Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How America Uses Its Land

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 244 posts

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#191

Post by knuththetruth »

leetcrew wrote: post #158
knuththetruth wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were feeding grazing animals, but without all the massive externalities associated with industrial agriculture, from antibiotic resistance to its impact on climate change. If you’re also of an ethical mindset similar to someone like Peter Singer, the “cultivation” of animals for slaughter is not something one should favor.

> impact on climate change do cows produce significantly more methane than non-domesticated grazing animals, or are there simply many more cows than there were buffalo?

There are cows now within an industrialized agricultural context that we know to be a significant contribution to climate change. Would bison in this context produce the same outcome? It’s hard to say, but the two circumstances of their existence on this land is largely incomparable.

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#192

Post by nightski »

justinwp wrote: post #176
rayiner wrote: post #48

The one third being used for cows is misleading. Pasture is basically the Bureau of Land Management’s default use for the vast swaths of federal land. It’s like “here is this land, you’re allowed to graze on it with a permit.” That doesn’t produce that many cows—it’s more about politics and the fact that much of the land is good for little else besides growing grass. The real land use from growing meat comes from the…

>Pasture is basically the Bureau of Land Management’s default use for the vast swaths of federal land. It’s like “here is this land, you’re allowed to graze on it with a permit.” That doesn’t produce that many cows... And yet it is an incredibly destructive use of land for so few cows. BLM land is often shrubby desert and is not able to cope with the impacts of the cows and remain a healthy ecosystem.

Isn't that true of pretty much any industrial farming even plants?

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#193

Post by nightski »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #185
hirundo wrote: post #30

> More than one-third of U.S. land is used for pasture ... There’s a single, major occupant on all this land: cows. Not here. I live on cow range land, but the cattle are outnumbered by elk. The elk hunting industry here is larger than the cattle industry. Every third local seems to be a hunting guide, and many of those are cow growers too. This seems to me to be a very positive thing that should be encouraged. Inste…

Lot's of people truly enjoy nature and aspects of it but also love being able to walk to three grocery stores, 15 high quality restaurants, and knowing that they can get almost anything at any hour of the night. Cities offer something rural areas often do not. Rural areas offer something cities do not. I grew up on a dirt road in the middle of no where and loved every minute of it. I've been in Chicago for the last f…

It's not so black-and-white. I live in an area where I have both of those things and it's a much smaller city (<200k). Okay I lied there might be a little driving involved but it doesn't really matter because I drive less than 3000 miles a year anyways.

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#194

Post by snowwrestler »

TomMarius wrote: post #182
justinwp wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Pasture is basically the Bureau of Land Management’s default use for the vast swaths of federal land. It’s like “here is this land, you’re allowed to graze on it with a permit.” That doesn’t produce that many cows... And yet it is an incredibly destructive use of land for so few cows. BLM land is often shrubby desert and is not able to cope with the impacts of the cows and remain a healthy ecosystem.

I think that the point was that only minority of this land is really used for this purpose.

No, the point was that using such land for grazing does not actually produce a high percentage of cattle raised for meat, vs. feedlots where cattle eat corn grown on farmland.

From an ecosystem impact perspective, though, arid land that only occasionally hosts herds of cattle is still going to be significantly affected, compared to similar land that is protected from any commercial grazing.

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#195

Post by francisofascii »

zip1234 wrote: post #159
redahs wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inequality in land ownership has been continuously increasing in the United States since the 1930s. Higher property tax rates on land ownership are needed to reverse it, as well as the elimination of property tax exemptions which the owners of non-profits, private forests, golf courses, etc are currently receiving.

Why is it a problem that those people are buying more land? If anything, a single owner that doesn't need the land for economic purposes can protect it much better than a bunch of individual people. My point is that people assume automatically that this is bad and must be stopped. Maybe it is good?

It is morally wrong to buy up tons of land, then forbid others to walk across it. Land should be for everyone, not just for a select few, especially since land was not created by the owner.

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#196

Post by EliRivers »

PakG1 wrote: post #189
beambot wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Other organisms don't really seem to have a concept of value. To first-order approximations, most living creatures seem to value their lives & habitat.

I believe that doesn't satisfy the definitions of the word value. Per https://www.dictionary.com/browse/value?s=t 1. relative worth, merit, or importance: the value of a college education; the value of a queen in chess. 2. monetary or material worth, as in commerce or trade: This piece of land has greatly increased in value. 3. the worth of something in terms of the amount of other things for which it can be exchange…

How about crows who, without having been trained to do so, collect items that they have no inherent need for and cannot eat - small pieces of metal and such - and then gift them to humans who feed them?

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#197

Post by beambot »

PakG1 wrote: post #189
beambot wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Other organisms don't really seem to have a concept of value. To first-order approximations, most living creatures seem to value their lives & habitat.

I believe that doesn't satisfy the definitions of the word value. Per https://www.dictionary.com/browse/value?s=t 1. relative worth, merit, or importance: the value of a college education; the value of a queen in chess. 2. monetary or material worth, as in commerce or trade: This piece of land has greatly increased in value. 3. the worth of something in terms of the amount of other things for which it can be exchange…

Your cat example is perfect. Your cat clearly makes value judgements about food options by rejecting one type in favor of other offerings -- ones that may not even be immediately available. That you cannot speak 'cat' for her to explain why the sausage is not ideal is not her failure...

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#198

Post by conanbatt »

francisofascii wrote: post #195
zip1234 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it a problem that those people are buying more land? If anything, a single owner that doesn't need the land for economic purposes can protect it much better than a bunch of individual people. My point is that people assume automatically that this is bad and must be stopped. Maybe it is good?

It is morally wrong to buy up tons of land, then forbid others to walk across it. Land should be for everyone, not just for a select few, especially since land was not created by the owner.

All land owners could forbid others from walking across, that is indifferent if you have 1 land-owner or a million. That's the origin of rent: becoming a land-owner makes you one of the forbidders.

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#199

Post by conanbatt »

clarkevans wrote: post #167
zip1234 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it a problem that those people are buying more land? If anything, a single owner that doesn't need the land for economic purposes can protect it much better than a bunch of individual people. My point is that people assume automatically that this is bad and must be stopped. Maybe it is good?

Concentrated ownership is power. Power tends to corrupt.

Yeah but also..there are no scaling benefits in owning really lots of land. It doesnt get easier to manage. And it is impossible to buy up all the land as the last piece of land would be worth infinity.

Im not sure what's going on, I'd like a more nuanced analysis.

Re: How America Uses Its Land

#200

Post by dsfyu404ed »

Sabinus wrote: post #76
tomcam wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, if you want people on the lower end of the economic scale to own land, why would you want to punish them with higher property taxes?

Larger areas of land with high value are taxed more. Low socioeconomic people don't put mansions on large estates.

Screw that. I know people who have to keep working in their retirement because of their property taxes. If you're gonna tax land it should be proportional to how developed that land is. You shouldn't be taxed off of your land because you bought it 40yr ago before it was valuable.
Post reply on HN