• FluffyPotato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Most food here is locally produced, I don’t see how that would create a shortage. Like people aren’t going to sell their grocery stores cuz their margins are thin again and farming is so heavily subsidised that I don’t see it effecting farmers.

    • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      If a local producer can get more selling to someone in the next country, they will. Basic economics. Prohibit them from doing so and they might plant something more profitable or just say “fuck it” and let their fields lie fallow, if they’re not making a profit. Farming ain’t free and farmers are on thin margins.

      • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Small farms are long gone. Farmers the the most heavily subsidized sector in the country, and they’re not run by Ma and pa, but big multi-national corporations who use extractive agriculture that damages the soil, results in worse yields than more sustainable agriculture, and requires insane amounts of chemical fertilizers, is rapidly contributing to the death of all of our most critical pollinators.

        I have really almost no sympathy for monoculture farmers who grow thousands of acres of almonds using trillions of gallons of water in a state perpetually under severe drought.

        Literally, just by seizing the lands used to grow alfalfa for Saudi Arabia and almonds in California, the majority of the country could be fed cheap on low water, low maintanence, high yield food forests. We don’t need to subsidize murder farms where pigs are fed to their children as slurry when that same land could be used for vertical gardening.

        The use of farmland for exclusively profit driven reasons is what drove the Great Depression. Farmers don’t deserve A profit if what they’re growing isn’t sustainable or catered towards the health of the people.

    • corm@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      *affecting

      And you’re wrong. Farmers and grocery stores are already operating on thin margins. Sure we could double subsidies but then why not just make food free instead? How about we just make food free for people who can’t afford it, maybe with some sort of special card

      • FluffyPotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Farmers yes, grocery stores not anymore. Profits of companies is public info here and they started racking it in the moment the massive ‘inflation’ started. My parents live near a farm and they just buy veggies directly from them for like a fraction of the price, I unfortunately live in a city though. Prices are better at local markets but there arent many of those.

        • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Prices are better from a farm because you’re skipping two steps on the distribution chain, at least - a food warehouse and the grocery store. Could be three, some grocery stores buy from an intermediate warehouse distributor that services smaller stores.

          So potatoes might be sold at .20 on a farm and .50 at the store, because they need to be sold twice to reach the store, transported twice, bagged, washed, stored twice, and finally placed in the retail front for sale.

          • FluffyPotato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why did you ignore the part where I said that the profits for grocery stores soared? Producing food has not become more expensive, that’s all public info here.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It runs the risk of affecting the farmers a lot especially in Europe where they will soon have to deal with very expensive electricity. So the government would have to know that it’s really price gouging and not a necessity (I believe it’s price gouging, but governments can’t (or shouldn’t) make rash decisions on beliefs.)