5 ms·
No it does not. You could phase out more than 60% of the Dutch farmers, which would reclaim 40% of the land (from the 66% they currently use), losing less than
by DrSiemer 3y ago
No it does not. You could phase out more than 60% of the Dutch farmers, which would reclaim 40% of the land (from the 66% they currently use), losing less than 1% of the BDP, and the country would STILL have plenty of food.
- coldtea 3y ago>and the country would STILL have plenty of food I did write: "export or domestic". The country would still have "plenty of food", but the second largest production of food would be affected.
- DrSiemer 3y agoAffected, yes. That's not the same as "no food". Having farmers in the Netherlands is not a binary choice.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- stefan_ 3y agoWhich is not a very big production at all because most countries that don't qualify as failed states rightly organize their food production independently. The biggest buyer tends to be China who doesn't need the food to begin with, it's just buying on generational paranoia.
- arp242 3y agoThe argument being made is "farmers take care of our food! We need them!" That is what "no farmers no food" means: "no farmers, no food for us". Everyone understands that's what it means. And that's just not true, as much of it is for export, as was mentioned.