Check this Factory Farm Map. What does it look like to you?

I agree 100%. I lived in NV for years. The orage area in this map isnt a farm at all. Its a country. Dont believe me anyone look it up. This map is total bullshit

Food Inc is a really great documentary. It's pretty much impossible to keep it to oneself, it's so eye-opening. In fact, my copy of it is currently being borrowed by a friend of a friend.

!!Spread the word!!

Seriously. I wish I owned it because I want everyone I know to watch it.
They don't even know where their meat comes from... watching Food Inc made me go back to being a vegetarian, lol.

To MrMxyzptlk:

Agriculture can be resurrected. First, we need its decentralization. Organic Agriculture at a local level can offer many new jobs, and each and every one of these workers can be decently paid too.

The first question that people ask: Aren't we going to pay a lot more for our food if we make this happen?

Actually we wouldn't. It is a myth that is propagated by these agro-chemical giants to install fear and stall change.

The reason why we don't pay much at a supermarket for conventional food is because we are paying for it with our TAX MONEY.
The current chemical agriculture is heavily subsidized. Organic agriculture gets almost NOTHING.

Then we pay again with our taxes to clean up the damage to the environment as this is not a bill handed to them but to us, once more!

Also, organic agriculture has shown scientifically to cost less and produce more in the long term besides the nutritional benefits, the healthy soil and water.
An other factor is that prices will lower as this market grows.
One big truth twister is that these companies prefer to pay one guy spraying over the fields than 100 spreading manure because it is cheaper.

See, if you say it's cheaper, you almost make it sound like the company is getting a good break from its expenses to manage to survive.
The reality is: It would cost them more and they will cash in less mega profits.
The reality is that they want to make ALL THE MONEY and Monsanto is one of them.

Big difference, isn't?
I am sure your dad will agree with this.

How do these companies make billions every year?
It's called: EXPLOITATION.

May be, just may be, in a system where this wouldn't be allowed, farm owners would have a chance to build a decent business, workers have a decent pay and consumers end up paying about the same without any environmental and health costs like mentioned above.

We need policy changes!

And to rhetoricallyineffective:
Do not give up.

The old argument of the subsidies is a reality and here are the numbers:
"Last year (2008), mandatory spending on farm subsidies was $7.5 billion, compared with $15 million for programs for organic and local foods, according to the House Appropriations Committee"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/business/22food.html

What does this make you think?

Let's talk more numbers:
We pay around 20 billion a year of externalities (costs of environmental damage) and it all comes from our TAXES.

The destruction on our Nature and health itself will end up costing us more money in the long term, and this concept is better explained here:
http://current.com/news/92702808_5-000-000-000-000-the-cost-each-year-of-vanishi...

Demand rises, price lowers. Right now the demand for organic food represents only 10%, if it would increase, you can only imagine how affordable it becomes.

Also keep in mind that with local agriculture, fuel and transportation would be dramatically reduced, lowering expenses.

For how sustainable agriculture affects the costs of production, yields, prices see this:
http://www.cias.wisc.edu/curriculum/modII/secd/modii_secd.htm

For specific numbers on subsidies:
"Just ten percent of America's largest and richest farms collect almost three-fourths of federal farm subsidies – cash payments that too often promote harmful environmental practices."
http://www.ewg.org/farmsubsidies

I can't deny this would take an enormous shift and years to complete it but this can't be enough reason to surrender and let companies like Monsanto win.
Thank you.

You are correct about the USDA paying rent to farmers to keep land fallow.
You say that this rent is not a bad deal for farmers but has nothing to do with keeping food cheap. That does not make any sense.

It's not a bad deal to corporate farmers at all.
It's done for recovery reasons but also to raise land value which will qualify for subsides and reactivate the transfer of money from consumers (tax) to corporate farmers.

This is not money to be discounted from the 7.5 billions or the 20 billions mentioned above as they were always part of it. They represent an indirect contributing factor of artificially keeping the current price of food.
These corporate farmers will continue over producing (creating oversupply) to drop the price below the guaranteed USDA price and keep cashing the difference (subsidy or deficiency payment) as you know.

What a nice game of politic and money that is!
This can all be resumed in what is no more, no less than a political transfer of wealth.

No matter how you put it, it will always mean that money being rewarded to the big ag is money taken away from the small, local agriculture that is more productive, environmentally sound and in the long term more cost effective.

From the link I sent you before you can see that most of the money goes to the largest farms (chosen by crop type and quantity) which keep on buying smaller farms consolidating the market and creating monopoly. This also leads them to be eligible for more subsidies which can be used for more expansion and so on.
And the largest crops are: Corn, soy, wheat, cotton and rice as you know, no need to mention who's behind these.

The second point is not how much you can save per month if you didn't pay the subsidies through taxes whether it's 70 dollars or more. It's paying these to sustainable, small farms, and if we would reverse the system, the price for organic food would decrease dramatically.

This does not necessarily mean I approve of such manipulation of the economy and suppression of the free market, it just proves the point that organic food price could match the conventional one.

