Why small farms can not feed the world anymore...

Not sure about other European countries, but the dividing up of farms to numerous sons, as Martin mentioned, was common in Ireland pre famine. In fact, some believe that this is what exacerbated the famine by leaving families dependent on very small fields, which was ok for growing potatoes, but not for grains. It was only post famine that the practice of leaving the farm to one son became common.

__________________
"Being normal is not necessarily a virtue...rather, it denotes a lack of courage".

Yes, this is what happened in Scandinavia too. I think it was Sweden. They kept dividing up the land until the parcels were so small that some sons got really rotten pieces--swamp, all rocks, etc.--and were expected to eek out a living on that far substandard land. And this is why many of them in the 1800s immigrated to places like Minnesota or Wisconsin area.

You also see the phenomenon of the large landowners in England. The oldest son normally would inherit, and the 2nd son went into the military, and the 3rd went into "orders" or something to do with the church. I guess they figured out that to keep up their manors, they couldn't keep dividing. Seems that after awhile though, many of those got broken up into smaller units, and owned individually by regular folk who had been working the land. Not sure on the history.

__________________
Multitude of Uses for Five Gallon Buckets: www.fivegallonideas.com

On the subject of feeding ourselves, I haven't seen any discussion on here about what happened in the former Soviet Union after that collapse. I keep an eye on Dmitri Orlov's site, (search for Club Orlov) and in one of his books, he talks about how many of the backyard gardens kept Russia from starving when all the systems broke down. Not sure on the percentages, but it was pretty high, like over 50%. Not that we are looking for a collapse like that. And I believe the victory gardens during WW2 also provided for a whole lot of produce in the US. Until, of course, the war was over, and the govment wanted us all to go back to buying our food in the stores......

__________________
Multitude of Uses for Five Gallon Buckets: www.fivegallonideas.com

I think we're putting the cart before the horse here. Instead of struggling to grow enough food to meet the demand, why not try to reduce the demand? North Americans, and probably most modern countries, eat far more food than they need to. Portion sizes are ridiculous. Restaurants throw out a criminal amount of food as do grocery stores. Some studies have shown that reducing calories may have an affect of longevity although they aren't conclusive.

We need to start thinking outside the box here. People hate dandelions and spend huge amounts of money on massive amounts of chemicals to get rid of them. However, dandelion greens make a great salad. Many so called "weeds" are edible or medicinal. People in the cities have food growing wild before their very eyes but they can't or won't see it. We also don't need to have virtually any food in the world available to us all the time. It's nice to have the food choices that we have available today but they aren't necessary. We can have a perfectly healthy diet without the vast array of food offered in the grocery stores today.

Toronto has a large raccoon and goose problem, that would feed a lot of people but that would take a real change in thinking...

The food demand problem and the cost of health care are largely tied together. Without getting into the debate of which system is better, the fact is that both health care systems treat North Americans for a number of easily preventable conditions. Heart disease, diabetes and many cancers can be drastically reduced by diet alone. If we start off with the root problem, that being the quality and amount of food we consume, the problems down the line will take care of themselves.

petroleum subsidies?
Really, you need a scapegoat so bad you fall back on that one?
That benefits everyone.
LOL
Grain subsidies?
A few years ago maybe as corn was cheap and life was good for the beef guys.
Not so much anymore.
And why worry about grain subsidies? You should be raising grass fed and finished, shooting for that niche market.

Really come on guys.
Grass fed ground beef sells for 8 bucks a pound at the grocery store, if you aren't jumping on that market you're crazy...

__________________
Deja Moo; The feeling I've heard this bull before.

Until demand outstripped supply and they would have to be factory farmed...

__________________
Deja Moo; The feeling I've heard this bull before.

"Most of the money goes to real farmers who grow crops on their land, but they are under no obligation to grow the crop being subsidized. They can switch to a different crop or raise cattle or even grow a stand of timber -- and still get the government payments. The cash comes with so few restrictions that subdivision developers who buy farmland advertise that homeowners can collect farm subsidies on their new back yards."

Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm

Who here got a check from the government when they had to get rid of their cow or sheep because of the drought? Who got a check because they had to buy hay instead of the cow grazing? Who got a check because their hay barn got flooded? Don't think many small farmers even bothered with the hassle. A couple cows are not worth jumping through the hoops but you multiply that by thousands and you can afford to hire a lawyer to write up the paperwork to get your government handout.

__________________
U.S. Constitution -10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

No, it doesn't. What if I was hand picking my garden or hiring it to be hand picked. Small farmers do not mechanize as much to be done as big ag. So therefore they have higher labor costs and when the government subsidizes mechanization it puts the small farmers to a disadvantage. Take away the fuel subsidies and handpicking labor maybe cheaper.

Heck, why do they even have minimum wage and all the restrictions on hiring people? (but thats a whole other arguement)

So a regular joe smoe walks up to the meat counter and sees $2/lb feedlot beef and $8/lb grassfed beef, which do you think he will pick up the majority of the time?

