Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] Growing sustainable models

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Growing sustainable models
  • Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 21:35:59 -0600


Exactly. This is why making growing profitable is such an uphill struggle.
And why it's a topic almost taboo among growers. But if sustainable growing
can't first sustain the growers there won't be enough growers no matter how
much people want real food. Bottom line.

I can't go with the argument that policy should subsidize our work, not at
all. Policy should stop subsidizing industrial agriculture which makes junk
food cheaper than real food. That's not all. Fortunes have been spent
promoting junk food - not real food, not natural, unprocessed, unpackaged,
unadulterated food. It's a miracle there's an organic or fresh local movement
at all considering it's against all odds.

But things change. Here's the last person I'd expect to see promoting home
cooking - just tonite Barb showed me what Guy Fiero (punked out show host)
was doing on Diners, Drive-ins, and Dives, who's on a reality show tour to
cities showing ordinary people *how to cook*. He told his audience about 30
years ago people stopped cooking at home and need to do it again and involve
the kids. His audience went wild.

paul tradingpost@lobo.net


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 8/14/2010 at 12:08 PM EJ wrote:

Some people would argue that policy is more important than individual
consumers:

It's the policy, stupid
Why eaters alone can’t transform the food system

by Tom Philpott

In the cover piece of the newest American Prospect, Heather Rogers skillfully
makes a point I've been flogging for years: that public policy, not consumer
choice, is the villain propping up the industrial food system and
constraining the growth of organic farming.

Rogers, author of the new book Green Gone Wrong: How Our Economy Is
Undermining the Environmental Revolution, opens with the example of a New
York State farmer named Morse Pitts. He sells the bounty of his 15-acre
Windfall Farm in the Hudson Valley at Manhattan's famed Union Square market,
where his eggs command a steep $14 per dozen and "some of his greens go for
more than $40 per pound." Yet even though his weekly market stand teems with
consumers eager to "vote with their forks" (to speak nothing of their
checking accounts), he nets just $7 per hour for his labor and plans to shut
down his operation soon.

The problem, Rogers makes clear, is a widespread lack of infrastructure for
supporting small-scale, ecologically minded farmers. The public resources
that might do just that are siphoned off by the industrial food system, in
the form of commodity subsidies and largesse to the corn ethanol industry.
Farmers like Pitts have to pass on the costs of their ecological stewardship
directly to their customers in the form of eye-popping prices, which still
don't add up to a decent salary, while industrial-scale farms can generally
trash the environment with impunity, letting society as a whole, or distant
communities, pick up the bill. See, for example, the Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone.

More:
http://www.grist.org/article/food-why-eaters-alone-cant-transform-the-food-system/

Dieter Brand wrote:
> We live in a consumer society. This means that the consumer decides the
> future shape of farming by the choices she makes in the shop. Neither the
> government nor the corporations have the power to change the status quo.
> They do have the power to influence public opinion, but in the end, they
> are just as powerless to change things as we are.
>
>






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page