4 ms·

Uhm... I've worked at Cargill. You are quoting the whole value of a corporation not the total dealing with farmers. In fact, Cargill's grain division doesn't

Uhm... I've worked at Cargill. You are quoting the whole value of a corporation not the total dealing with farmers. In fact, Cargill's grain division doesn't own any farms. Pork does, but that's not the type of farm we are talking about. Nothing owned by Cargill is listed as a family farm. The article actually says United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that at least 30 percent of American farmland is owned by non-operators who lease it out to farmers. Yeah, that is a common arrangement that's been with us for decades. Also, in some states, such as North Dakota, corporate farms are illegal http://inthesetimes.com/rural-america/entry/19224/north-dakota-votes-no-on-measure-1-corporate-farm-ban http://inthesetimes.com/rural-america/entry/19224/north-dako...

kurthr 7y ago
All this does is cause relabeling of "corporate" farms to "family" farms since a privately held corporation held more than 50% by a single extended family is a "family" farm. They still end up being so large for economies of scale that no single mulit-generation family (of 20) could possibly farm them. The smaller farms are stuck in debt and poverty or sell out to the other "families". In my experience it's true for almonds, rice, corn, wheat, cotton, hogs, cattle. When you can't see the edge of the farm from the top of a pickup and talk about size by number of wells... it is a "family" farm in name only.
- protomyth 7y ago
  You really are going to have demographics to back that claim up. Technology has been amazing for the family farmer as it has allowed the purchase of machines that allow vast areas to be farmed by far less people. Farmers, unlike their typical portrayal, are pretty savvy about new technologies[1] and can manage both the land and financial tools such as hedging. Its still a lot of families that have been doing this for years and years. 1) although I content the six foot drone the folks here were playing with has a bit of a fun factor too in addition to mapping the fields for their crop forecasts and planning.

kurthr 7y ago

All this does is cause relabeling of "corporate" farms to "family" farms since a privately held corporation held more than 50% by a single extended family is a "family" farm. They still end up being so large for economies of scale that no single mulit-generation family (of 20) could possibly farm them. The smaller farms are stuck in debt and poverty or sell out to the other "families". In my experience it's true for almonds, rice, corn, wheat, cotton, hogs, cattle. When you can't see the edge of the farm from the top of a pickup and talk about size by number of wells... it is a "family" farm in name only.

protomyth 7y ago
You really are going to have demographics to back that claim up. Technology has been amazing for the family farmer as it has allowed the purchase of machines that allow vast areas to be farmed by far less people. Farmers, unlike their typical portrayal, are pretty savvy about new technologies[1] and can manage both the land and financial tools such as hedging. Its still a lot of families that have been doing this for years and years. 1) although I content the six foot drone the folks here were playing with has a bit of a fun factor too in addition to mapping the fields for their crop forecasts and planning.