4 ms·

This info graphic shows more the specialization of the workforce, or at least of titles, between 1978 and 2014. I'm ready to bet there's almost the same percent

by herge 11y ago

This info graphic shows more the specialization of the workforce, or at least of titles, between 1978 and 2014. I'm ready to bet there's almost the same percentage of truck drivers in 1978 compared to today, it's just that people who would have been 'just' secretaries have split into marketing assistants, HR workers, accounts receivable, sales people, etc, and the total number of white collar workers hasn't changed that much. However, a truck driver is a truck driver is a truck driver, let it be a dump truck, a big rig, a van or whatever. Sucks for farmers, tho.

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
Farms have consolidated - 300 acres used to be a big farm. Now you have to have 10,000 and a workforce of 100 people to farm profitably. So the numbers have reduced. The road I live on had 13 farms when I was a kid. My brother was the last. Now he works in town and rents the land to a corporation.
- escherplex 11y ago
  Sad point you bring up. Agriculture has morphed into agribusiness which consists of large corporations with no personal connection to the land growing Monsanto clones fertilized by ancient guano deposits and ammonium nitrate synthesized from methane. Strange new world we now live in.
  - vlehto 11y ago
    The alternative is the Nordic model! Subsidizing farmers so heavily that even our socialist welfare pales in comparison. Here 50% of farms make 80% of produce. The rest just keep the land from accommodating wildlife.
    - escherplex 11y ago
      Although idyllic farmland communities are a thing of the past (if they ever were) the primary intended reference wasn't to sociology or even to business model. A question arises as to what will be the long term impact on general health of a lifelong consumption of cloned plant material raised on a steady diet of junk food consisting of mined potash and reconfigured natural gas. Not to mention the vulnerability of that homogeneous plant stock to a single new pathogen.
      - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        Amusing way to put it. Not really the case, as plants are not 'made' of the elements they consume biologically, and plant stocks are designed to be resistant to pathogens better than the 'wild' varieties.
        escherplex 11y ago
        Really? But these plants are not being grown for aesthetics but as a food source. Nutrition value (read vitamin, mineral content, et al) of contemporary produce is considerably less than it was 50 years ago. If interested see a sample low-tech Scientific American article on the subject. URL: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soil-depletion-and-nutrition-loss/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soil-depletion-and... And for the sociology: what percentage of the population are responsible enough to take the now necessary dietary supplements to maintain a healthy, productive physiology?
      - vlehto 11y ago
        You have ingested different propaganda than I have. My GF studies plant pathology and is most worried about people religiously opposing GM.
        escherplex 11y ago
        Amazing. GMO tech is probably the only methodology with any hope of combating the impact of that single new killer pathogen when it arises. Your grandfather must know about fungal pathogen Ug99 devastating the world wheat crop and that only about 10 percent of other wheat varieties are resistant. Question is: why isn't a mixed variety regimen a general rule? Given that it takes a long time to introduce pathogen-resistant genes into a single plant variety, dependence on single or a mostly clone stock (a general rule based on economics) could prove fatal at some point. Although, a real problem with the current GMO tech is the diminished nutritional value of the foodstock produced relative to historic produce. But that, of course, is due in part to depleted soil.

by herge 11y ago

JoeAltmaier 11y ago

Farms have consolidated - 300 acres used to be a big farm. Now you have to have 10,000 and a workforce of 100 people to farm profitably. So the numbers have reduced. The road I live on had 13 farms when I was a kid. My brother was the last. Now he works in town and rents the land to a corporation.

escherplex 11y ago
Sad point you bring up. Agriculture has morphed into agribusiness which consists of large corporations with no personal connection to the land growing Monsanto clones fertilized by ancient guano deposits and ammonium nitrate synthesized from methane. Strange new world we now live in.
- vlehto 11y ago
  The alternative is the Nordic model! Subsidizing farmers so heavily that even our socialist welfare pales in comparison. Here 50% of farms make 80% of produce. The rest just keep the land from accommodating wildlife.
  - escherplex 11y ago
    Although idyllic farmland communities are a thing of the past (if they ever were) the primary intended reference wasn't to sociology or even to business model. A question arises as to what will be the long term impact on general health of a lifelong consumption of cloned plant material raised on a steady diet of junk food consisting of mined potash and reconfigured natural gas. Not to mention the vulnerability of that homogeneous plant stock to a single new pathogen.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Amusing way to put it. Not really the case, as plants are not 'made' of the elements they consume biologically, and plant stocks are designed to be resistant to pathogens better than the 'wild' varieties.
      - escherplex 11y ago
        Really? But these plants are not being grown for aesthetics but as a food source. Nutrition value (read vitamin, mineral content, et al) of contemporary produce is considerably less than it was 50 years ago. If interested see a sample low-tech Scientific American article on the subject. URL: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soil-depletion-and-nutrition-loss/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soil-depletion-and... And for the sociology: what percentage of the population are responsible enough to take the now necessary dietary supplements to maintain a healthy, productive physiology?
    - vlehto 11y ago
      You have ingested different propaganda than I have. My GF studies plant pathology and is most worried about people religiously opposing GM.
      - escherplex 11y ago
        Amazing. GMO tech is probably the only methodology with any hope of combating the impact of that single new killer pathogen when it arises. Your grandfather must know about fungal pathogen Ug99 devastating the world wheat crop and that only about 10 percent of other wheat varieties are resistant. Question is: why isn't a mixed variety regimen a general rule? Given that it takes a long time to introduce pathogen-resistant genes into a single plant variety, dependence on single or a mostly clone stock (a general rule based on economics) could prove fatal at some point. Although, a real problem with the current GMO tech is the diminished nutritional value of the foodstock produced relative to historic produce. But that, of course, is due in part to depleted soil.