> If the USA withdrew from this, farmers would likely switch away from corn. Within a few years we could 10x meat production. Large open pastures producing gras

> If the USA withdrew from this, farmers would likely switch away from corn. Within a few years we could 10x meat production. Large open pastures producing grass fed meats would be a far better choice. First, you can't convert all current farm plots owned by independent farmers into contiguous grazing land, and second, animals need tons of vegetable nutrition. Lots of that corn is already diverted to animal feed - grasslands aren't going to be more productive for animal calories than engineered corn. That's why we actually need to be decreasing meat production - it's incredibly wasteful. If you believe we could 10x meat production by replacing corn (which... we can't), we could just 200x vegetable production instead. Obviously that makes no sense to replace vegetables with vegetables on the same land and get orders of magnitude more crops. The conclusions you should be drawing is that we should stop subsidizing corn for HFCS as an unhealthy high-calorie filler and instead subsidize nutritious vegetables like legumes.