Will Soldiers Have to Use Private Ins?

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

I don't think food should be taxed, and I don't like the way big agri-business has taken over and put small farms out of business.

Small farms don't feed cities.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by TGRR

Small farms don't feed cities.

Urban agriculture can hopefully make an impact if it starts growing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_agriculture

Lots of benefits to it.

[xoxoxoBruce]

That's a pipe dream.
First of all, in order to grow food for the city on the surrounding land, you have to tear down the suburbs that are already there. The people that live on the fringes of the city, while they love the bucolic view, soon bitch about the smells, insects, dust, etc, that go along with agriculture.

Now, the people of a particular city could get fresh veggies grown closer... in season. But, not every veggie can be grown everywhere, so the best you can hope for is some produce, some of the year, that costs more.

But for grains, meat, tropical fruits, fugetaboutit.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

That's a pipe dream.
First of all, in order to grow food for the city on the surrounding land, you have to tear down the suburbs that are already there. The people that live on the fringes of the city, while they love the bucolic view, soon bitch about the smells, insects, dust, etc, that go along with agriculture.

The ancient city-state setup isn't the only urban agriculture option. Green roofs are getting increasingly popular and a few cities (Vancouver and Portland) have started planting large gardens in unused lots with some success. It wouldn't be profitable now, but if sources of energy became cheaper entire buildings could be dedicated to the growth of vegetables and maybe even fruits and grains.

Also, preventing excess water runoff is becoming a large issue in cities and methods or preventing runoff can easily coincide with urban agriculture.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

The ancient city-state setup isn't the only urban agriculture option. Green roofs are getting increasingly popular and a few cities (Vancouver and Portland) have started planting large gardens in unused lots with some success. It wouldn't be profitable now, but if sources of energy became cheaper entire buildings could be dedicated to the growth of vegetables and maybe even fruits and grains.

Also, preventing excess water runoff is becoming a large issue in cities and methods or preventing runoff can easily coincide with urban agriculture.

And I think that is AWESOME! It also helps cut down on energy usage with heating and air conditioning, because it helps regulate the indoor temperature. Don't they have rooftop gardens in Chicago?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Fruits and grains take a lot of area to produce a substantial crop. Grains have to be milled in substantial quantity to make it economical. Buildings have to reinforced to carry the load of soil, unless you're not doing some sort of expensive hydroponic deal. And growing in buildings? Have to ever compared a garden tomato with hothouse grown?

Rooftop/vacant lot growing of in-season veggies is a good idea, but will never be more than a supplement to the normal food supply. Our success with feeding over 300 million people is based on Mother Nature wiping out a crop over here doesn't devastate us because we're growing more over there.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Fruits and grains take a lot of area to produce a substantial crop. Grains have to be milled in substantial quantity to make it economical.

That's why I said maybe, I am not well versed on growing grains and fruits along with the economics of it.

Buildings have to reinforced to carry the load of soil, unless you're not doing some sort of expensive hydroponic deal.

Yup, that's a problem as of now but urban agriculture will not be widespread in one sweep, if ever. Buildings will naturally be rebuilt and restructured so in the future they can be designed to handle the extra load.

And growing in buildings? Have to ever compared a garden tomato with hothouse grown?

No, but I know people will be working their asses off to lessen the disparity. Its always a possibility that can be used in the future.

Rooftop/vacant lot growing of in-season veggies is a good idea, but will never be more than a supplement to the normal food supply.

A full replacement was never the idea. Urban agriculture can make an impact with food production and if real problems do occur in the future, diet changes are a possibility, making urban agriculture even more efficient. What people eat is largely dependent on what is available. If locally grown foods become more available and foreign grown foods become less available, people will start eating locally grown foods, making urban agriculture more significant.

We have no idea how our food production setup will be in 100 years, but having a homegrown source can never be bad. Not to mention the multiple other benefits from urban agriculture that has nothing to do with food production.

Our success with feeding over 300 million people is based on Mother Nature wiping out a crop over here doesn't devastate us because we're growing more over there.

True, but how does urban agriculture go against that? If we have crops growing in 100 cities across the United States, I don't think availability of certain foods will be a problem.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by TGRR

Small farms don't feed cities.

I never said they did. I said I don't like the way big agri-business has taken over everything at the expense of smaller farms. And you know, it didn't always exist, yet people always seemed to have food before. (yes, I know how naive that sounds. It is still the truth.)

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

I never said they did. I said I don't like the way big agri-business has taken over everything at the expense of smaller farms. And you know, it didn't always exist, yet people always seemed to have food before. (yes, I know how naive that sounds. It is still the truth.)

Over half the population used to farmers as well.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

I never said they did. I said I don't like the way big agri-business has taken over everything at the expense of smaller farms. And you know, it didn't always exist, yet people always seemed to have food before. (yes, I know how naive that sounds. It is still the truth.)

Yeah. Back when 40-50% of the population was agrarian.