I don't like the idea of foreign firms using American resources to grow export-only crops, but I can't make a compelling case against it without resorting to ar

I don't like the idea of foreign firms using American resources to grow export-only crops, but I can't make a compelling case against it without resorting to arbitrary rules that are both xenophobic and easily gotten around. It's not much different from American farmers growing food for export. The root of the problem is that we've completely externalized (or socialized) the true cost of food. Farmers—including large corporate industrial ones—get large tax breaks, subsidies, tariff exemptions, grants, preferential access to funds. This is all well-intentioned, in order to keep food affordable, and guarantee domestic food security. But it means that food doesn't cost what it should, so we end up with a catastrophic corn sugar glut, a distracting obsession with ethanol fuel, and other countries' food needs subsidized by all Americans. I'm left wondering if we wouldn't be better off seeing the true cost of production reflected in supermarket prices, and food aid being increased for those in need. At least then there would be incentives to manage the environmental impact, and disincentives for exporting. Water is just one of the ways in which the true cost of farming is externalized. There are plenty of other negative environmental effects that aren't born by the farmers. None of this is a dig at farmers. They're in a difficult, low-margin business. Most of them are small businesses playing fairly within a complex system. It's just that the current incentives are all wrong.