5 ms·

(Apparently) unpopular opinion: literally everything in this article is good for everyone except the farmers themselves. More production from fewer cows is good

(Apparently) unpopular opinion: literally everything in this article is good for everyone except the farmers themselves. More production from fewer cows is good for the environment, particularly the carbon intensity of milk production. Lower prices are good for consumers. Even the author benefited by not being roped into working on the family farm, instead using his skills more productively in the software business.

gwbas1c 8y ago
> More production from fewer cows is good for the environment You obviously did not read the article. The problem with factory farming this way is manure disposal. The article describes the environmental impact of this kind of farming in painstaking detail. In summary, dense factory farms disposing of high volumes of manure pollutes groundwater and spreads disease.
- ijpoijpoihpiuoh 8y ago
  I did read the article. I just believe that it's better to sacrifice the local environment than the global one. If I could double the carbon intensiveness of milk production to completely eliminate its effects on the local environment, I would not.
  - ricardobeat 8y ago
    That makes no sense. "Local" impact is global when it happens at scale.
    - asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
      (Same respondent, different account.) I don't understand what you're trying to communicate with this objection. There is not sufficient demand for milk, at any price, that a typical person will live in the local environment of a dairy farm. Thus, the local environmental effects of dairy farms will never be global, even if they scale to the natural demand ceiling.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
sonnyblarney 8y ago
There are strategic considerations in terms of food production, which are real, and also softer, cultural concerns such as the centralization of controls, loss of local autonomy and other things. They're all externalized in the calculations and first-order thinking, which is why the farmers are essentially under thread. I live in a supply-managed area (Quebec) and Milk is a lot more expensive. Maybe a little too expensive. That said - I don't mind one bit paying 'a little bit more' to have locally sourced products. I suggest most people would feel the same way! Ergo, paradoxically, the 'market is inefficient' here! If consumers were able to make reliable choices with respect to the locality of their milk and produce, I would bet they'd make rational choices according to their own motivations to 'pay a little more'. It's just the way information is transmitted ... it's too onerous on consumers to have to make complex decisions with respect to every purchase! 'Free Trade' proponents actually try to stop things such as labelling like 'made in Michigan' or 'made in Quebec' because this runs counter to their economic arguments (and interests!) ... but hey, if consumers value something for whatever reason, more than others, that's their choice! I'll bet that a coherent, well communicated effort to label foods in a manner that enables consumers to make quick and easy decisions on this stuff may actually work. Environmental issues related to 'mass farming' aside - I wish governments or organized bodies would do this. Hint: we already do this in terms of categories. People chose to eat vegan/vegetarian for whatever reasons based on their own criteria, but it's fairly easy for them to do that: just don't buy the meat. So imagine if they could make such informed decisions as well with their Milk. Even without this, if I had to chose between 'supply management' and 'cheaper prices' I think I would chose the supply management system, at least for foods. I'm not sure the Canadian version is perfectly well suited, but the reality of globalism just has too many indirect consequences not on the balance sheet.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
  (Same respondent, different account.) > There are strategic considerations in terms of food production, which are real, I don't understand what strategic considerations there could be related to family farms. Farms in general, perhaps. > and also softer, cultural concerns such as the centralization of controls, loss of local autonomy and other things. I acknowledge those concerns exist. I think little of them. > That said - I don't mind one bit paying 'a little bit more' to have locally sourced products. I'm glad that you feel that way, since you do not have a choice. It would be sad if you did mind, because you would not have the option to make a different choice. I feel the opposite to you. I buy the inexpensive eggs and the inexpensive milk, since there is no discernible difference in taste, and the cheaper stuff costs less than half as much at my grocery store. I don't like to pay twice as much for a product that is no higher in quality.

gwbas1c 8y ago

> More production from fewer cows is good for the environment You obviously did not read the article. The problem with factory farming this way is manure disposal. The article describes the environmental impact of this kind of farming in painstaking detail. In summary, dense factory farms disposing of high volumes of manure pollutes groundwater and spreads disease.

ijpoijpoihpiuoh 8y ago
I did read the article. I just believe that it's better to sacrifice the local environment than the global one. If I could double the carbon intensiveness of milk production to completely eliminate its effects on the local environment, I would not.
- ricardobeat 8y ago
  That makes no sense. "Local" impact is global when it happens at scale.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
    (Same respondent, different account.) I don't understand what you're trying to communicate with this objection. There is not sufficient demand for milk, at any price, that a typical person will live in the local environment of a dairy farm. Thus, the local environmental effects of dairy farms will never be global, even if they scale to the natural demand ceiling.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

sonnyblarney 8y ago

There are strategic considerations in terms of food production, which are real, and also softer, cultural concerns such as the centralization of controls, loss of local autonomy and other things. They're all externalized in the calculations and first-order thinking, which is why the farmers are essentially under thread. I live in a supply-managed area (Quebec) and Milk is a lot more expensive. Maybe a little too expensive. That said - I don't mind one bit paying 'a little bit more' to have locally sourced products. I suggest most people would feel the same way! Ergo, paradoxically, the 'market is inefficient' here! If consumers were able to make reliable choices with respect to the locality of their milk and produce, I would bet they'd make rational choices according to their own motivations to 'pay a little more'. It's just the way information is transmitted ... it's too onerous on consumers to have to make complex decisions with respect to every purchase! 'Free Trade' proponents actually try to stop things such as labelling like 'made in Michigan' or 'made in Quebec' because this runs counter to their economic arguments (and interests!) ... but hey, if consumers value something for whatever reason, more than others, that's their choice! I'll bet that a coherent, well communicated effort to label foods in a manner that enables consumers to make quick and easy decisions on this stuff may actually work. Environmental issues related to 'mass farming' aside - I wish governments or organized bodies would do this. Hint: we already do this in terms of categories. People chose to eat vegan/vegetarian for whatever reasons based on their own criteria, but it's fairly easy for them to do that: just don't buy the meat. So imagine if they could make such informed decisions as well with their Milk. Even without this, if I had to chose between 'supply management' and 'cheaper prices' I think I would chose the supply management system, at least for foods. I'm not sure the Canadian version is perfectly well suited, but the reality of globalism just has too many indirect consequences not on the balance sheet.

asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
(Same respondent, different account.) > There are strategic considerations in terms of food production, which are real, I don't understand what strategic considerations there could be related to family farms. Farms in general, perhaps. > and also softer, cultural concerns such as the centralization of controls, loss of local autonomy and other things. I acknowledge those concerns exist. I think little of them. > That said - I don't mind one bit paying 'a little bit more' to have locally sourced products. I'm glad that you feel that way, since you do not have a choice. It would be sad if you did mind, because you would not have the option to make a different choice. I feel the opposite to you. I buy the inexpensive eggs and the inexpensive milk, since there is no discernible difference in taste, and the cheaper stuff costs less than half as much at my grocery store. I don't like to pay twice as much for a product that is no higher in quality.