:

Jason P wrote:

Where did I blame the independent farmer? I faulted human perception. And there are 10,000 things that can be linked to cancer rates.

Food is cheap right now. Going organic requires more resources for lower production, thus a higher price. When the economy is good, profits are good. Right now, when people are looking to cut costs, organic doesn't make economic sense. But people have food.

I think your article mentioned 33,000,000 US citizens are starving right now. How many more would be starving if everything was organic and there were no factory farms?

again it boils down to what information you are going to go by ... i basically disagree with your entire foundation ... industrialized farming DOES NOT increase yields ... it's a myth propagated by big agri ... the fact is organic farming as similar yield while a) using way less resources b) no pesticides and thus lesser impact on environment and c) is more nutritious ...

and why must everyone always think cheap is good!?? ... how short-sighted is that? ... does quality not matter? ... impact to environment? ... sustainability? ... fair wages? ...

If what you say is true then why do organic products cost more? If anything, they should be much, much cheaper.

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

If what you say is true then why do organic products cost more? If anything, they should be much, much cheaper.

which brings us again to the level playing field argument ...

Jason P

polaris_x wrote:

Jason P wrote:

If what you say is true then why do organic products cost more? If anything, they should be much, much cheaper.

which brings us again to the level playing field argument ...

Both sides have the same yields according to you. One side is using less resources according to you. And one side doesn't have spend money on chemicals and pesticides according to you.

Your right, that isn't a level playing field.