Community, local agriculture has a great potential. In cold regions the food supply can be improved and increased.

"Food in the U.S. travels an average of 1,300 miles from farm to supermarket. Almost every state in the U.S. buys 85% of its food from some place else. In Massachusetts, for example, this food import imbalance translates to a $4 billion leak in the state economy on an annual basis. UMass studies have determined that Massachusetts could produce closer to 35% of its food supply. This 20% increase would contribute $1 billion annually to the economy of the Commonwealth.
Increased local food production would add a significant number of additional food dollars to the economy of many other states."

You might want to read this: The Potential for Urban Agriculture - http://www.crcworks.org/urbag.pdf

and this: Promising Community-Based Food System Initiatives - http://www.crcworks.org/promising.pdf

"Alaska is a state that has woefully little local agriculture -- estimates are that somewhere in the 2 percent to 4 percent of food consumed locally is produced in state, and that of the $2.5 billion annually spent on food by Alaskans, only $30 million goes to local producers (and this includes non-food crops such as hay).

Why does this matter? It matters because money spent in your local community will stay in your local community -- can you imagine what a boost even a portion of that $2.5 billion would represent to our local economy in these challenging times?

It matters because Alaska has an estimated 2 to 4 days worth of food in-state should shipping lines be shut down for any reason, as was the plan most recently in response to the bird flu epidemic scare. It matters in the name of food security. It matters in the name of environmental responsibility and greenhouse gas production. Community Supported Agriculture involves a community -- and last time I checked, my community was not Seattle (or California, or Mexico)."

Read more at: http://www.adn.com/2009/03/17/726667/its-important-to-truly-support.html#ixzz173...

This is from a successful farmer in Alaska:

"We think about sustainability a lot in Alaska, however most of the discussion focuses on natural fish and wildlife populations and their relation to subsistence versus commercial harvest. There is little talk about sustainable agriculture, but there should be. Although one’s vision of Alaska might be one of a hunter alone on the tundra, we get most of our food like the rest of America – from large supermarkets run by huge corporations.

If the average piece of food travels approximately 1500 miles from producer to consumer in the rest of the country, it travels much farther to us in Alaska. For this reason, and many others, we should be concerned about sustainability on a local and community scale."

And this (second excerpt):

"If the son of a long line of Jewish tailors can carve out a niche in small scale agriculture, then I’m optimistic that this growing movement of community-centered agriculture can keep gaining momentum. We need to invest in community agriculture – it is at the core of sustainability."
http://fairbankscoop.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/essay-on-sustainable-agriculture/

The conclusion is: It's easy to pinpoint the drawbacks and the flaws of a new system to come as if it was painted in the perfect light. Instead, we should focus in discussing how we can make this happen for the good of all and keep in mind the potential and the genius of people.

I mentioned some of the dynamics behind subsides and showed you the numbers that prove it.
It's not sufficient to say: "That is the wrong idea of what the laws of economics are".
This is vague talk. You should always back up your statements with an explanation and a source.

The Rodale Institute, IFOAM and many renowned economists think it's possible and they also demonstrated it. If you keep on factoring alone the cost of intense labor of the organic agriculture and ignore those fundamental aspects that financially outweigh it like explained before, you will never acknowledge what is factual.

Then, what is your solution and where do you stand? Please, explain it, back it up and show me.
If anything I am interested in what could be better for all of us and you might be just the one to reveal it (no sarcasm intended).
Thanks.

My personal experience is I have not seen that organic lettuce is 3 times as much as conventionally grown and produced lettuce. While I think the Subsidies may have a part to play, my thinking is that those costs are negligible when it comes to the Point of Sale. on this, MrMxy, I find myself in agreement with you. (I know, I find it amazing as well..lol..)

Americans DO need to face the facts that food prices are kept artificially low through a myriad of reasons, and that we can not ask a farmer to pay a living wage and still expect our lettuce to cost 50 cents. If you on one hand demand a living wage for the pickers, and then also demand that you only pay 50 cents for your lettuce, then you do NOT in fact believe in a living wage.

Personally, I think if you are not willing to spend the extra FEW dollars (and in my experience the difference in cost is really quite negligible, and I live in California where prices are already outrageous. Though to be fair, this is only my own personal experience.) it cots to buy local and/or organic, then you are talking out your ass and don't REALLY care about food safety or anything of the sort. You are just a blowhard who wants to feel superior to everyone else because you buy ORGANIC and they DON'T. Sort of like a majority of the Prius owners I know. (Again, personal experience)

Americans need to learn how to budget, and actually prepare some meals, our entire system is designed to make us spoiled and whiny little bitches who have a superiority complex.

Tell me something I don't know. Of course! The organic certification takes so much hardship. This is the very reason I am trying to reverse these subsides and change policies.

