> The environmental consequences of such high-intensity farming is another issue, of course. It's not another issue, it's the same issue. We're in this mess in

> The environmental consequences of such high-intensity farming is another issue, of course. It's not another issue, it's the same issue. We're in this mess in the first place because nobody cares to price in the costs of the equation over time. We all want to eat for like a century, right? So why make price estimates that only work for ~10-20 years of unsustainable-climate-change-driving industry and then collapse when the climate changes and farming has to change too? Pricing the costs into the equation from the start makes your "very simple" point become still, "quite complex". The environment changing is a key fact in the pricing of things, and ignore-the-environment-in-first-estimates trope is a major flaw in how we think about problems.