Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["E. E. Mitchamore Jr" <emitch@att.net>]

I don't think the "profit" spoken of here is the same as corporate agribusiness.  What Paul is referring to is the ratio of output to input.  You can certainly raise "yield" by the use of chemical fertilizers, but the long-term cost is too high.  By keeping costs very low, a lower yield can make very good sense for the long term.

 

E. E. "Mitch" Mitchamore
www.hillcountrynatives.biz

----- Original Message -----

From: Mark Nagel

To: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:22 PM

Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Yield vs output/ was nutrition

I'm not looking to UP (or to "raise") the ante, but shouldn't it really be driven by moral obligation to feed people?  That is, shouldn't it be stated that we should strive to produce what would be the greatest value to others?

It's picking nits, but the pure "profit" angle will, at least in the short-run (which may have substantial consequences of the long-run), drive farmers to produce biofuels :-(


-Mark Nagel
Everett, WA


=====================
From: TradingPostPaul <tradingpost@riseup.net>
Date: 2007/03/10 Sat PM 11:23:06 CST
To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [Livingontheland] Yield vs output/ was nutrition


Reply to Ken's post.
Looking at # 8. Manage crops for highest profit per acre;  not the highest
yield per acre.

We've been bamboozled by industrial agribusiness over the word "yield".
Total output is what counts, and total profit which is gross minus
expenses.

_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland