Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good thoughts on these pages. Even suburbia is realizing that the system is broken. Lordy Lordy has a handle on it. The folks who built my house in 1885 worked hard and made a living off this 107 acres. If I had to I could live the way they did.
Of course we need iron, salt, fabrics other than wool and chocolate ;-). Eyeglasses are nice, but I know how eyeglasses were made in colonial times. After the adjustment some of us will be fine. I wonder how many in today's society will have useful skills other than manual labor.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,989,150 times
Reputation: 40635
[quote=20yrsinBranson;32561520]Most of them are not willing to adjust their standard of living. You cannot have new cars, boats, vacations, cable television, high speed internet, etc., if you want to live a sustainable lifestyle. Most people are not willing to sacrifice these expenditures under the auspices of "quality of life". If that is what you need to have a good quality of life, then you do not truly want to live this way.
There is surviving, and living. They are not one in the same.
I found that the most I can plant, tend to and harvest is about 2 acres without having a bunch of machines to do most of the work. I also found that lots of the plants tended to be corn and such that are easier to harvest. if anyone can give good suggestions to plant more and not use a whole lot of machinery, I could sure as heck use some good ideas.
I found that the most I can plant, tend to and harvest is about 2 acres without having a bunch of machines to do most of the work. I also found that lots of the plants tended to be corn and such that are easier to harvest. if anyone can give good suggestions to plant more and not use a whole lot of machinery, I could sure as heck use some good ideas.
I found that the biggest waste of time was watering plants. I solved that by setting up drip irrigation. I also found that other time wasters were: weeds - solved by mulching around plants, cold weather snaps where I had to cover plants - solved by building raised beds out of abundant rock here and stabilizing them with concrete (the sides). I then put rebar to stick out of the beds and ran pvc pipes in arches over the beds. In winter, the pvc pipes are covered with nylon, in summer with screen.
In essence, what I found was that the initial setup took most of the money and cost. However, once you are done with that, you are done. As for fruits, here persimmons grow wild and that's all the fruit I need. Also, America is the original home of the grape, just choose the type of grape that grows best in your area and it does not take much for it to grow, after all, wild grapes are everywhere. Other source of "food" are bees - properly set up, beekeeping is not time consuming at all, you can spend a few hours on it every few weekends. So on and so on...
At the peak optimum, I can see a farmer [with no petroleum or synthetics] providing 90% of the food needs for maybe 10 families. That is about it.............
I suspect that 90% for the food for 10 families is wildly optimistic.
If I owned enough pasture, I might be able to provide 10 families with 90% of their beef, but nothing else. Or 90% of their apples, but nothing else.
No scratch that. I spent 30 years trying to grow apples organically and I gave up. My apples are now sprayed, otherwise I don't get any. So, no apples at all without synthetic input.
Here is the biggest issue about smallholders feeding the world: I am happy to do all that hard work to provide superior food for my own family. However, I refuse to work 12 hours a day to feed 10 ungrateful families in the big city who don't even know where their food comes from and who don't want to pay for my time and expenses.
I am not even willing to do all that work for strangers who are willing to pay. I can produce a very nice assortment of food for my own family. To produce enough food to make it worth my time and effort to drive into the farmer's market to sell, pay for a booth, sit there all day, and maybe get premium prices and maybe not, it would involve me investing an enormous amount more time and more expense.
No thank you. I don't have the time or the energy to do it.
I suspect that 90% for the food for 10 families is wildly optimistic.
If I owned enough pasture, I might be able to provide 10 families with 90% of their beef, but nothing else. Or 90% of their apples, but nothing else.
No scratch that. I spent 30 years trying to grow apples organically and I gave up. My apples are now sprayed, otherwise I don't get any. So, no apples at all without synthetic input.
Here is the biggest issue about smallholders feeding the world: I am happy to do all that hard work to provide superior food for my own family. However, I refuse to work 12 hours a day to feed 10 ungrateful families in the big city who don't even know where their food comes from and who don't want to pay for my time and expenses.
I am not even willing to do all that work for strangers who are willing to pay. I can produce a very nice assortment of food for my own family. To produce enough food to make it worth my time and effort to drive into the farmer's market to sell, pay for a booth, sit there all day, and maybe get premium prices and maybe not, it would involve me investing an enormous amount more time and more expense.
No thank you. I don't have the time or the energy to do it.
You don't have to. My initial post was motivated by the terrible waste of land around the country. People have all these nice lots, just the right size, to grow a garden or a small set of fruit trees etc. Even supplementing your grocery list from things you grow is better than nothing. Instead the dirt goes fallow (best case) or gets turned into an unproductive, water guzzling, chemically infested "back yard". Maintaining the latter also takes work, time, money, energy and it produces absolutely nothing. In fact, it is detrimental to the environment.
As for growing apples - here persimmons grow wild and I put in a bunch of trees on my property. They virtually need nothing but picking the fruits and provide vitamins in the same doses as your apples would. Hence, the best approach would be to grow what grows naturally in the area, IF YOU CAN - that would be the path of least resistance with the highest level of harmony with your surroundings. For example, grapes grow almost anywhere in this country. Find a type that suits your environment and go to town
As for the families in town - well, they are in town, you can grow stuff in your apartment windows but in general it is easier for you to grow if you have a backyard (even in the city and people do it too). The gratitude is shown with their wallets when they pay you for your overflow of organic produce you could not consume, can or barter.
Most of them are not willing to adjust their standard of living. You cannot have new cars, boats, vacations, cable television, high speed internet, etc., if you want to live a sustainable lifestyle. Most people are not willing to sacrifice these expenditures under the auspices of "quality of life". If that is what you need to have a good quality of life, then you do not truly want to live this way.
Quote:
There is surviving, and living. They are not one in the same.
It depends on your mindset. I "live" quite well without wasting money on things like going to the movies, or having cable television set. I have no interest in either and so I really don't care. As far as vacations, well, to me it is much more enjoyable to have some chickens or rabbits than it is to spend $1,000 for the privilege of sitting on a beach somewhere, sleeping in an uncomfortable bed and eating food that has been poorly prepared by someone else.
There is nothing that I feel is lacking in my frugal life. Because I am frugal in so many areas, it gives me the opportunity to spend the money I save on truly important things like the quality of food that I do buy, and making improvements on my homestead. It's all about priorities. If you are someone who feels "deprived" because you cannot spend $300 going to a professional sports game, then probably, the lifestyle is not for you.
Boy, you sound bitter - it is not healthy do carry that stuff all bottled up!
Anyways, I will take someone who maintains the health of the soil through organic methods any time over someone who douses it in all sorts of chemicals and then regurgitates the mantra that it is all safe and that science knows all. In almost all instances we find the truth decades later. I mean, after all, aren't the same corporations who sold us s*it now making "natural" versions of the same s*it? And charging more for it? What happened to the stuff they sold before? Isn't that a quiet admission that they were selling s*it?
You mentioned in the thread that you prefer to pursue your professional interests and make money and live an easier life instead of slaving on the land. Curious- do you have any scientific training? If so, how can you write the stuff above? Makes me seriously wonder about the quality of our education system . Although I think even someone with primary school education would understand the different between using composted manure to enrich the soil and dousing the soil in all sorts of chemicals which devoid it of any life.
I don't care if you choose the life of debt and indentured servitude to banks and employers. I personally could't sleep knowing that I have debt and that someone like a disgusting bank is making money on me like I am some sort of a mule to exploit. At least slaves did not have a choice, they were made to lose their freedom. But when someone voluntarily gives it up... well, it is just sad.
I also can't sleep knowing that someone is poisoning me knowing full well that what they are feeding me is s*it but because they bought off enough senators and congressmen and because they employ immoral scientists, they can pass laws that make all the stuff healthy for you to eat. Or should I use their terminology and say "not unhealthy" . See I can speak "lawyer speak" too! Too bad it's all we reduced ourselves to.
Anyways, thanks for your point of view. I now understand why most people don't do it. All I can say is I am sad for humanity.
You simply don't get it, or more precisely, refuse to take off your romaticizing goggles.
Historically, the kind of subsistence agricultural economy you envision has never satisfied most people. That's why thousands of years ago, people started separating themselves into those who could grow crops well, those who could deal with animals well, those who could make stone tools well, those who could build mud houses well, etc. Were the Sumerians, Egyptians, Babylonians, Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, etc all wrong? All of these ancient civilizations were based upon the idea of specialization, market agriculture, and cities.
Do you know what the last period when western European culture was based on subsistence agriculture was called? The Dark Ages.
Name one country in the world today that has a subsistence agricultural economy that is NOT a Third World country.
I suspect that 90% for the food for 10 families is wildly optimistic.
If I owned enough pasture, I might be able to provide 10 families with 90% of their beef, but nothing else. Or 90% of their apples, but nothing else.
No scratch that. I spent 30 years trying to grow apples organically and I gave up. My apples are now sprayed, otherwise I don't get any. So, no apples at all without synthetic input.
Here is the biggest issue about smallholders feeding the world: I am happy to do all that hard work to provide superior food for my own family. However, I refuse to work 12 hours a day to feed 10 ungrateful families in the big city who don't even know where their food comes from and who don't want to pay for my time and expenses.
I am not even willing to do all that work for strangers who are willing to pay. I can produce a very nice assortment of food for my own family. To produce enough food to make it worth my time and effort to drive into the farmer's market to sell, pay for a booth, sit there all day, and maybe get premium prices and maybe not, it would involve me investing an enormous amount more time and more expense.
No thank you. I don't have the time or the energy to do it.
Exactly. You've pretty well summed up why small-scale organic agriculture isn't feasible as an economic model.
Too many who have posted on this thread have definitely over-estimated yields while under-estimated the acreage and effort required while at the same time over-estimated what they can get for their crops/meat. What may work for a limited number of people who are willing to live a particular life-style deprived of many if not most of the amenities of the modern world is simply not going to work for an entire country or even for many people in that country.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
or someone's rat in a chemical experiment.
- it is not healthy do carry that stuff all bottled up!
