Live data from Hacker News

Small-town America fights for its life

washingtonexaminer.com

21–30 of 77 posts

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#21
post #13

Environmental destruction is the story here, but with one misunderstanding. > Rural America is eroding. If you talk to farmers such as Short and Roger, they lament it. But almost nobody thinks it can be prevented. More efficient farming... The new farming isn't more efficient physically, chemically, or biologically. It consumes without replacing resources like topsoil, biodiversity, water, etc. It looks more efficien…

> The new farming isn't more efficient physically, chemically, or biologically. It consumes without replacing resources like topsoil, biodiversity, water, etc. It looks more efficient financially only by neglecting the future costs to restore those resources.

B.S. Farmers aren't stupid, they still remember the lessons of the 1930s. They all plan to farm until they're physically unable to, and hope that the family farm will stay in the family for generations to come. Their biggest asset is that land, and they'll be relying on it for decades to come.

That's why they're adopting methods like zero-till and cover crops to prevent soil erosion, why they carefully manage their straw cover et cetera.

They also don't listen to city folk who think obviously silly things like "organic is better for the environment". The alternative to glyphosate is tillage, and farmers have first hand experience with how destructive tillage is to the soil, how it erodes the soil and the subsequent erosion destroys the waterways.

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#22
post #13

Environmental destruction is the story here, but with one misunderstanding. > Rural America is eroding. If you talk to farmers such as Short and Roger, they lament it. But almost nobody thinks it can be prevented. More efficient farming... The new farming isn't more efficient physically, chemically, or biologically. It consumes without replacing resources like topsoil, biodiversity, water, etc. It looks more efficien…

> The new farming isn't more efficient physically, chemically, or biologically. It consumes without replacing resources like topsoil, biodiversity, water, etc. It looks more efficient financially only by neglecting the future costs to restore those resources. B.S. Farmers aren't stupid, they still remember the lessons of the 1930s. They all plan to farm until they're physically unable to, and hope that the family far…

[deleted]

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#23
post #2

There is no article there. Is there a Magic Button I'm missing, other than "subscribe"? It seems content is also fighting for its life. Here's a similarly-name article that's open-able, at least to me: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/22/opinion/rural-america-eco...

https://outline.com/vZPggv

... Oh, that doesn't really work here. Sorry.

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#24
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for sake of clarity never heard of this newsource before but what kind of clarity is this additional information supposed to provide ?

Every media source has bias and I think people should be aware of them, especially for smaller sources like Washington Examiner.

[deleted]

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#25
post #2

There is no article there. Is there a Magic Button I'm missing, other than "subscribe"? It seems content is also fighting for its life. Here's a similarly-name article that's open-able, at least to me: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/22/opinion/rural-america-eco...

https://outline.com/vZPggv ... Oh, that doesn't really work here. Sorry.

Didn’t work for me...

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#26
post #13

Environmental destruction is the story here, but with one misunderstanding. > Rural America is eroding. If you talk to farmers such as Short and Roger, they lament it. But almost nobody thinks it can be prevented. More efficient farming... The new farming isn't more efficient physically, chemically, or biologically. It consumes without replacing resources like topsoil, biodiversity, water, etc. It looks more efficien…

Agree with the other responder to this comment, this is BS. But oddly there are lots of passages in the actual article that directly refute this thesis, e.g.:

> Also, farms are reducing erosion. “We’ve gone from 100-bushel corn [per acre] to 250-bushel corn because we’re saving our soil,” Short said.

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#27
post #5

No judgement on this particular opinion piece, but just for sake of clarity in case people are unaware, the Washington Examiner has a rather pronounced conservative and Republican bias.

Also subject to an impressive amount of Wikipedia revert-edits from a White House OoTP IP address recently:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/204.68.2...

The page was subsequently protected:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Washington_Examin...

IP info:

https://www.infobyip.com/ip-204.68.207.13.html

(Archive: https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.infobyip.com/ip-204...)

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#28
post #13

Environmental destruction is the story here, but with one misunderstanding. > Rural America is eroding. If you talk to farmers such as Short and Roger, they lament it. But almost nobody thinks it can be prevented. More efficient farming... The new farming isn't more efficient physically, chemically, or biologically. It consumes without replacing resources like topsoil, biodiversity, water, etc. It looks more efficien…

An acquaintance of mine has startups about some these issues:

https://landlifecompany.com/ (reforrestation with the aid of technology)

https://www.sensoterra.com/ (smart soil moisture measurements)

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#29
post #13

Environmental destruction is the story here, but with one misunderstanding. > Rural America is eroding. If you talk to farmers such as Short and Roger, they lament it. But almost nobody thinks it can be prevented. More efficient farming... The new farming isn't more efficient physically, chemically, or biologically. It consumes without replacing resources like topsoil, biodiversity, water, etc. It looks more efficien…

The destruction of farms has nothing to do with soil erosion. It's all about government policy that has destroyed producer prices.

One example is the changes in terms how anti-trust policy has evolved over time. Today, cartels of produce buyers collude to keep prices low. There's also the lobbying and market pressures to transform away to manufactured food processes (fake meat, milk, etc).

The environmental devastation is yet to come, and it will come from the commodity crops that are depleting water tables.

Re: Small-town America fights for its life

#30
If small town 'murica is dying because no one is popping out 8 or more children, well, welcome to the modern world. Large families were required on family farms simply as a way of getting help, which is much reduced these days. And the children that are born into that life, see the bright city lights and the hustle and bustle of Des Moines and decide that is where they want to be.

Nope, small town America, as seen in The Music Man, is dead and gone forever. Nothing is going to halt its decline nor bring it back.

Post reply on HN