|
John's World
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Another reason you don't want autosteer on your ox...
 A-B lines won't help much here. (Really - it's terraced fields in China) [via Neatorama] Labels: fun
OK, maybe it matters a little bit...
I cannot deny being a flummoxed by the inertia of our behemoth economy. It shrugs off problems like the housing slowdown and marches on. The deficit balloons and no lightning strikes. The president claims that his $2.57 trillion budget is the first step on the road to fulfilling his campaign promise to halve the deficit by 2009, even if Congress agrees to make his tax cuts permanent and enacts still more reductions. That claim is completely unfounded. Indeed, if the White House team that drafted this budget were subject to Sarbanes-Oxley, criminal indictments would be flying. This has been a bad time for doomsayers. Nonetheless, I feel like saying some doom. And I'm not alone. Modern accounting requires that corporations, state governments and local governments count expenses immediately when a transaction occurs, even if the payment will be made later. One thing I have noticed during my life is how long it takes for the trees to fall. Even after the final through-cut is made, a large tree will remain upright, only slowly developing the momentum that hurls it to earth. I have witnessed this same phenomenon as farmers who farmed badly took decades to exit, despite doing everything wrong at every chance. We Boomers may pull off the last great generational robbery as we suck resources from future generations aided by fictitious accounting illustrated above. Not a great epitaph.
Universal health care and a real currency?...
Those sneaky ol' Canadians have been using economic performance-enhancing potions, I guess. Take a look at the Canadian dollar (yeah, the one we used to laugh at 5 years ago).  Considering the hysteria that marks U.S. currency relationships with China and Japan, which stand accused of maintaining cheap currencies to boost exports, there should be widespread applause here for Canada. But as the Canadian dollar on Tuesday reached nearly a 30-year high against the U.S. dollar, trading at $1.07 Canadian per U.S. dollar, the Cassandras of international trade can't seem to find any words for our neighbors to the north. As far as I know, none of the financial pundits is saluting Canada's boon to U.S. exporters or, for that matter, complaining that the biggest U.S. trading partner is holding up U.S. consumers, who must pay more for Canadian goods. [More]Most of my career producers near our northern border have been irked by the currency advantage that seemed to operate for Canadian competitors. Thanks to our huge appetite for Canadian energy, the gripes could be flowing the other way. Tuesday, May 29, 2007
A trick of perspective...
I have never been good with 3-D puzzles. Two dimensions seem to work for me. I'm from Illinois. The video below - even when explained - still mystifies me. Labels: fun
Why Yao Ming looks so tall...
This is an example of an Ames room. See the accompanying post (since I don't know how to link in YouTube posts.)
Right arm, Jim...
Little Jimmy Weisemeyer comments on the farm bill to date and hits the nail on the head. Farm bill wild cards: If President Bush vetoes many FY08 appropriations bill, this would muck up House and Senate floor debate for the farm bill and could push the end zone into 2008. Also, I am still not ruling out a presidential veto of the farm bill whenever it comes if it exceeds the spending level the White House eventually lays out, and/or if the bill doesn't provide most of the reforms reflected in the administration's farm bill language. [More, by subscription] The farther we go into the sunset of the Bush administration the less predictable he becomes. Crimony, when your ratings are in the low thirties, what have you got to lose? The idea of Pres. Bush vetoing a generous farm bill is not unthinkable. See, you just thought of it. Nor would the farm bill be the only example. Consider the quiet efforts by the administration to reform food aid. But critics say it does so in a way that benefits American shippers and food producers at the expense of thousands of people who die of hunger unnecessarily. That's because under its Food for Peace program, the U.S. buys only grain and other food produced in this country, and then ships 75 percent of that load on U.S.-flagged ships, which many say delays delivery of food aid that is needed in a hurry. It could also be that the iron grip of the White House has been loosened allowing conservative administrators a chance to do something, well, conservative before hitting the consultancy road. Makes me roll round the idea of one-only, 6-year presidential terms. Monday, May 28, 2007
It beats big horses...
How many times do we have to listen to Carl Orff's composition before we ask who actually wrote it?
News from the front...
I post often about trends in food. Sooner or later they show up here on the farm. Just a sample of the current chatter: The last decade's avalanche of information about food, where to get it, what's in it, and how it's made has been mostly a very good thing: the industrialized food system that wallows in corn syrup, hydrogenated soybean oil, and boneless, skinless chicken breasts is finally being recognized as unhealthy for both individuals and society, as well as the very soil. American culture is in the gradual process of rediscovering the pre-industrial food system, and recovering some of the benefits that many other countries have yet to lose: seasonality of fruits and vegetables, the higher quality of meats produced by smaller-scale production, etc. [More] While mildly voiced, the resonating message of this commentary is less about the conclusions, and more about how deeply embedded the idea that industrial agriculture has let us down as food consumers. This is bald nonsense. Our agricultural apparatus, while skewed sadly by government intervention simply supplies the consumer what they pay for. Since recently they have shown an attraction to process in addition to price, producers are scrambling to supply that market. Chastising an astoundingly efficient industry for not anticipating the consumer's latest whim is childish. Agriculture cannot turn on a dime. However, put down a dollar.... Labels: food
Big whoop...
Forecasters have read the omens for this year's hurricane season. I am beside myself with excitement. The 2007 Atlantic hurricane season should have above-average activity, with three major hurricanes and a good chance at least one of them will make landfall, a top hurricane researcher said Friday. [More] Methinks no sane forecaster would offer a "below normal" forecast. How many things could go wrong there? Better to err on the side of caution and predict the sky will fall. Someday. Maybe. How good are these predictions? Not bad at all. In general, the predictions fall within a storm or two of the observed totals. Last season, though, the forecasters had a bad year. 2004's six intense hurricanes doubled most predictions. The seasonal total of nine hurricanes was also significantly higher than expected. Forecasters blamed the poor predictions on a "year [that] did not behave like any other year we have studied." [More] Provide me a break. To begin with the most-often quoted hurricane guru also has a prominent role in the global warming debate. And if it's OK to poke fun at Al Gore (too easy for any real humorist), Dr. Gray is also fair game. The problem is not Gray's age -- we all revered Henry Stommel who did some of his finest work in his seventies. The problem is Gray's failure to adapt to a modern era of meteorology, which demands hypotheses soundly grounded in quantitative and consistent physical formulations, not seat-of-the-pants flying. The WSJ also made much of the withdrawal of an invitation for Gray to join a debate on hurricane trends at an Atlanta tropical meteorology conference. We can't speak for the organizers, but we find it easy to believe that their decision was guided more by the invalidity of Gray's scientific reasoning than by any political or personal considerations. [More] So am I deeply concerned about this year's hurricane season? Actually, yes. America has demonstrated that where hurricanes are likely to hit are a low-empathy sector of our economy. Perhaps it is necessary to be harsh to discourage coastal development and shoddy building practice, but if we did not learn anything from Katrina, the victims are wretched indeed. Labels: global warming, weather Sunday, May 27, 2007
It's only going to get worse...
As the push for green energy gathers momentum we will see more stories like this soon: California's nearly 2 million cows, most living on industrial-scale dairies, create a huge and costly waste problem. According to the PUC order approving the BioEnergy deal, a single thousand-pound dairy cow each day produces 10 pounds of "volatile solids" - that's bureaucratese for poop - which can be transformed into 72 cubic feet of biogas. Dairy owners can dispose of that burden, clean up the environment and turn crap into cash by cutting deals with companies like BioEnergy. PG&E benefits as the biogas produced counts toward a state mandate that it obtain 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources b y 2010. Such projects typically produce some sort of green "credits" that can be used toward meeting emissions limits or can be sold on carbon trading markets. PG&E will retain some of those so-called environmental attributes produced by the cow power project though the PUC said it remains to be decided just how they might be applied when California's cap on greenhouse gas limits comes into force. [More] I have no complaint with the facts of the story, but as non-ag media writers start to investigate bioenergy of all forms they seem to get nervous around manure - resorting to cutesy wordplay ("crap into cash"??) and double entendres. Look folks, it's excrement. And mankind has spent considerable effort to devise all kinds of scatological language to deal with our instinctive aversion to feces. And after a while, you get used to it. I am not "dissing" these writers - just the opposite. In time they will develop a more detached view of manure, just as generations of livestock producers have. We should not expect it overnight. Still, I think we've heard 99% of the manure jokes by now.
I blame Tom DeLay...
People are smiling for their mug shots now.  Maybe it's because they know they are being posted in the Internet. Or maybe they just enjoy their work. Somebody tell Glenn Campbell. [via Presurfer] Labels: fun
Pistol Shrimp
Way cool! As one commenter notes: "Even shrimp love the taste of shrimp".
Take my carbon. Please...
When last we visited the subject of global climate change, several readers had shared their points of view on the seriousness of the problem and whether it indeed exists. You can read all the posts and comments by clicking on "global warming" in the Labels section below. Suffice it to say at this point I accept the argument that greenhouse gases (GHG) are contributing significantly to climate change. The question now becomes: What if anything can or should we do about it? The answer has been reduced to two primary options: emissions trading and carbon taxes. Policymakers and businesses are now trying to figure out the best way to limit the emissions of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, which is produced by burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. Why impose limits? Because accumulating scientific evidence indicates that the increased concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is causing average temperatures to rise globally. This increase could trigger significant disruption of the world’s climate by the end of this century. Although there remain serious uncertainties about the magnitude of the human role in climate change, there is a growing consensus that emissions need to be reduced. [If you only read one link - read this one] At first glance, most would likely opt for the one that does not include the word "taxes". But another way of looking at carbon taxes is pricing energy with all the externalities included. Rather than a government revenue scheme, carbon emitters (energy users) would no longer be subsidized by future generations who will experience the downstream costs of our energy consumption. How? With a carbon tax that assesses fuels according to how much they pollute. Coal, having the highest carbon content, would be taxed the most, followed by oil and natural gas. The higher prices for the most damaging fuels would encourage people and companies to use them less and more of other types of energy, including nuclear, solar, wind and biofuels. This approach also would affect all sources -- not just cars, which account for only one-fifth of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. [More]Such a tax is termed a Pigovian tax after economist Arthur Pigou. One of the strongest proponents of the carbon tax has been economist Greg Mankiw. One powerful reason he cites is the importance of switching to consumption taxes. Economic growth. Public finance experts have long preached that consumption taxes are better than income taxes for long-run economic growth, because income taxes discourage saving and investment. Gas is a component of consumption. An increased reliance on gas taxes over income taxes would make the tax code more favorable to growth. It would also encourage firms to devote more R&D spending to the search for gasoline substitutes. [More] Emissions markets seem to solve the problem without making us actually, well, do anything. And for the most part, the European experiment in emissions trading was handled just that way - the governments simply handed out emissions allowances until they were worthless. Nonetheless, for many farmers sporadic articles describing how we could suddenly get a payment for sequestering carbon by simply doing what we do is tempting compared to paying $5 for diesel. On the whole, going at GHG reduction via trading schemes strikes me as incredibly complicated and inefficient, since vast bureaucracies for measuring, allocating, and administering caps and credits would be required. Of course, this is one reason such plans are popular with legislators and government planners. One big challenge is how we will get corn residues to breakdown and release nitrogen without releasing carbon - another complicating factor for all-corn cropping strategies. Tillage will decompose the residue faster by mixing oxygen into the soil system, but the carbon and nitrogen release from the residue will be rapid, far before the crop needs the nutrients. A legume cover crop could reduce some of this nitrogen penalty by providing some biological diversity. [More] I favor the carbon tax. By making it revenue neutral via lower income taxes and capital gains taxes (which would go a long way to ending 1031 problems and estate hassles), we could shift our taxing structure and discourage fossil fuel consumption. Since the wealthy consume more energy, they would pay most of the taxes, and progressive rebating via lower income taxes would mitigate the burden on low earners while still encouraging consumption changes. But the even bigger reason is this: ethanol/biofuels would likely not be subject to a carbon tax - it is not a fossil fuel, and hence, carbon-neutral. Taxes would have been paid for the coal or natural gas needed to power the plant, but the result would still be a wider spread between ethanol and gasoline than without the tax. This pricing advantage would lower the need for other legislative protections for biofuels. A carbon tax would solidify the future of biofuels more securely than mandates, credits, and tariffs. A gradually increasing carbon tax would make energy expensive, and perhaps finally make lower consumption via changing our lifestyles more imaginable to more Americans. To be sure, our world will change, but perhaps in a better way. Labels: global warming, policy, pollution Saturday, May 26, 2007
Walmart has another problem..
I like to watch issues that fall off the radar but still reverberate in the marketplace. One of these could be the melamine-laced pet food debacle that featured the source - China - prominently over and over. Following recent scares over food contaminated with the banned substance melamine, a number of processors - including Nutracea, Mission Foods and Tyson Foods - have announced that their ingredients are not, or will no longer be, sourced from China. [More] While we in agriculture observe this sputter of outrage by consumers with mild interest, you can bet your stock option boards of directors are asking where ingredients are coming from. And not just ingredients, perhaps. This sorry episode illustrates that a global food supply requires honesty and integrity. If China or any other country wants to sell its products on the international market, it needs to make sure that its products are top-of-the-line. Arresting a company manager is not an acceptable long-term solution. [More]Meanwhile, America's top retailer is so deeply invested in Chinese sources that the cloud over imports could impact sales of all kinds of retail goods. Most people are not aware of the massive effect that the world’s largest company has on the American food supply. As noted by Charles Fishman in his book “The Wal-Mart Effect,” Wal-Mart is China’s eighth-largest trading partner. In 2004, almost 10 percent of everything imported to the United States from China was imported by Wal-Mart. With the way Wal-Mart pushes its suppliers to do business at the lowest possible cost, systems are poorly regulated and done on the cheap.The impact on Walmart comes at an inconvenient time. As has been pointed out by numerous analysts, Walmart's primary consumer market is the lower 50% of earners, and those are exactly the citizens who have been left out of the prosperity growth in America. Analysts believe that Wal-Mart has a ready-made marketThe persistent reminders of wildly unequal economic progress in the US and the world remind us how national statistics can be a cold comfort, regardless of their positive nature. Thursday, May 24, 2007
The metaphor at the end of the rainbow...
I'm not crazy about Tom Friedman's book, "The World Is Flat". It turns out I'm not alone, but other critics have other reasons. Edward Leamer meticulously deconstructs the metaphor of worldly flatness and finds it unhelpful. In the process, he refreshes my memory on one agricultural example (assuming I ever knew it in the first place). The German farmer Johann H. Von Thünen noticed that farmland closer to the towns This is what I was awkwardly trying to get to when I posted that warnings of high-priced land in the path of development were meaningless. That's where high-priced land should be. Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Predictable compromises...
The supplemental emergency funding for Iraq was seen as a major victory for the administration. Like many of the President's wins, it was largely bought on credit. Democratic leaders still insisted on about $20 billion in non-war domestic spending as part of the deal. That includes money for military and veterans' health care, Hurricane Katrina relief, military base closure costs, drought aid for farmers and medical coverage for poor children. Also part of the deal is the first federal minimum wage hike in more than a decade. [More] Another example: the immigration deal between legislative leaders and the White House deleted the requirement that illegal immigrants pay back taxes to earn citizenship. Forget that part about the taxes. The Bush administration actually asked that the provision requiring payment of back taxes be dropped from the bill, and it was taken out. Kennedy had it in! ...This pattern is pretty firmly fixed for both branches of the current government. Lacking any compelling crisis such as interest rates, the solution to every problem from gay marriage to energy prices will likely be found in adding to the deficit. Well, every problem except the deficit, of course. Labels: immigration, politics, taxes
The farmer buyout trend gains momentum...
While the US is contemplating various buyout schemes to end ag subsidies, we may just be part of a global movement. The EU Commission wants to offer wine-growers cash incentives to voluntarily take land out of grape production. After cries of protest, she this week cut the proposed scheme from 400,000 hectares to 200,000 hectares. [More]This idea: Big-Money-Now, just might work. After all they are dangling the incentives in front of Baby Boomers - arguably the most selfish generation in history. Regardless, I think a pattern is being molded for farm policy. And I'm not so sure it is misguided. Labels: farm program, international, policy
Stare at the cross...
 [Click on image first] Did you see the rabbit? From here. [via 3 quarks] Labels: fun
Sports for all...
Sometime in my childhood, we adopted a pretty rigorous approach to athletics. Teams, coaches, rules, schedules, and of course, parents. The result has been a few spectacularly skilled players the rest of us watch. But what about the fun we used to have inventing and then playing our own sports? Maybe it's not completely gone. And it also poses an interesting question: Why don't more people invent new sports?[Please check the video link adjacent for a visual explanation.] Between the obnoxious all-closeup-all-the-time TV production style in vogue today (how many times do I have to see Andy Pettite peer over his glove?) and the adoption of frenetic quick cuts, sports especially have become hard to watch if you have any attention span at all. Throw in boorish (heck - violent) fan/player behavior, I have pretty well tuned out professional sports. Still, I love a game, and I need the exercise.
Another buyout...
The political impossibility of ending farm subsidies - despite the impeccable logic - has caused more payment opponents to consider a buyout. Unfortunately the very political power that keeps farmers on the government payroll means that an outright and overnight end to farm programs is unlikely without "financial inducement." An up-front buyout of existing trade barriers and farm subsidies, based on (but less than) the present discounted value of seven years of expected payments—5 years representing the approximate tenure of a farm bill, plus two bonus years—might do the trick. Based on current spending projections, that could cost somewhere in the vicinity of $75 billion.The psychological scheme here is we farmers will opt for money now and to heck with the future. While I can entertain that strategy as plausible, it only seems likely if producers are convinced the subsidies are going to end anyway. There is the tough idea to swallow. Repealing the permanent farm legislation is required for this option to be credible. [I'll try to post more on this plan from The Cato Institute after it is released Wednesday.] Labels: farm bill, farm program Monday, May 21, 2007
Food and justice...
The strengthening connection between food and politics should be of interest to producers, I believe. While the livestock sector will feel it first and most powerfully, it could redound* to change the methodology of grain productions as well. The Rabbinical Assembly, which represents Conservative rabbis, has endorsed the idea of a hechsher tzedek ("certificate of justice"), a Jewish seal of approval that would go beyond the usual dietary rules to include the compensation and working conditions of people who produce kosher food. It's the brainchild of Minnesota rabbi Morris Allen, who was upset by reports that immigrant workers at a kosher slaughterhouse in Iowa are poorly paid, receive meager health benefits, and get inadequate safety training. Not surprisingly, Orthodox rabbis, who have long dominated the business of certifying food as kosher, are not pleased with Morris' idea. [More] Aside the obvious connection to food processing, most interesting to me are the litmus tests for "fairness". Note the prominent mention of "health benefits". As more Americans join the ranks of the uninsured, the outcry of inequality will increase. Of course, few are willing to discuss how to pay for all the medical services we can now provide - they want to talk health insurance. This is mindless. Insurance is way of spreading the costs of random occurrences across all potential victims - not an bottomless pit of assets available for every medical miracle. Nor should we be surprised when non-random health problems such as lifestyle choices wrench such schemes into unworkability. Nonetheless, the debate will increasingly be framed in the form of "affordable medical insurance" - not the harder debate about how much care can we give to every person, especially at the end of life. Simply put, this is an insufficient answer. * Don't ask me, it just seemed like the right word.
Ya see, this is what I have to put up with...
Behold the following epistle forwarded to me by a colleague: Jeanne, Sheesh - I don't get no respect. PS. Needs some lime juice. Labels: fun
What if something gets done?...
I have been re-reading my posts and to my surprise, have noticed my references to bi-partisanship and cooperation suddenly appearing. It was apparent in the announcement of the immigration proposal, and the new farm bill idea put forward by a mixed group of Congressfolk last week as well. Trade issues have also been rejuvenated. Of course, there are many who deserve credit (or blame, depending on your perspective) for the deal. It is hard for me to pinpoint exactly how this pragmatic spirit is gathering momentum. But until proven otherwise, I'll ascribe it to politicians who are sincerely interested in getting something done and weary of confrontational, strong-arm legislating. This also means we'd better pay attention a little more closely to what's going down in DC. Stuff could happen! Sunday, May 20, 2007
The extended adolescence threat...
As we stretch the dependency of children into their 30's we may be underwriting our own extinction. It turns out reproductive speed - no, not that speed - is crucial to the survival of species. The oft-cited causes of habitat loss and living in a limited geographic area also are significant risks for extinction of a species, but under hunting pressure it's reproductive speed that really matters, according to a new statistical analysis by evolutionary biologist Samantha Price, a postdoctoral fellow at the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center in Durham. Kick 'em outta the house at 12, move and leave no forwarding address. Your descendants will thank you. Science - ya gotta love it.
I'm still on board...
I still get goosebumps when I see old pictures imagining the future. like this one from 1984 showing the Farm Of the Future.  Something about the imaginings of our youth resides in our mental hope chests, perhaps. Or maybe it's just part and parcel of growing up during a time when technology could do no wrong. Regardless, these reminders of what I thought today would be like have the power to make me smile and remain hopeful. I think the difference is how fascinated we were then with the future. The visions were overwhelmingly optimistic and the idea of science - for many of us at least - as the great benefactor of mankind was pervasive and convincing. And for the most part, has been proven correct.
Bird-watching...
 Boy, this new lens is great - it's like he's right in front of the camera! [via Arbroath] Labels: fun
Too bad nobody reads the papers...
Editors across the country are wading into farm bill opinions. A current sampling: Last year, the Minneapolis-based Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy published a study by Heather Schoonover and Mark Muller that looked at the change in food prices from 1985 to 2000, the same period during which child and adult obesity began to escalate. In that time, the price of fresh fruits and vegetables increased by 38 percent. During the same time, the cost of soft drinks plummeted by nearly 23 percent, with significant declines in the costs of fats and oils, added sugars, and meat and dairy products. The authors cited farm bill spending priorities as a direct cause of this price disparity and resulting dietary imbalances. The source is worth noting as I think California is very much more in play for this farm bill. Just a few votes there, ya think? For too long, the emphasis in agriculture legislation has been on handing handsome benefits to a small number of big-time farmers and farm businesses, at the expense of everyone else, including smaller farmers. Of course, the deeply-thinking tanks have lobbed some serious papers onto the battlefield as well. The powerful American Enterprise Institute offered these mild observations: Elimination of farm subsidies for corn, wheat,Tough talk - but just talk. It is hard for me to take the AEI seriously. Farm policy has been one sin they easily tolerate to accomplish some greater good elsewhere in the economy. The right wing has shown little inclination to invest effort in reforming agricultural policy. Perhaps the sleeper idea is the bi-partisan reform bill offered by Sen. Dick Lugar and Rep. Jeff Flake (among others). Just like the immigration bill - which oddly may have a chance simply because we have forgotten the power of compromise - this idea may have legs by virtue of its bi-partisan authorship and the fact it actually addresses some of the concerns being trumpeted above. Of course, Memorial Day will anesthetize Washington shortly, and the immigration issue seems to have sucked the oxygen from the political debate, but for some reason, this proposal strikes me as at least worth following. Labels: farm bill
Really growing up...
Regardless of your politics, this is a commencement address worth pondering: There is a verse from the Bible that is sometimes read or recited during rites of passage like this. Corinthians 13:11: “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child. Now that I have become a man, I have put away childish things.” I cannot remember any of the commencement speeches or speakers I have listened to as a parent, graduate or attendee. Precisely because I hadn't truly grown up, I suspect. Labels: culture, human nature Friday, May 18, 2007
Sound investments...
While many suppressed a gasp, the US population passed a numerical milestone: 100 million minority citizens. The nation’s minority population reached 100.7 million, according to the national and state estimates by race, Hispanic origin, sex and age released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. A year ago, the minority population totaled 98.3 million. “About one in three U.S. residents is a minority,” said Census Bureau Director Louis Kincannon. “To put this into perspective, there are more minorities in this country today than there were people in the United States in 1910. In fact, the minority population in the U.S. is larger than the total population of all but 11 countries.”But wait, there is more to get your attention: Hispanics accounted for almost half (1.4 million) of the national population growth of 2.9 million between July 1, 2005, and July 1, 2006.and With a 3.4 percent increase between July 1, 2005, and July 1, 2006, Hispanic was the fastest-growing minority group. Asian was the second fastest-growing minority group, with a 3.2 percent population increase during the 2005-2006 period. The population of non-Hispanic whites who indicated no other race grew by 0.3 percent during the one-year period.It should be clear that we in the present majority have an unworkable business plan. While we think of children in terms of expense and hassle, other cultures see their future in progeny. Though the argument can be made that rising prosperity will temper fertility rates of the most fecund groups, it seems clear that laws alone cannot preserve a culture which fails to heed the basic biologic imperative: propagate life. My greatest regret as a parent is not being more of one - we stopped too soon. Perhaps having the ability to choose will doom us to the melancholy land of fulfilled wishes. I do not join critics who use this trend to condemn those who have made the choice to not have children - a particularly unkind group - but to note the all too obvious consequences, and speculate on their possible meaning. At the same time, how shall we raise those children we did make time for? A great experiment on a grand scale is providing an illuminating insight: In Shanghai — or Beijing, or Shenyang, or Hangzhou — children not in school are seen in the presence of one and usually more adult supervisors: parents, grandparents, aunts or uncles, people from the neighborhood. But in this one afternoon in Mumbai we came across many scenes of what can only be called roving bands of kids. They were playing cricket in dirt lots. They were throwing stones. They were playing tag. They were running around without watchful adults immediately in sight. [More]As the immigration debate rages today, it is fair, I believe, to grant fuller hearing to those who will actually populate the future - not just the present. Labels: culture, population
Send a flower to a friend or grandchild...
Look - it's silly, but good for a smile. [via Neatorama] Labels: fun Thursday, May 17, 2007
I normally don't do these...
(I'm afraid I'll turn into my brother-in-law who is our family's official spammaster.) But a loyal reader writes: Good Morning John and sends this:  I guess I'm getting old enough to wince before I guffaw any more. There but for the grace of God... It doesn't take an engineer to ponder how much longer infrastructure built for WD-45's will sustain modern equipment. Maybe some of our ethanol profits should go to upgrade stuff we've taken for granted.
The problem with courage...
Is that, like history, it often isn't obvious at the time. The courageous immigration deal announced today had a honeymoon of maybe 30-35 minutes before being roundly criticized by both sides. The Senate will wade into an emotional and wide-ranging debate on the issue next week that promises to test the unlikely coalition that produced the deal. Almost instantly, the plan brought vehement criticism from both sides of the immigration issue, including liberals who called it unfair and unworkable and conservatives who branded it an overly permissive "amnesty." [More] [More] The immense effort required by both Congress and the administration nonetheless should be applauded. This is one of the few examples of national leadership we have seen from Washington in years. I think much of the outcry will originate from politicians who are afraid of losing their one reliable election year issue. If there is an immigration plan in effect, somebody might ask why we can't have a fiscal policy too. As someone who does more than my share of pointing out flaws in our leadership, my hat's off to those who worked to get us even this far on this issue. Labels: immigration, politics
This explains the auto industry maybe...
