You may have a valid point as far as food security is concerned, and an
arguable one in terms of ecological functions, at least if the government
steps in (as it is increasingly doing) to regulate agricultural practices
that affect the environment.
But I have to differ strongly on the questions of economic and social function.
Communities need *people* to fill their schools and churches, shop at their
stores, be volunteer firefighters, &c. The land doesn't stop producing
crops when small- and moderate-sized farms go out of business, but it
generally doesn't produce as many people. The out-migration from some rural
areas is as great now as it was in the '30s and '40s.
Ditto for income. In my agricultural county, farmers are 20% of the
population (and shrinking) but account for 75% of the economy (that's also
shrinking, as is the county's economy as a whole). A large number of
moderate-acreage farmers can support feed mills, fuel dealers, insurance
companies, banks. A few very large farms, especially corporate ones, are
more likely to get their supplies through a large broker, not a local dealer.
When farms go broke (leaving their employees out of work), their local
suppliers typically go with them, and their employees are out of jobs as well.
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: