4 ms·
This seems fairly inextricably tied to a heavy reliance on cereal crops & soy. If fruits & vegetables were a higher portion of our collective diet, more small f
by ip26 6y ago
This seems fairly inextricably tied to a heavy reliance on cereal crops & soy. If fruits & vegetables were a higher portion of our collective diet, more small farmers could be supported (produce being less mechanized) and while food spending would increase, our collective health might improve at the same time.
- duxup 6y agoI think hanging your hat on 'well produce will just make more' if the market shifts towards that is a bit fragile. Generally farmers have been really good at increasing output across the board... often driving prices way down. Probably a good idea diet wise, but generally not a tried I'd expect would save many farms for long. We've seen increases in other types of farming boom and bust time and again after flooding the market with product.
- nradov 6y agoIt's not really possible to produce enough calories for the population by focusing on fruits and vegetables. Only cereal and starch crops can do that. This has been true ever since humans stopped being hunter-gatherers and it won't change in our lifetimes. Also even produce farming is increasingly automated. For example there are already working prototypes of strawberry picking robots; within 10 years those will be in widespread use on large farms.
- ip26 6y agoA meager 9% of the US population hits the recommended 2-3 cups of vegetables a day. I'm not talking about doing away with grains. It's true produce is increasingly automated. The viable scale still seems much smaller though.