Comment on Pro-tip for this capitalistic hellscape
Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 week agoOkay, but the problem most people are worried about is how much food do they need to eat to get their needs met. Growing in a far denser manner doesn’t matter to people if chicken and bugs carry a higher load in the grocery store. So there’s a compromise there. And crickets look like they slot right into it. In other words you’re confusing Economic with Efficient. They aren’t always the same.
veganpizza69@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Efficiency is about physics. You can’t break the laws of physics. Economics are not physics and subsidies can go in many different directions.
If we plan on using the land to store carbon, to restore ecosystems and biodiversity, then land use and land use intensity will have to decrease, which will mean that we have make sure that land is used to feed people, not to feed food.
If you’re going to say “waste”, don’t bother. Waste firstly has to be reduced, and we need the rest for compost.
Your appeal to density works much like the bird CAFOs now in the face of HPAI. You think you’ve figured out a cheat, but, over time, it averages back down.