4 ms·
It makes more sense to farm in places that have reliable sources of water. I don't see why we need to subsidize California's crops, especially when we have so m
by drzaiusapelord 12y ago
It makes more sense to farm in places that have reliable sources of water. I don't see why we need to subsidize California's crops, especially when we have so much great soil wasted on corn. Farming, in general, in the US is fairly messed up. Perhaps this crisis will lead to a fix. Maintaining the status quo and pretending everything is okay via regulation and political corruption is what got us here. Lets not continue that.
- sp332 12y agoThat's a great argument for moving farms, but that would take years. It won't prevent a shortage in the next year.
- mikeash 12y agoWhy not? Prices would rise, producers in wetter areas would produce more to take advantage, and everyone eats. We'd pay more for food, but we're already paying it, just indirectly and in a more damaging fashion with subsidized water.
- sp332 12y agoProducers in wetter areas can't create a farm, plant crops (especially trees like almonds), and harvest in one year.
- emodendroket 12y agoEven if we just grant that agriculture should be moved away from CA, no one wants to just see it stop immediately for the same reason that the government didn't demolish all buildings that were made with asbestos when they determined that it was harmful to human health.
- baddox 12y agoI would rather see agriculture move immediately than water to literally run out.
- rconti 12y agoDefine "reliable". California DOES have a reliable source of water. There's a reason the crops are grown here in the first place! The problem is, it's not a reliable source of water for the demands being placed on it. Which is something you'll find, oh, anywhere you start trying to move this agriculture project. It'll work great, and there will be enough for everyone, right up until there isn't.