You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Vladimir_M comments on Vegetarianism - Less Wrong Discussion

29 Post author: Raemon 24 December 2010 04:57AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (165)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vladimir_M 28 December 2010 07:35:25PM 1 point [-]

Which is to say that a farmer that may go bankrupt in 20 years because the farm will no longer be able to sustain production is not going to increase prices unless the farmer is quite cognizant of the fact and is planning for it. Most won't.

But why? In countries with stable governments and secure property titles, plenty of economic activity takes place with time horizons of this magnitude, and even much longer ones. What is it that makes landowners so irrationally shortsighted?

Comment author: datadataeverywhere 28 December 2010 08:45:41PM *  -1 points [-]

Poverty. If you have no income, and $X in savings that produce 5% interest, if 0.05X isn't enough to live on, you're still going to live on the money you have, even if you're aware that it will run out.

I think farmers in developed nations are much better off, but that farmers in the developing world are depleting topsoil faster than we can afford to have it depleted, to say nothing of the future cost to themselves. I further am under the impression that topsoil depletion is still a problem in the US, and its current resolution is forcing faster topsoil depletion in the rest of the world. If you have specific information that this is not the case, I'm basing this impression off a large number of things that I've read that all might be out of date, or collectively too pessimistic about current conditions.

Edit: also note the last paragraph of my reply to Vaniver.