7 ms·

Some farms are just hella big with ultra low land productivity.

doikor 6y ago
And a lot subsistence farming in the developing world where you basically just farm for yourself to eat which are very small. And even if someone farms for selling to others if they don't have reliable access to machinery the farms will be really small as that just does not scale up (just take a look at pre industrial world where something like 90% of people were farmers)
- bboygravity 6y ago
  > And even if someone farms for selling to others if they don't have reliable access to machinery the farms will be really small as that just does not scale up (just take a look at pre industrial world where something like 90% of people were farmers) You seem to assume/imply that small farms in the developing world cannot scale up due to economic/business reasons. However in some developing countries, farms cannot be scaled up due to legal reasons. Countries like The Philippines don't allow ownership of farmland over one or two hectares per person. For companies the maximum is 5 hectares if I remember correctly. Foreigner investors cannot legally own any land whatsoever there (not even through a company, because foreigners aren't allowed to be majority share holders). Is that good or bad? I don't know. Agriculture world wide is a highly regulated and highly subsidized non-free market that has very little to do with the concepts of capitalism and free market. This should probably be analyzed on a country by country basis with a couple of history books handy. Random facts that I like about farming subsidies in the West: if farming in the Western world wasn't heavily subsidized, it wouldn't exist in the Western world. The reason for the farming subsidies is to have internal food production in case a war prevents sufficient food imports.
  - markdown 6y ago
    > Is that good or bad? I don't know. I do. It's good.
  - qsort 6y ago
    I agree with most of your comment but the final paragraph is a bit ???? > if farming in the Western world wasn't heavily subsidized, it wouldn't exist in the Western world It probably would change, but it's weird to suggest it would stop existing without governmental subsidies. Most farming in the West is either intensive mass-production of commodities or sectorial, high-margin goods like wine. For the most part, agricultural subsidies are helping small businesses in sectors where they aren't really competitive (mostly by making the taxpayer or the consumer pay the difference, but that's another story...). Again, not to say subsidies are wrong per se, but I don't follow your reasoning there. > The reason for the farming subsidies is to have internal food production in case a war prevents sufficient food imports ??? Most Western countries (with the possible exception of the US, I don't know) aren't agriculturally self-sufficient, nor it is a goal for them to be. In case a war broke out, energy supplies would be a much more pressing concern, especially for Western Europe.
    - oblio 6y ago
      He's right. Western Europe heavily imports laborers from Eastern Europe, Turkey and North Africa for many crops. Germany opened its borders at the height of the first Covid-19 wave to allow workers from Romania to come, when Romania was a hot bed for Covid-19. Many Western countries are self sufficient agriculturally and they are huge exporters. Agriculture is a cornerstone of national security. Life sucks when you are rationing fuel or imposing lights out curfews but it gets dire (and dangerous!) when people starve.
      - clawoo 6y ago
        > Germany opened its borders at the height of the first Covid-19 wave to allow workers from Romania to come, when Romania was a hot bed for Covid-19. Just a small correction, you've got your data the other way around. Early to mid April when Asparagus-Gate happened, Romania had at the very worst 500 new daily cases for a population of 19 million, while Germany regularly had 4-5000 for a population of 83 million. So in essence Germany was a hotbed.
        oblio 6y ago
teraku 6y ago
Currently, EU subsidizes farms based on land area. Which is supposed to change, but the lobby is strong.
- mamon 6y ago
  EU also sets limits on how much farms can produce. No one cares about yield from unit of land, they care about keeping prices high, so that farmers get adequate profits. EU will even pay farmers a pension if they retire and stop production.
  - secondcoming 6y ago
    Funny story, an aging local farmer used raise free-range a small amount of turkeys for the Christmas market. But she stopped because she thought the EU satellites would catch her doing it without permission. Those turkeys were far better than anything you would buy in a supermarket.
    - jokethrowaway 6y ago
      Regulations and centralised governments kill small businesses. Don't worry though, it's for your health (oh and for those cheeky shareholders of big corporations). Similar story here: https://www.fwi.co.uk/livestock/poultry/other-poultry/turkey-producer-forced-out-by-health-and-safety-regulations https://www.fwi.co.uk/livestock/poultry/other-poultry/turkey...
- alecco 6y ago
  They should subsidize by efficiency/yield, soil maintenance, and crop rotation.
- jabl 6y ago
  The current CAP proposal for the 2020-2027 period basically, thanks to intense lobbying by the agribusiness sector, more or less the same as the current scheme. If adopted, it will more or less put a stake through the EU Green New Deal that they're supposedly also implementing. :(
mikeyouse 6y ago
And conversely, many “family Farms” are just subsidy hoovering hobby farms relying on land appreciation to build wealth.