The real point here is how important could that stamp imprint be anyway? I'll bet it says "Inspected by Number 45".
Deep down inside, I know you're bored...
Has the constant stream of news from Iraq and the thundering oratory of warning about the Mideast started to, you know, leave you cold? Maybe it's because you are thinking clearly. Western analysts are forever bleating about the strategic importance of the middle east. But despite its oil, this backward region is less relevant than ever, and it would be better for everyone if the rest of the world learned to ignore it [More of a great article]How long can a crisis continue before it becomes simply the way thing are? I suggest 4 years - the duration of high school, a presidential term, the timing of leap years, etc. At this point then, what most of us have been fussing about in the Mideast is likely the way things are and are going to be. Our tendency - aided by the media desperate to deliver advertiser eyeballs - to label every event catastrophic has been so amplified by ubiquitous communications that perhaps our brains are tuning out to save our sanity. And in our sane moments I think we would call some bluffs on crisis-mongers. It might beat current strategies. Labels: international, politics
Sound investment advice...
If you are like me, your biggest puzzle lately has been whether to invest in the new "forever" stamps. (Actually, I thought the name referred to the delivery time). Turns out the economics of such a strategy are suspect. Absolutely not. Since 1971, postal rates have increased more slowly than the actual inflation rate, as measured by the U.S. Consumer Price Index. So, despite the numerous rate hikes over the last 36 years, stamps have actually been getting cheaper. The 20-cent stamp from 1981, for instance, would be equivalent to 45 cents in today's dollars—which makes today's rate 10 percent cheaper than it was 26 years ago. Should this historical pattern hold, you'd be paying more for today's forever stamps than you would for any stamp in the future, no matter how high the rate goes. [More]There is a more compelling reason as well. Since I can barely write legibly now, what are the odds that I will be sending any letters in the future? For that matter, what if there are no letters at all? And then there is the male fear of commitment...
I could see this happening in corn...
A fallacious report of delays in production of the iPhone and Leopard operating system was enough to plunge Apple stock briefly and cost some people some serious electronic money.  Apple fell more than 4.47 points -- wiping just over 4 billion off the company's capitalization, according to Techcrunch -- in the space of six minutes after Ryan Block, a reporter for Engadget, posted a report that Apple's iPhone would be delayed by four months and its new Leopard operating system by three. [More]With so much of the trading in commodities - like stocks - controlled by algorithmic computer programs, selling short and then posting some credible, but shocking tidbit on an not-too-obscure blog/website could reap some real change. Not that it had ever crossed my mind, of course... The guys I would suspect first are our old friends in Russia. They seem to be big into computer attacks. Maybe the next Great Grain Robbery will be by remote control. Labels: technology, trade Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Oh, this is going to be good...
Responding, I believe, to the growing concerns by consumers and our own livestock sector that ethanol is forcing corn prices a tad too high, legislators who think they can now mandate economics, are devising ways to shift to the "cold fusion" of agriculture: cellulosic ethanol. "When I talk about energy and I talk about cellulose, you know, switch grass can be a commodity," Harkin said. "It may not be a commodity now, but in the next five to 10 years it could be a very big commodity ... Why are commodities just limited to what we've done in the last ... 50 years? Maybe there are new commodities out there we should be investing in."Meanwhile, corn growers have deployed a full-court press to deny the idea that corn prices affect food, and I don't think they will stand idly by as farm subsidies start flowing to switchgrass. Nor will ethanol producers. I don't think we know what high corn prices are yet. But a few more ethanol startups and a teensy production hiccup will show us. Labels: policy, production Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Strange and yet not unthinkable...
A brilliant look at some future possibilities we are building right now: Today, I can pick up about 1Gb of FLASH memory in a postage stamp sized card for that much money. fast-forward a decade and that'll be 100Gb. Two decades and we'll be up to 10Tb.The idea of the "lifelog" is already being presaged by e-mail - for many of us it is our log of communications, thoughts, and events done automatically and relatively easy to find stuff in. The idea of a permanent record of all we say and do is unnerving to say the least. That it would be searchable by authorities is chilling. That it is happening is undeniable. This provocative essay also led me to consider how the mundane decisions of our lives are the concrete building blocks of the future. Our choices of transportation, communication, entertainment, and so forth give economic life to the options that will be available in the future. While many will think agriculture will be shielded or left behind by such changes, the important note in this piece was how location matters so little anymore. The influx of dollars into agriculture vis biofuels will only speed this process. While this does not have to be alarming news - we can still choose and forego many changes. But we will have to respect the rights of others to choose differently. [via Grasping Reality] Labels: culture, future, technology
Hey - I'd vote for these guys!
Suddenly I'm a little excited about the impending (only 17 months to go) elections. Labels: politics Monday, May 14, 2007
Prosperity choices...
I have been speaking about "Prosperity For Dummies - managing success after a long layoff" since January at the Top Producer Seminar. Economist Bill Edwards at Iowa State has been entertaining similar thoughts. We came to different conclusions. His remarks are insightful to me because they seem ( with one exception) to be the same advice most ag economists have been giving my whole career. After acknowledging the financial reality of higher grain prices and pointing out farm equity positions are in the best shape in decades his primary advice: Pay down debt. Which leads to the question, are there any circumstances when extension advisers would suggest we take on debt? Boy, if not now, when? Let's fact it - ag economists are dogmatically against using borrowed capital. And many farmers agree, which is a good thing. These farmers, in my opinion will be less competitive in the rush to control land by rent or purchase, for one thing. And as I have been predicting for some time that explosion is just beginning. Interest rates are historically low, debt service income looks more solid than I have seen, and the rewards to ownership (not operating) are huge and growing. Moreover, every piece of land I have purchased in the last 20 years failed the "cash flow test" (whatever that means). Had I not ignored such stern advice to avoid debt, my farm would be much smaller and my equity drastically less. Risk aversion in hard times is one thing. Risk aversion in good times will leave you trailing the pack. I note the standard call to avoid cash rent leases - good luck with that! And as for his advice on the kitchen, I think he has it backwards. No other investment impacts every day more than that room. I would spend my first dollar there. It is not a luxury - auto-steer is a luxury. Consider investing to improve happiness, not just a balance sheet. [via Farmgate] Sunday, May 13, 2007
On the other hand...
