|
| Many times(not always) new tech doesn't really help the farmer be more profitable but forces them to adopt a new expensive technology to stay completive while making less profits. The patent holder or rent seeker gains the most. Or corporation that can lobby to force everyone to adopt there new tech.
This is maybe more evident in row crop farming or at least the examples are easier for me to point out.
Look at traited seed, computers, GPS technolgy etc.
Traited seed better but way expensive
GPS tech sure its better but it takes less skill and effort so you can farm more acres because its less fatiguing especially for older farms and new employees can be trained quicker. Driving a tractor can sometimes be easy like chisel plowing but laying out a field with a 10 bottom plow planting straight rows then coming back to cultivate takes practice. This doesn't help land rent or prices stay affordable or available.
Computers are use full however look how much more expensive they make everything and even though the cost of computers themselves has dropped a lot jamming them into everything them makes servicing difficult and farmers are often forced to call the dealer. What could be a simple breakdown is now a headache. Also think of the unnecessary emissions controls added to engines that most would not exist without computers. The cost is signficant. Are engines really that much better in 2024 then they were in 1994? Maybe but how much of that came from better computing? Is it worth it? | |
|
Does anyone believe Gene editing...