Take that same situation and have the feedlot beef at $10/lb and the grassfed beef at $8/lb and which do you think he will pick up?

The $8/lb grassfed stuff doesn't exactly "fly off the shelves" or it wouldn't be called a "niche" market.

Look sammy, if I'm not mistaken you raise beef cattle and there is nothing wrong with that, your just getting your piece of the pie.You probably don't even realize how big this is and what all your missing out on. We're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars being pumped into "social engineering". Why does the government have to "steer us" into doing what they think is right? Why can't this just be a true free market where everyone can compete equally without begging the government for your share of the handouts?

__________________
U.S. Constitution -10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Governments do not hand out money without strings attached that, were the fine print read, even some of the most greedy individuals might rather choose to abstain.

The government is buying rights and hard goods (property) with their subsidies.

Now ask again how America fell so far so fast from the pinnacle of liberty......

__________________
“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater.
III

I do not receive any subsidies.
I rented an organic farm once that got a DCP the year I worked it which the owner pocketed.
I ain't getting no piece of pie.
I grow what I feel will sell and market it myself most times.
I do not count on trying to compete in the commodity market. And I do not feel that they are competing with me.
I don't look to lay the blame on others if something I do fails.

__________________
Deja Moo; The feeling I've heard this bull before.

So who says you have to price it at supermarket prices.
You price a bit lower, take time to extol the wonders of grass fed and viola, you have a sale and most likely a repeat customer, if you did everything right.

__________________
Deja Moo; The feeling I've heard this bull before.

And that's what's happening in agriculture. And in a lot of cases the farm is divided into house lots when the kids don't want to farm or the owners decide to take the big $$$.

__________________
So in the morning, please don't say ya love me.
Cause you know I'll only kick you out the door.

BUT, it should be flying off the store shelves, which do you think in an unmolested marketplace should be cheaper.

1. Beef that is fed corn (that has been shipped half way around the country) and the corn farmer had to pay Monsanto $5/lb for the seed then had to turn around and pay for the fertilizer, roundup, and everything else while feeding his tractor hundreds of gallons of diesel.Then the farmer has to pump them full of antibotics and growth hormones just to keep them alive and get them up to weight. Then those heads of beef get shipped multiple times around the country to get to the,market, then the slaughter house, grocery store distribution center,and the grocery store it self.

2. Beef that was raised in the backyard on grass growing naturally that has been cut and sold right there on the farm.

I think it's a no brainer which has less costs involved but in our warped society we place our tax dollars on the first choice. Heck if anything we should be rewarding #2 for wasting less oil and producing healthier food.(Not that we should do that even)

I'm not saying we should or could get rid of big ag. I mean once again the question comes up of small farms may not be able to produce enough food, but we should not discourage small farms from prospering and right now that is what is being done. Let people pay the TRUE cost of food and see how much is wasted and how much more is produced in people's backyards.

__________________
U.S. Constitution -10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Lots of people going back now, selling those subdivisions and buying small farm acreage.

^^^absolutely right. I don't think the question is whether small farms can produce enough food to feed the world today, where government slants the market in favor of large agribusiness....its is whether small farms could feed the world if the playing field were level in a free market.

Remember where there is opportunity/profit, people will rush in to fill the need.

If we had a free market without the subsidies and regulation, large agribusiness would have to raise their prices. Small farms would be able to produce, process, and sell their own products without artificial roadblocks. I don't believe large agribusiness would be able to compete on a level playing field with millions of small, adaptable, individual farmers.

But that is living in a dream land to even think there would ever be millions of small farms any more. That just is not going to happen. And I sure would pick Grain Fed Beef over grass fed any day of the week, and that is how raise them myself WHEN I am able to raise a street. Now with prices so high not only in hay but grain as all i have not been able to raise a steer. As it would be WAY higher then buying beef at a store now. And there is no way millions of small operations will even start up and get to be the in thing anymore. So big farms is here to stay.

__________________
Oh my, dishes yet to wash and dry

See My Pictures at
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0903/arabianknight/

Not if we remove subsidies for the big boys.



Aaannnd...

First base!

I think we've been here before.

Just to add: I think we vastly underestimate our upcoming generations if we think they won't want to farm. You'd be surprised.

Won't work, similar has been tried. Put a limit on size of acreage and big farm with single owner becomes a lot of smaller farms on paper with each owned by a different family member.

Martin

if it were a free market and somehow you could break up all the big farms into small farms and then you could somehow find folks to farm them, in 50 years it would all be back to where it is now.
A few boom and bust cycles, another round of "Oh we can't lose the small farms we need subsidies for them" and a few passionate letters to state reps from farm wives explaining how they haven't been able to buy clothes for the children for 3 years and it will start all over again.

__________________
Deja Moo; The feeling I've heard this bull before.

I don't think anyone is talking about "breaking up" the big farms.

Just let them stand on their own two feet, like everyone else. Pull the props and special favors.