I support strongly the emergence of an agrarian sector that sells not just products (beans, lettuce, eggs, beef, etc.) but process (free range, organic, local, biodynamic, etc.). It is a true market response to consumer choices propelled by entrepreneurship, passion and very little government support (which could be the reason it's thriving). But, here's the catch. I also am an enthusiastic proponent of industrial agriculture. These are farms like mine that grow products that meet every standard required, in environmentally responsible ways, and using every bit of technology I can get my mind around. These two sectors in agriculture really do not compete much head-to-head. Only our insistence on one vision for farming makes that seem the case. Still when I read articles about agrarian farming I lament the witless drivel that passes for informed comment about what I do for a living. Consider this paragraph from a paean to local agriculture: The American Farmland Trust estimates 1.2 million acres of cropland, pastureland, and rangeland are lost each year to development. Farms are increasingly being swallowed up by new houses, roads, and strip malls—86 percent of U.S. fruits and vegetables and 63 percent of dairy products currently come from areas in the path of urban sprawl. This loss of farmland combined with the shift during the past century toward industrialized agriculture has greatly extended the distance produce and meats travel. The average American meal today journeys more than 1,500 miles from where it’s grown or raised to where it’s bought—at a big cost. Green-house gases emitted during food transport contribute to climate change. Our produce is not as fresh as it would be if it were grown closer, which would improve its taste and, health experts say, possibly its nutritional value. And because our food is so heavily mass-produced and transported, the origins of outbreaks of E. coli, like those from last year’s much-reported batch of tainted spinach, cannot always be pinpointed in time to prevent human illness, sometimes even death. [More]To save make my responses more coherent, I will insert them into the original text. The American Farmland Trust estimates 1.2 million acres of cropland, pastureland, and rangeland are lost each year to development. [Wait - lost? Those acres have gone missing? Actually those acres simply have houses on them, and houses have to be somewhere. This familiar trope insinuates that the strong instinctive urge for permanent housing should be satisfied only for the affluent and that the need for food requires every acre. (See ethanol, etc.)] Farms are increasingly being swallowed up by new houses, roads, and strip malls—86 percent of U.S. fruits and vegetables and 63 percent of dairy products currently come from areas in the path of urban sprawl. [ Where exactly would you site a fruit/vegetable operation - New Mexico? Of course valuable crops like sod are grown on the outskirts of development. Transportation costs matter. Besides, if this land is developed those valuable crops will still be grown just outside urban areas. This statistic has not changed appreciably for decades, and should be recognized for what it is: an inversion of cause and effect. Farmland is valuable because it's close to people and and hence a candidate for high-value agriculture. People are the key - not land] This loss of farmland combined with the shift during the past century toward industrialized agriculture has greatly extended the distance produce and meats travel. The average American meal today journeys more than 1,500 miles from where it’s grown or raised to where it’s bought—at a big cost. [Oddly, the market will sort this out if you price in all costs.] Green-house gases emitted during food transport contribute to climate change. [Okey-doke, let's include this cost via a carbon tax] Our produce is not as fresh [Can you actually discern something 80% as fresh?] as it would be if it were grown closer, which would improve its taste and, health experts say, possibly [or possibly not] its nutritional value. And because our food is so heavily mass-produced and transported, the origins of outbreaks of E. coli, like those from last year’s much-reported batch of tainted spinach, cannot always be pinpointed in time to prevent human illness, sometimes even death. [But we did pinpoint it, thanks to industrial records/tracking. As for death, compare food contamination deaths now to truly agrarian times.]It is not necessary to have an internecine battle to address consumer wishes about food. It is also foolish to believe the agrarian model could provide a reliable food supply on the scale of industrial agriculture. On the coasts of America, around metropolitan areas and in scenic rural areas like New England or Lancaster County, these concerns can be addressed with the enormous amount of money available there. But transferring those values to my county or northwest Iowa, for example, yields no return for society and overrides Constitutional freedoms. We have room and need in America for industrial and agrarian farms. And best of all, consumers can make the choice. Friday, May 11, 2007
When you sell hammers...
Everything looks like a nail. I have been following the discussions about wealth and income inequality for some time. Recently I ran across this thoughtful piece via a link on Greg Mankiw's blog. So instead of lamenting the increased earnings gap caused by education, policymakers and the public should focus attention on how to raise the fraction of American youth who complete high school and then go on for a college education. Solutions are not cheap or easy. But it will be a disaster if the focus remains so much on the earnings inequality itself that Congress tries to interfere directly with this inequality rather than trying to raise the education levels of those who are now being left behind. [More]The authors make a convincing case for investing in education, since difference in education levels seems to be a powerful factor in future income. The question is begged by these types of conclusions if the sliver of college grads earning the astronomical salaries were excluded, would the trend be as sharp? My hunch is an awful lot of college grads (liberal arts, teaching, business, etc.) don't enjoy the enormous salary differentials making college less of a good deal than "average statistics" would suggest. But wait, the authors are in the education business, i.e. college professors. Doesn't a whacking income inequality between people who use their products and those who don't bode well for higher education biz? Higher education does not often examine its own efficiency or value. What I do know is more dollars buys fewer classroom hours, and those are with fewer full professors. Grades are inflated, graduate skills have dropped, and in general a college degree does not imply the level of education it used to, in my opinion. All these outcomes have one standard solution from colleges: we need more money. Without the growing income inequality, education consumers might be pressuring colleges for a better product. With college competing with health care for Biggest Pain in the Wallet, customers may need reminding why they should fork out so much to put Morgan through Yale. No problem. We'll just turn to our unbiased Economics/Marketing Department. The last thing an academic study would be likely to show is poor return for your dollar from academics, I would guess. Other questions pop up: Is there an upper limit for how many college grads we can absorb? How does more money to higher education help those doing jobs for which college education has no real value? What does the rise of education competitors like India mean for those higher salaries in the future? (IT engineers are having a sobering reality check thanks to the ease of outsourcing work, for example.) If income and wealth inequality is a problem - and I tend to think it poses some social and political hazards - offering college as THE answer strikes me as simplistic. From where I stand, the problem calls for a farm subsidy, methinks. It's all in your perspective.
I thought they were the bad guys...
There is a fascination in DC with "czars". With the Iraq war not proceeding exactly as planned, Pres. Bush is looking for a "war czar". The obvious question is "Isn't that your job?", but it seems he has had an upgrade to "commander guy". (Man, I couldn't even make up stuff this good). The list of czars is getting longer. # In 2001, with escalating concerns about possible attacks on our information technology infrastructure, Bush named a "cybersecurity czar." What if the administration appoints a business czar - would he/she be the "biz-czar"? Anyhoo, the tendency to appear like we're solving problems by handing it to a czar strikes be as overt belief in dictatorial power for stuff you really really want to get done. No wonder our government is doing so well with the old democracy method. Labels: politics
It's not getting better...
