4 ms·

Agtech is high tech now, especially for the large agribusiness. Without this tech I would think it would be difficult to feed as many people as we do. Does this

Agtech is high tech now, especially for the large agribusiness. Without this tech I would think it would be difficult to feed as many people as we do. Does this mean there needs to be more tech hiring in agribusiness?

shawn-butler 7y ago
That ship has already sailed. Also no one on the farm can repair any of this anymore.
abyssin 7y ago
What I see here is a machine that replaces human work with petrol. We could definitely feed people without these machines, but there might be less meat in their plate, and more workers needed to produce the food.
- asdkjh345fd 7y ago
  It would just shift more to healthier meat like beef instead of so much chicken. Beef production requires no large tractors, seeders, harvesters, etc. You are just letting cows eat grass. Chicken production is basically an extra step in corn production, so it needs all the equipment involved in corn production.
Cthulhu_ 7y ago
It wouldn't be more difficult to be honest; you can do the exact same work with low-tech tractors and mechanical implements, you'd just need to hire more workers. And honestly, the US is not lacking in workers at the minute. But the problem the US has is that they just don't want to pay people a living wage or give them any guarantees. You know a farmer or machine operator in agriculture will have a full lifetime of work ahead of them. But in general, US employer culture does not want to commit to anything, they want to be able to fire a tenth of the workforce if there's a pandemic without any consequences. err. Ranting but I hope you see my point. Automation isn't necessary to maintain production, it's a means to do the same job with less people.
- bluGill 7y ago
  Pay isn't the issue, rural areas have low cost of living in general and the pay is actually pretty good. Not SF tech wages good, but still good considering not much education is required for the labor jobs. (the farmers make a ton of money but that requires good management because the one great year makes up for many years of losses) The real problem is that it is a job where you are along for hours every day, in a rural area where there aren't many options at the end of the day for fun. Cities have some nice points, most people would like farming for a week and then get bored.
asdkjh345fd 7y ago
I think that is actually a very harmful myth that huge multinational corporations want to keep in people's minds. We produce less food per acre with modern industrial farming, not more. They optimize for total cost, not for land use. We could feed more people than we feed now just fine without any modern equipment, it would simply create lots of jobs.
- rexreed 7y ago
  Maybe I should edit the comment to say "... feed as many people as we do at the cost that we do..." because while it's true we can gain the same land productivity with less advanced equipment, it would seem that the total labor cost to do so would make overall food cost very high. Not to mention difficulties in hiring the quantities of people needed. I'm definitely not any sort of knowledgeable expert here, just thinking aloud.
  - asdkjh345fd 7y ago
    We currently have massive unemployment, and low quality, toxic food. I think rather than giving everyone a "basic income" to purchase that inferior food, we should give them jobs producing better food, and the overall increased price of food wouldn't be any worse than the cost of UBI.

shawn-butler 7y ago

That ship has already sailed. Also no one on the farm can repair any of this anymore.

abyssin 7y ago

What I see here is a machine that replaces human work with petrol. We could definitely feed people without these machines, but there might be less meat in their plate, and more workers needed to produce the food.

asdkjh345fd 7y ago
It would just shift more to healthier meat like beef instead of so much chicken. Beef production requires no large tractors, seeders, harvesters, etc. You are just letting cows eat grass. Chicken production is basically an extra step in corn production, so it needs all the equipment involved in corn production.

Cthulhu_ 7y ago

It wouldn't be more difficult to be honest; you can do the exact same work with low-tech tractors and mechanical implements, you'd just need to hire more workers. And honestly, the US is not lacking in workers at the minute. But the problem the US has is that they just don't want to pay people a living wage or give them any guarantees. You know a farmer or machine operator in agriculture will have a full lifetime of work ahead of them. But in general, US employer culture does not want to commit to anything, they want to be able to fire a tenth of the workforce if there's a pandemic without any consequences. err. Ranting but I hope you see my point. Automation isn't necessary to maintain production, it's a means to do the same job with less people.

bluGill 7y ago
Pay isn't the issue, rural areas have low cost of living in general and the pay is actually pretty good. Not SF tech wages good, but still good considering not much education is required for the labor jobs. (the farmers make a ton of money but that requires good management because the one great year makes up for many years of losses) The real problem is that it is a job where you are along for hours every day, in a rural area where there aren't many options at the end of the day for fun. Cities have some nice points, most people would like farming for a week and then get bored.

asdkjh345fd 7y ago

I think that is actually a very harmful myth that huge multinational corporations want to keep in people's minds. We produce less food per acre with modern industrial farming, not more. They optimize for total cost, not for land use. We could feed more people than we feed now just fine without any modern equipment, it would simply create lots of jobs.

rexreed 7y ago
Maybe I should edit the comment to say "... feed as many people as we do at the cost that we do..." because while it's true we can gain the same land productivity with less advanced equipment, it would seem that the total labor cost to do so would make overall food cost very high. Not to mention difficulties in hiring the quantities of people needed. I'm definitely not any sort of knowledgeable expert here, just thinking aloud.
- asdkjh345fd 7y ago
  We currently have massive unemployment, and low quality, toxic food. I think rather than giving everyone a "basic income" to purchase that inferior food, we should give them jobs producing better food, and the overall increased price of food wouldn't be any worse than the cost of UBI.