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

Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

fb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 432 posts

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#271

Post by Throaway1982 »

dathinab wrote: post #179
unglaublich wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People outside of the US look down on inferior products like HFCS, bleached chicken, hormones used in beef cattle, prevalence of GM crops, the preventive use of antibiotics in poultry, hen battery cages, and permissive-by-default use of additives. If at least all those bad farming practices would lead to very affordable food, then one could make an argument for it... but currently the US just does worst of two worlds…

Interesting Side Note: bleached/chlorinated chicken The things which makes this a no go in the EU is ironically not the chlorination per-se, but the fact that chlorination is needed. Like basically the EU thinks the way the US allows farmers to keep and raise chickens is so bad/unsanitary that chlorinating them isn't sufficient to make them safe for (repeated) consumption. Which makes sense given that some of the thi…

The EU doesn't allow chlorination of chicken

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#272

Post by lateforwork »

xienze wrote: post #260
insane_dreamer wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose they've successfully instilled the fear that "our way of life" will be destroyed if they don't vote for Trump, despite 1) being a lie, and 2) a vote that will make things worse for them. It's amazing how powerful these relatively minor cultural issues can be. It certainly makes for interesting case studies for future political science and sociology university (if the humanities survive).

> instilled the fear that "our way of life" will be destroyed if they don't vote for Trump, despite 1) being a lie You may find this hard to believe, but there are a lot of people old enough to see how rapidly "our way of life" has gone down the toilet. It's not a myth, it's happening.

Are you talking about manufacturing jobs going away, or something else?

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#273

Post by Throaway1982 »

bruce511 wrote: post #124
csours wrote: post #107

Of all the guns that rural Americans love, the humble foot-gun is the most beloved. --- Someone else can argue the morality, ethics, economics, and politics of it all, but VERY simply, US Federal Government Agencies are machines for redistributing wealth from cities to rural areas. Rural America voted quite heavily to stop those subsidies. That's what efficiency means. --- Maturity means suspending judgement and list…

I agree. Personally I don't understand the love that agriculture shows to the Republican party, but hey you get what you vote for. It seems like this whole year has been implementing policy after policy that screws over agriculture. USAid (big purchaser) gone. 40 billion sent to Argentina. Antagonize Canadians (Canadians !!) so they boycott American produce. Tarif China so they'll reciprocate on soy beans. Deport far…

It's all cultural. The Republicans captured the messaging around "ordinary folk."

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#274

Post by Throaway1982 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #235
throwaway422432 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a US citizen, just an observer. What is the alternative when the Democrats appear just as much beholden to corporate finance, and position themselves as the party for city dwellers? I also disagree on the wealth redistribution. Government agencies are managers of risk. * Is there a risk to the country's food security if farmers go bust on mass? Then the Government needs to mitigate that risk. Fairly simple.…

Democrats write constantly about trying to reach rural americans. I've never seen democrats meaningfully position themselves as the party for city dwellers. Instead I've seen democrats simply refuse to describe cities as hellholes full of crime, laziness, and sexual promiscuity like the republicans do.

The Dems dont actually do much to reach those rural Americans though.

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#275

Post by throwaway2037 »

jansper39 wrote: post #266
wojciii wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do European chicken meat plants use to reduce bateria load? I'm sure it's just salt and water. I don't understand why consumers will pay for a chicken breast which has been injected with salt water. It comes out when you prepare it. Also some people don't season food with salt (you can add salt at the table if you really need it). Meat with added salt taste very salty to me.

It's also down to vaccination requirements for EU based farms who take far more preventative measures than US ones. It's why you can eat raw eggs and keep them out of the fridge in the EU/UK but not in the US, because the chickens are vaccination for Salmonella.

Generally, I agree with your post. About "keep them out of the fridge": I thought this is mostly due to wash or not-wash the eggs before packing. I think washing removes a thin layer that makes the eggs last longer, but can be visually less appealing. Please correct me if you know better! Japan also vaccinates heavily for Salmonella, and they eat plenty of raw eggs in their cuisine.

