4 ms·

> The dutch seizing farms in the name of global warming. 1. Seizing farms is not happening here, only a few farms have been sold by the owning farmers to the g

> The dutch seizing farms in the name of global warming. 1. Seizing farms is not happening here, only a few farms have been sold by the owning farmers to the government. 2. The aim is to reduce nitrogen emissions, which have been accumulating in the ground. The Netherlands is a net exporter, apparently, so we could stand to loose some food production. But yes, Dutch farms are very efficient per area. We should export that expertise, and I think we actually do that too

leesalminen 3y ago
> The Netherlands is a net exporter, apparently, so we could stand to loose some food production. The countries importing that food will now have to import from somewhere else. It doesn’t seem to be solving any climate problem, just shifting it elsewhere.
- mcv 3y ago
  Nobody has to pickk this up. It's unnecessary surplus that only does damage. A third of all the food in the world is thrown away. European food production is too high because of the way agricultural subsidies work, and the surplus is dumped, often below market price, on the global market, driving farmers in Africa and India out of business. Literally the only reason not to reduce this excessive production is in order to protect established business interests and not rock the boat. That doesn't meam buying out farms is necessarily the way to go. A lot can be done to reduce nitrate pollution by changing the feed for cattle, letting them roam outside as much as possible (the biggest polluters are factory farms woth thousands of animals), and other measures. But reducing the food production won't cause any problems; it will solve them. EU farm subsidies shouldn't be rewarding production at any cost, but sustainable production and care for the environment.
- ragebol 3y ago
  See point 2, it's not about climate but our local environment, where too much nitrogen has been deposited. Maybe we should export the meat and ship the nitrogen with it and distribute the emissions instead of it all piling up here.
aksss 3y ago
> Seizing farms is not happening here, only a few farms have been sold by the owning farmers to the government. That’s some rather disingenuous spin. Look, I’m not at all interested in the merits of the buyouts (maybe they’re entirely justified, I don’t care) but don’t misrepresent what’s going on there - buyouts are being taken under duress, “voluntary” today with statements that they will become mandatory if enough volun-told people don’t step up. Again, I literally don’t care about the propriety of the motivations - not my circus, not my monkeys. In the US we have something called eminent domain that amounts to the same thing: “move and take this bag of cash that we deem to be the market value, or we’ll come with brickbats and make you move.” Sometimes it’s abused, sometimes it’s justified, but it is what it is - the government taking (seizing) property. The fact that there’s some compensation makes it mostly equitable at least. As far as I understand the offers from the Dutch (funded by EU?) are above market. What can never be quantified and captured adequately in a buy-out price, of course, is the legacy of multi-generational ownership, sentiment, and the cost of occupational rehabilitation. Given the variable factors that would go into such things, it’s probably a fool’s errand to even try to calculate such things anyway.

leesalminen 3y ago

> The Netherlands is a net exporter, apparently, so we could stand to loose some food production. The countries importing that food will now have to import from somewhere else. It doesn’t seem to be solving any climate problem, just shifting it elsewhere.

mcv 3y ago
Nobody has to pickk this up. It's unnecessary surplus that only does damage. A third of all the food in the world is thrown away. European food production is too high because of the way agricultural subsidies work, and the surplus is dumped, often below market price, on the global market, driving farmers in Africa and India out of business. Literally the only reason not to reduce this excessive production is in order to protect established business interests and not rock the boat. That doesn't meam buying out farms is necessarily the way to go. A lot can be done to reduce nitrate pollution by changing the feed for cattle, letting them roam outside as much as possible (the biggest polluters are factory farms woth thousands of animals), and other measures. But reducing the food production won't cause any problems; it will solve them. EU farm subsidies shouldn't be rewarding production at any cost, but sustainable production and care for the environment.
ragebol 3y ago
See point 2, it's not about climate but our local environment, where too much nitrogen has been deposited. Maybe we should export the meat and ship the nitrogen with it and distribute the emissions instead of it all piling up here.

aksss 3y ago

> Seizing farms is not happening here, only a few farms have been sold by the owning farmers to the government. That’s some rather disingenuous spin. Look, I’m not at all interested in the merits of the buyouts (maybe they’re entirely justified, I don’t care) but don’t misrepresent what’s going on there - buyouts are being taken under duress, “voluntary” today with statements that they will become mandatory if enough volun-told people don’t step up. Again, I literally don’t care about the propriety of the motivations - not my circus, not my monkeys. In the US we have something called eminent domain that amounts to the same thing: “move and take this bag of cash that we deem to be the market value, or we’ll come with brickbats and make you move.” Sometimes it’s abused, sometimes it’s justified, but it is what it is - the government taking (seizing) property. The fact that there’s some compensation makes it mostly equitable at least. As far as I understand the offers from the Dutch (funded by EU?) are above market. What can never be quantified and captured adequately in a buy-out price, of course, is the legacy of multi-generational ownership, sentiment, and the cost of occupational rehabilitation. Given the variable factors that would go into such things, it’s probably a fool’s errand to even try to calculate such things anyway.