I’m not so sure that’s true. There is a shit load of land used to grow corn to make ethanol that’s farmed by independent farmers. In the US most farmland is used for soy beans and corn for livestock feed or fuel. It wouldn’t be a simple or cheap undertaking, but that last could be utilized more efficiently to directly or indirectly fees people.
I would also bet there are enough people that would love to be farmers that can’t because land isn’t available or cheap that would step up if large farm operations were broken up. That’s pure speculation, but even if one mega farm were split 4 ways, that would still be an improvement to the current situation.
deleted by creator
I’m not so sure that’s true. There is a shit load of land used to grow corn to make ethanol that’s farmed by independent farmers. In the US most farmland is used for soy beans and corn for livestock feed or fuel. It wouldn’t be a simple or cheap undertaking, but that last could be utilized more efficiently to directly or indirectly fees people.
I would also bet there are enough people that would love to be farmers that can’t because land isn’t available or cheap that would step up if large farm operations were broken up. That’s pure speculation, but even if one mega farm were split 4 ways, that would still be an improvement to the current situation.
So then people were just starving to death in the 50’s and 60’s?
I seriously doubt it
deleted by creator
Sounds like a classic chicken and egg problem. Or circular reasoning.
We had half the population in the US in 1960, and a bit more than a third of today’s number globally.
And we had none of the efficiency, gmo’s, and a fraction of the available laborers, and were using smaller amounts of land for farming.
The efficiency comes at scale, not diffuse small farms.
GMOs yes.
Modern farming is less labor-intensive, not sure on your point there.
Ag land use down 21.7% 1950-2002 Source. Downward trend continues through 2024 Source.