And a lot subsistence farming in the developing world where you basically just farm for yourself to eat which are very small. And even if someone farms for selling to others if they don't have reliable access to machinery the farms will be really small as that just does not scale up (just take a look at pre industrial world where something like 90% of people were farmers)

bboygravity 6y ago
> And even if someone farms for selling to others if they don't have reliable access to machinery the farms will be really small as that just does not scale up (just take a look at pre industrial world where something like 90% of people were farmers) You seem to assume/imply that small farms in the developing world cannot scale up due to economic/business reasons. However in some developing countries, farms cannot be scaled up due to legal reasons. Countries like The Philippines don't allow ownership of farmland over one or two hectares per person. For companies the maximum is 5 hectares if I remember correctly. Foreigner investors cannot legally own any land whatsoever there (not even through a company, because foreigners aren't allowed to be majority share holders). Is that good or bad? I don't know. Agriculture world wide is a highly regulated and highly subsidized non-free market that has very little to do with the concepts of capitalism and free market. This should probably be analyzed on a country by country basis with a couple of history books handy. Random facts that I like about farming subsidies in the West: if farming in the Western world wasn't heavily subsidized, it wouldn't exist in the Western world. The reason for the farming subsidies is to have internal food production in case a war prevents sufficient food imports.
- markdown 6y ago
  > Is that good or bad? I don't know. I do. It's good.
- qsort 6y ago
  I agree with most of your comment but the final paragraph is a bit ???? > if farming in the Western world wasn't heavily subsidized, it wouldn't exist in the Western world It probably would change, but it's weird to suggest it would stop existing without governmental subsidies. Most farming in the West is either intensive mass-production of commodities or sectorial, high-margin goods like wine. For the most part, agricultural subsidies are helping small businesses in sectors where they aren't really competitive (mostly by making the taxpayer or the consumer pay the difference, but that's another story...). Again, not to say subsidies are wrong per se, but I don't follow your reasoning there. > The reason for the farming subsidies is to have internal food production in case a war prevents sufficient food imports ??? Most Western countries (with the possible exception of the US, I don't know) aren't agriculturally self-sufficient, nor it is a goal for them to be. In case a war broke out, energy supplies would be a much more pressing concern, especially for Western Europe.
  - oblio 6y ago
    He's right. Western Europe heavily imports laborers from Eastern Europe, Turkey and North Africa for many crops. Germany opened its borders at the height of the first Covid-19 wave to allow workers from Romania to come, when Romania was a hot bed for Covid-19. Many Western countries are self sufficient agriculturally and they are huge exporters. Agriculture is a cornerstone of national security. Life sucks when you are rationing fuel or imposing lights out curfews but it gets dire (and dangerous!) when people starve.
    - clawoo 6y ago
      > Germany opened its borders at the height of the first Covid-19 wave to allow workers from Romania to come, when Romania was a hot bed for Covid-19. Just a small correction, you've got your data the other way around. Early to mid April when Asparagus-Gate happened, Romania had at the very worst 500 new daily cases for a population of 19 million, while Germany regularly had 4-5000 for a population of 83 million. So in essence Germany was a hotbed.
      - oblio 6y ago

teraku 6y ago

Currently, EU subsidizes farms based on land area. Which is supposed to change, but the lobby is strong.

mamon 6y ago
EU also sets limits on how much farms can produce. No one cares about yield from unit of land, they care about keeping prices high, so that farmers get adequate profits. EU will even pay farmers a pension if they retire and stop production.
- secondcoming 6y ago
  Funny story, an aging local farmer used raise free-range a small amount of turkeys for the Christmas market. But she stopped because she thought the EU satellites would catch her doing it without permission. Those turkeys were far better than anything you would buy in a supermarket.
  - jokethrowaway 6y ago
    Regulations and centralised governments kill small businesses. Don't worry though, it's for your health (oh and for those cheeky shareholders of big corporations). Similar story here: https://www.fwi.co.uk/livestock/poultry/other-poultry/turkey-producer-forced-out-by-health-and-safety-regulations https://www.fwi.co.uk/livestock/poultry/other-poultry/turkey...
alecco 6y ago
They should subsidize by efficiency/yield, soil maintenance, and crop rotation.
jabl 6y ago
The current CAP proposal for the 2020-2027 period basically, thanks to intense lobbying by the agribusiness sector, more or less the same as the current scheme. If adopted, it will more or less put a stake through the EU Green New Deal that they're supposedly also implementing. :(

mikeyouse 6y ago

And conversely, many “family Farms” are just subsidy hoovering hobby farms relying on land appreciation to build wealth.