(was thinking of this as I was driving this morning) -- actually all the argumentation in that article, iirc, is essentially an inverted pyramid that all rests

(was thinking of this as I was driving this morning) -- actually all the argumentation in that article, iirc, is essentially an inverted pyramid that all rests on one point: "there is a natural limit on the ratio of the $$ value of food production to that of the rest of the economy". This is clearly a "surely" argument (it is not being supported by anything other than his intuition), and a pretty bad one at that -- for example, we've seen agricultural employment collapse from ~90% to ~2% of the population, and the process continues, despite farming subsidies and other conscious attempts to slow it down.