3 ms·

It’s only inefficient if you continue to ignore the points being raised by the parent post.

• AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  The only point I see that wasn't addressed was that we can use land unsuitable for agriculture for grazing, but in that case all the supposed top-soil benefits are going to the wrong place anyway.
  • t-3 5y ago
    "The wrong place" can become "the right place" in a relatively short period of time if we change the way we think about agriculture, is the point. For what it's worth, I think the main problem here is agricultural subsidies - they completely distort the market. Calories are cheap due to this, true, but the result is completely unsustainable agricultural practices, poorer health, a more fragile economy, and less variety and higher prices for unsubsidized goods.
    • hn_version_0023 5y ago
      Agreed. There’s another thing that must change as well: our (the US specifically) focus on profits above all else. We act as if our actions and decisions have no consequences and continually mortgage the future for profits today. If we don’t change this, we’re dooming ourselves.
    • lanfeust6 5y ago
      > For what it's worth, I think the main problem here is agricultural subsidies - they completely distort the market. Yep. In the discourse surrounding this there's a call to reduce or eliminate meat consumption, but simultaneously we have market incentives for meat consumption through legislation. This is untenable.