My whines about Windows Vista in my new Dell computer are being echoed by people with more knowledge and experience. Jim Coates in the Chicago Tribune is one of my favorite tech columnists and he is finding out the backward compatibility of Vista is a pain. When Microsoft execs made the rounds before Vista arrived, they were full of assurances that moving the software you currently own over to Vista would be a cakewalk. All this hassle is to prevent me violating DRM [Digital Rights Management] (copying music/videos). But despite Microsoft's assurances that it works fine, the real world travails don't go away. Meanwhile, as per the pattern, it seems MS didn't have the security problems completely nailed down when the product shipped, so we users are enjoying lengthy downloads of humongous updates. Anyone who was still living under the illusion that the arrival of Windows Vista would mean a lessening of security holes for Microsoft to patch would have had rude awakening this month. Microsoft announced no less than 19 newly discovered flaws in its software, of which 15 are classed as critical. [More] While businesses may be locked in by inertia, I think a few users (myself included) have reached our tipping point. Vista is a pain in the assembler, and MS has finally lost this frequent buyer. Labels: computer Thursday, May 10, 2007
Animated Bayeux Tapestry
Google "Bayeux Tapestry" for the whole story, because part of your past is intertwined with this story. Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Herod and the 200-mile commute...
The recent announcements about the alleged discovery of Herod's tomb triggered an "oh yeah" moment for me. Prof Netzer said he "assumed with certainty" that the discovery was the site of Herod's burial although he will have to wait for peer review before the issue is settled. Archaeological work like this fascinates me, as it weaves new threads through my pictures of life in Biblical times. It also prompted me to report on my experience with the Great Courses during my 210-mile weekly commute to South Bend to tape US Farm Report. My evaluation so far: Outstanding. These lectures have been a solid and reliable high point in my week, and an effective counterbalance to all the other stresses in my life. Imagine your very favorite college professor teaching a course you are actually interested in. Now give that professor performance-enhancing drugs. Taa-daa - this is the product I have enjoyed. I have done so far: All have exceeded my expectations and I have become pedantic bore on more topics than ever! The lectures are compelling and the delivery more polished that I have ever heard. C'mon - ask me about Emperor Justinian or textus receptus. Monday, May 07, 2007
Just could not let this one pass by...
Big science news: Artificial Snot Improves Performance of Electronic Noses. The researchers have coated the sensors used by odour-sensing "electronic noses” with a mix of polymers that mimics the action of the mucus in the natural nose. This greatly improves the performance of the electronic devices allowing them to pick out a more diverse range of smells.OK, you may only be young once, but you can spend your life being immature.
The most affordable gasoline...
American agriculture's persistent claim of the "most affordable food in the world" has caught the attention of other commodity purveyors. Like gasoline: There are probably three reasons that gasoline prices appear so high to us today. First, many don't fully appreciate the long run effect that inflation has on prices. Second, many don't appreciate how much our incomes have increased relative to prices. Finally, we still remember 1998 very well, the year in which we encountered the lowest gasoline prices since 1949. Gasoline in 1998 sold for $1.03 per gallon, the equivalent of $1.21 in today's currency. Adjusting for growth in per capita income yields a price of $1.35 per gallon in today's terms. Today's price is more than double that and people resent the increase over the last several years, in part, because they think that 1998 prices were normal. But they were not.Wow - I guess we owe a big "thank you" to the petroleum industry. Or we need to get real about claims like this. Interestingly, "affordability" is not due to actual food cost - which has exceeded inflation for like, forever. It's due to income increases. What else is "affordable"? Well, about anything that has increased in price less than disposable income. My guess is this particular spin campaign could be hijacked by all kinds of vendors. We need a new slogan. Or at least, a more accurate one. Sunday, May 06, 2007
Other than the the horses, I'm OK with it...
There are bloggers out there who are truly talented writers and photographers, and whose work is defining a new journalism. Thanks to a pointer from loyal readers Bob and Ann, I checked out thepioneerwoman.com. Like many blogs, this is a personal journal, more than a little gooey, and for the love of Mike - it's got POETRY!!!  Still the photos are excellent and of course, it's about cowboys, so by definition, it's like, totally awesome. It's hard to imagine a woman writing such rapturous prose about an engineer. Cowboys - I hate 'em. Labels: fun
How real is this thing?...
I've been reading about "Mexican Coke" for a few days now, and I'm going to start looking out for it. My guess is the logical sources would be retailers who serve the Latino community. Since smells, and hence tastes, are closely linked to memory, I'm wondering if (a) I can detect any difference from good ol 'Merican (HFCS) Coke and if so, (b) does it bring back any memories. Coca-Cola downplays the appeal of the cane sugar version, insisting that "there's not a perceivable taste difference between Mexican Coke and Coke bottled in the U.S.," Martin said. The dispute about the taste of cane sugar pop vs. HFCS has been overtaken by charges of health and obesity problems, but it is also the easiest to decide for yourself. Don't need no scientists for that. Labels: food Saturday, May 05, 2007
The future is optional...
While many producers are watching the CBOT buyout with mild interest and eyes glazed by so many zeroes, it may simply be just a sideshow in a larger push to find a play for enormous amounts of money. Right now, derivatives are the investment of choice, it seems. Derivatives are so called because they derive their value from an underlying asset, such as a stock, bond, interest rate or commodity. Their use has exploded over the past couple of decades. Philadelphia is one of six American exchanges that trade options (which give holders the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell a security). Futures, the other big exchange-traded derivative, are promises to buy or sell on a given date. [More]With computer algorithms driving stock trading, what's a broker to do with her free time? Trade somewhere else, I suppose, and here on the farm, we're the game people are betting on. The attraction, as outlined in the article above is manifold: Joshua Carter of Goldman Sachs sees “derivatisation” as one of the three main trends in the exchange business, along with consolidation and “electronification”. One attraction, he points out, is that derivatives are typically more liquid than their underlying assets. Also, their highly mechanical nature makes them well suited to algorithmic trading, which is growing. And transaction costs are lower than stocks for a given unit of exposure.All this could mean some very, very wealthy commodity brokers soon. But then, they could be the last of their breed, too. Open outcry will likely be kept on just for background footage for ag video - like gambrel barns and windmills. Hey - we use it at USFR.
What on Earth?...
Like all those folks who have been mesmerized by the Planet Earth series (especially those with new HDTV's), I was intrigued by this Japanese site reminding me all the things I did not know about my home planet. [via Presurfer] Friday, May 04, 2007
Pics of the Big Guy...
 Stunning photos of Jupiter from the New Horizons spacecraft. Since when did we start naming spacecraft like mutual funds?
Is it me or are we going deeper into the woods?...