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#276

Post by Tangurena2 »

jansper39 wrote: post #266
wojciii wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do European chicken meat plants use to reduce bateria load? I'm sure it's just salt and water. I don't understand why consumers will pay for a chicken breast which has been injected with salt water. It comes out when you prepare it. Also some people don't season food with salt (you can add salt at the table if you really need it). Meat with added salt taste very salty to me.

It's also down to vaccination requirements for EU based farms who take far more preventative measures than US ones. It's why you can eat raw eggs and keep them out of the fridge in the EU/UK but not in the US, because the chickens are vaccination for Salmonella.

Japanese egg production is even cleaner, but then consuming raw eggs is commonplace in Japan.

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#277

Post by GrinningFool »

mexicocitinluez wrote: post #241
throwaway422432 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a US citizen, just an observer. What is the alternative when the Democrats appear just as much beholden to corporate finance, and position themselves as the party for city dwellers? I also disagree on the wealth redistribution. Government agencies are managers of risk. * Is there a risk to the country's food security if farmers go bust on mass? Then the Government needs to mitigate that risk. Fairly simple.…

> What is the alternative when the Democrats appear just as much beholden to corporate finance, and position themselves as the party for city dwellers? For the love of God, please don't "both sides" this stuff. When is the last time you took a look at the bills coming before Congress and how they were voted on? Like, literally go to the congressional website and view bills and vote tallies? Would you believe it if I…

> Lastly, there are at least 50 Dems in congress right now who explicitly aren't beholden to corporate finance and regularly introduce bills to remove money from politics.

Sometimes seems like they introduce those bills only when they can't possibly pass. Makes for good theater and talking points ("I _tried_, look!").

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#278

Post by gruez »

unglaublich wrote: post #166
cik wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, much of this is a political issue. America wants food standards that are different from many trading partners; fair enough. But it makes it impossible to export many farm goods as a result. This is outside of the current political climate, and has been going on for ages. It's just coming it a head now.

People outside of the US look down on inferior products like HFCS, bleached chicken, hormones used in beef cattle, prevalence of GM crops, the preventive use of antibiotics in poultry, hen battery cages, and permissive-by-default use of additives. If at least all those bad farming practices would lead to very affordable food, then one could make an argument for it... but currently the US just does worst of two worlds…

>inferior products like HFCS, [...] prevalence of GM crops

The others I agree with, but there's no evidence that HFCS or GM crops are bad.

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#279

Post by 9rx »

casey2 wrote: post #143
9rx wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> over half of corn acreage is used for ethanol. That doesn't mean much without more details. Corn is used as a tool in the crop rotation to enable growing foods for humans to eat. As we learned before ethanol's time in the sun, farmers are going to grow it anyway to support their rotations. The only question is if it is better to recapture that into usable energy or to let it rot out in the field. > ... when taking…

corn->ethanol is government subsidized robbery. I paid for those nutrients let them rot. Now consumers have to buy more and eat more calories to get the same nutrition. All so we can have net negative ROEI ethanol?

> corn->ethanol is government subsidized robbery.

There was that brief period where subsidies were enacted to spur on construction of ethanol plants to take up the excess corn that was rotting leading up to that time. They have long since come to an end. You could still call E10 requirements a subsidy, but you'd only be paying for that if you willingly chose to consume the product.

> Now consumers have to buy more and eat more calories to get the same nutrition.

Why?

> All so we can have net negative ROEI ethanol?

I'm not sure your math is mathing. Recapturing something, even with some marginal loss, is still a greater return than nothing.

Re: Significant US farm losses persist, despite federal assistance

#280

Post by ptero »

jansper39 wrote: post #266
wojciii wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do European chicken meat plants use to reduce bateria load? I'm sure it's just salt and water. I don't understand why consumers will pay for a chicken breast which has been injected with salt water. It comes out when you prepare it. Also some people don't season food with salt (you can add salt at the table if you really need it). Meat with added salt taste very salty to me.

It's also down to vaccination requirements for EU based farms who take far more preventative measures than US ones. It's why you can eat raw eggs and keep them out of the fridge in the EU/UK but not in the US, because the chickens are vaccination for Salmonella.

The reason for keeping eggs in a fridge is different (primarily washing vs not washing). This has been discussed a number of times at HN.

Here is an example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19815155

Post reply on HN