That quoted statement isnt really a premise, though it could be inaccurate. You make the obvious point of how we ended up where we are. The non obvious point

That quoted statement isnt really a premise, though it could be inaccurate. You make the obvious point of how we ended up where we are. The non obvious point is that this is not a desirable end point. Food is increasingly lower on nutritional value, some estimate 50-60% over the last ~50 years. Discount that from your yields of 5-20x. More bushels doesn't mean anything other than profit. Depleting soils and agricultural run-off have very difficult costs to quantify, so we largely don't even try. Soil condition is awful in monoculture farms. Nothing grows without synthetic fertilizer and pesticide. Glyphosate is being phased out because it's likely the largest driver of chronic disease the world has ever seen. Yes, blah blah, 'no evidence' - a point predicated on the fact there are no studies. We are barely coming to accept the reality of the gut biome/health connection, much less the gut/brain connection.. What is the cost of these failures? Certainly the corporations don't bare the brunt. Perhaps the situation would be different if they did. Or perhaps it would be different if you purchased products from producers with these costs in mind