The housing market was a dependable source of painless savings for so long, and I think at the microscopic level, many citizens built futures on the premise home prices would continue to escalate reliably. This plan is being reconsidered now. But while the general economy has moved ahead without the housing sector, the jury is still out on whether we have hit the bottom of the housing cycle. One noted expert thinks not. Robert Shiller is worried about your home's value, and that's not good. A finance and economics professor at Yale, Shiller proved he could see a crash coming with his book "Irrational Exuberance," which forecast the end of the 1990s stock bubble and hit bookstores in March 2000 - almost to the day the Nasdaq started to collapse.His prediction? Brace yourself: In fact, I'm inclined to think there's a good chance that the return on real estate will be negative, substantially negative, over the next 10 years because all booms reverse in the end. [More depressing reading] On that happy note, let's consider some implications. Hardest hit in the current doldrums were housing "flippers" - amateurs working on limited capital turning properties rapidly. Since this is a risky activity in boom markets, it snowballs when prices dip even slightly. This is why investment property could be clobbered. Then there are Boomers who decided their house would be their retirement plan a few years ago. Actually many of us would have been OK if we had cashed out in say, in 2005. But unless you're holding a condo in Manhattan, your retirement nest egg may not be what you had hoped. To be sure, if you have been in your house fro a considerable time, and the especially if the mortgage is paid, you still have a pile of equity - but maybe not the kajillions you hoped. But the truly scary scenario is at the bottom of the home buyer pyramid. Subprime mortgages were another real-estate gimmick that seemed feasible as the tide was coming in. As these loans head south, the defaults have crimped earnings at several financial companies. They will survive, and don't need my tears. But borrowers with less than perfect credit are now out of the market and also - more importantly, I think - out of the home-equity loan market. Notice how those ads are scarcer recently. Home equity loans fueled a significant portion of consumer spending growth, thus driving the economy as businesses held back on capital spending. What do all these developments suggest? First, if Shiller is right, we may not be close to seeing the effect of lower home prices on the economy as a whole. More and more borrowers will be at least frozen in place instead of ratcheting up the equity ladder. You may be stuck with actually paying off your mortgage. Labor will become slightly more fixed in place, as relocation costs for companies skyrocket and workers choose to stick it out in the old job. Retirees will recalculate their last day differently as well. The upper end seems to be bulletproof so far - largely untouched by the loss of equity and shrinking pool of buyers. But interestingly one big loser could be Uncle Sam. But there's a more alarming explanation for the surge in tax revenues. It could be that the orgy of speculation in recent years—in housing, stocks, investment instruments—has generated an unexpected gusher of the types of tax revenues derived from flipping assets and trading securities. And that suggests that with the housing boom over and the stock market moving sideways, tax-revenue growth could be slowing down, and soon. [More] Of course, the current fad in DC is not fiscal restraint, so it may not get much play unless deficits approach the the gold standard of $450B or so. Still, it might become a slightly hotter talking point. But what about farmland? Don't color me worried. And here is why - can you say "mandate"? The measure would establish an overall goal of reducing future gasoline use by as much as 45 percent below what it otherwise is expected to be in 2030. That would happen through a combination of more biofuels, such as ethanol, and production of more gas-electric hybrid vehicles and other fuel-saving measures. Land prices are firmly in the grips the need for carbohydrates to make fuel. This was an auction of 160 acres. The ground was flat, systematically tiled and nearly all tillable. Selling price: an eye-popping $6,731 an acre. A local farm family who were expanding their operation purchased the farm. {more detail from Mike Walsten's new farmland blog - subscription to PF required, but worth it] Now this example is Hoosiers, of course, so we have no idea what real free-spenders might be paying. We won't even miss 1031 buyers, IMHO. In fact, farmers could start our re-ownership of agriculture in this window of opportunity. Thursday, May 03, 2007
Maybe it's the up-tempo music from our i-Pods...
We're walking faster. Comparing the results with those compiled by US psychologist Professor Robert Levine in the 1990s, the study showed that people were, on average, now walking 10 per cent faster. Men are generally 25 per cent quicker on their feet than women. Well, duh! You try making time in heels! Not that I would know firsthand, of course. Labels: fun
Electronically disconnected...
Despite forecasts of "dispersed" lifestyles - working from home, teleconferencing, virtual meetings - people still seem to want to be with each other when doing business. Especially Big Business. But more than that, people are evolved to deal with each other in person. Anyone who's ever had an email badly received knows that stripping the non-verbal cues off words can dramatically change how they're taken. (Americans working for British firms become particularly aware of this, because the British style is much more curt, which comes across as hostile or censorious to Americans used to appending emoticons, or their verbal equivalent, to everything.) One of the promises for rural America was technology would make it a place where more than farming could be done for a living. Maybe we're asking too much or worse yet, wishing for the wrong thing. Meanwhile, my observation is rural areas are being roughly divided into growth and non-growth categories. Either they possess a magnet metropolitan area - usually with higher education, major medical services, and government offices - or they are gasping for the oxygen being sucked up by such urban areas. I'm not sure we'll reverse this trend and re-distribute our rural population more evenly. It could be better for the type of farming we do now to have large areas essentially lightly populated, and more or less left to agriculture. But even farmers need face time with colleagues. We may not admit it, but we do. The trick then becomes devising occasions or events that regularly provide such opportunities and then admitting to ourselves we can't really do justice to our profession over the phone, Or via a blog. Labels: culture, rural life
Chinese adultery...
The tainted feed problem is demonstrating to producers everywhere that a new level of transparency is becoming standard operating procedure around the globe. There are few places that your actions are not leaving a record, and we are becoming CSI experts in tracking stuff back to its original sin. One of the consequences of the protein-testing swindle perpetrated by Chinese feed ingredient con men could be an acceleration of the "eating local" fad. And in the process, many finicky eaters are getting an education. This is a legitimate point: Those who defend the pleasures and economies of modern life against the romanticizers of a zero-impact, local eating, fresh fruits and veggies past often overemphasize the soul-numbing drudgery of rural life. Picking berries and turning them into jam while chatting with a friend has been one of womankind's great pleasures for centuries. But just because it isn't awful doesn't mean that it isn't time-consuming labor. And in modern times, laying a hand on local berries in the first place can be pricey, U-Pick or not. [More] I think the eating local concept is one of the best food and agricultural developments to arise in recent years. It will educate distant consumers and apply immense pressure to industrial food processors to source raw materials more carefully, and handle them even more scrupulously. I will be blogging more about the ramifications of this trend when planting slows. (70% done with corn). Thanks for your patience. And for reading. US Farm Report host John Phipps surfs the Web so you don't have to...
About Me
Jan and I farm 1700 acres near Chrisman, IL. I have also written humor and commentary for Farm Journal and Top Producer for 13 years. Please visit my website (www.johnwphipps.com) to learn about my speaking services for your group's next meeting. ARCHIVES
April 2006 /
May 2006 /
June 2006 /
July 2006 /
August 2006 /
September 2006 /
October 2006 /
November 2006 /
December 2006 /
January 2007 /
February 2007 /
March 2007 /
April 2007 /
May 2007 /
June 2007 /
July 2007 /
August 2007 /
September 2007 /
October 2007 /
MORE FROM JOHN
On the Coffee Table |
Farm Journal • Top Producer • Beef Today • Dairy Today • AgDay U.S. Farm Report • Pro Farmer • Pro Farmer Members AgWeb Professional - Subscription Information • Add AgWeb.com to your Favorites FAQ • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Advertise on AgWeb.com Quotes by eSignal • Quotes delayed at least 10 min © Copyright 2006 AgWeb.com a division of Farm Journal, Inc. |
| Home | Agriculture News | Weather | Money & Markets | Ag Discussions | Site Map | |