I speak out of what has been scientifically established, and from many experienced organic farmers.
Here are the comparisons of organic and conventional chemical farming systems:
http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~christos/articles/cv_organic_farming.html

Years and years of trial and experimentation confirm all the economic benefits.
One of the longest running agricultural trials on record, more than 150 years, is the Broadbalk experiment at the Rothamsted Experimental Station in the United Kingdom.

"Until now, much of the light we’re generating here on our research farm has been hidden under the proverbial barrel, but we’re taking off the barrel and busting it up for firewood. We’re going let the light of the amazing research being done here shine on farmers, consumers and environmental activities."
Check the Rodale Institute Farming Systems Trial (FST). The data is from 23 years of research! http://www.rodaleinstitute.org/fst

This above is a FACT. We must inform people of the misconception that "Organic food costs more".

Subsidize it with 30 billions a year; Elimination of the cost of fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides; Demand growth; Soil preservation (which equals to increased yield/profit); Reduced seed costs; Reduction of 30% of fossil fuel energy compared to what is used to grow conventional corn and soybean; Reduced irrigation; And here comes the SCOOP for all of you that are deniers with no proof and unsound logic: LABOR INPUTS are only 15% HIGHER! (from the FST 23 year studies above).

After you take all these economic benefits into account, what does your logic tell you? Will organic food prices match those of the conventional food? Will all these benefits outweigh that extra 15% of labor input?

This is from Thomas Dobbs, a sustainable-agriculture economist at South Dakota State University:
"Dobbs makes a surprising estimate: if just one-third of American shoppers bought organic foods on a regular basis, most prices would come down to that 10 to 30 percent markup we're seeing on produce today."

Still seems expensive, but Dobbs says a third of U.S. consumers could afford to buy at today's prices if we chose to. The reason we can afford more than we think? We're already paying that much -- and more -- for supposedly cheap food.
http://www.grist.org/article/harrison-organics/

Not convinced yet?

If you do not want to accept the fact that organic food prices can match those of the conventional food, the opposite is truer:

"There is mounting evidence that if all the indirect costs of conventional food production were factored into the price of food, organic foods would cost the same, or, more likely, be cheaper than conventional food."
http://ofrf.org/resources/organicfaqs.html
In less confusing words: Conventional food prices would skyrocket making organic food prices the new affordable food.

On a side note, I will be discussing the living wage soon as this battle and the one above are interconnected and require a huge political change; You can't have one without the other.

That you agree or not, I am still very interested in hearing a solution from you.
Just so you know, it has been nice talking to you regardless of our disagreement.

For the record, I am not sure how those studies were conducted, but labor costs can not be calculated in a static environment.

who are we supposed to vote for? greedy corporate pawn A, or greedy corporate pawn B? it doesn't matter who you vote for, they are all in someones pocket! voting is a big game to them to keep morons occupied in thinking they are actually in control!

Not if you focus locally. The change has to start with your City Council, and spiral out from there. Remember that there is always choice C, D, and E. There are more than 2 parties, and while I think they stand ZERO chance at the National level, they absolutely stand a chance at the Local level. Start Local to affect the change. If your City Council is packed full or Republicans and Democrats, you can hardly complain about those parties dominating the National stage. It's like complaining about what a mess your neighboor's yard is, while your entire lawn is blighted and you have a bunch of spare tires strewn all over the place. Let's clean up the back yard, and the Block will follow.

VOTE LOCAL! BUY LOCAL!

no because if we got rid of the factory farms, and replaced them with organic farms, there would be plenty of organic to go around....not to mention lowering the prices

It would still be more expensive due to the costs of raising animals on open land instead of tiny pens, trust me i hate it too but it is necessary but on a much smaller level than it is today

People don't have to eat meat and would be healthier if they didn't

That totally slipped my mind, i love meat but i also enjoy tofu

easier said then done living in an apartment in the city......

True enough, but you can go to a local farmer's market. I have yet to live in a place that didn't have one.

community garden?

LOATHSOME ADVERTISEMENT .
PUTRID AD.
p.s. "Made in CHINA".

Yeah...but thanks to wikileaks the rats are scrambling now. At least for a while.

until they figure out a way to dispose of wikileaks, notice how they are trying to call wikileaks terrorists. Really it is kind of a terrorist organization, keep terrorizing the public with what is really happening in the world, not that bullshit they would prefer us to beleive.

They are only laws, i choose to ignore laws that just keep us in a state of social conformity like speed limits and i will just ignore this one too and still shop at farmers markets

you are as free as you choose to me... luckily i don't follow stupid laws either...

the rebellious hippie lifestyle is an awesome one

until it becomes that you get penalized for doing so.......
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/04/24/s-510-is-hissing-in-the-grass/

What? Laws against eating organic food? When did this happen?!

Amen to that calgar

that won't stop me... i am gonna milk this cow until they put a bullet in my head!

hahaha since monsatan stepped in...

Aha! A fitting nickname for the bringers of death, radioactive soy, Grapples, and cancer!

you forgot to mention high fructose shit syrup...

so true...

+^d BIGGER is NOT better.