I hate the basically deny the premise of the article, but it failed to convince me that land is super important. The reason we no longer consider land to be a factor in production is because it...
I hate the basically deny the premise of the article, but it failed to convince me that land is super important. The reason we no longer consider land to be a factor in production is because it simply isn't important in the current days. We don't need more land for productive growth, most of that occurs in office buildings and (automated) factories which are very space efficient. Land will only matter if (and very possibly) we pollute enough land that we lack enough to grow food. But we're still pretty far from that.
I think the article is saying that land is important -- specifically, good farming land that is being destroyed for unproductive suburban development. Is that something you disagree with?
I think the article is saying that land is important -- specifically, good farming land that is being destroyed for unproductive suburban development. Is that something you disagree with?
I interpreted the discussion of dying cities in fertile land (Buffalo, Rochester, etc) as evidence that we had already destroyed farming land for suburban development - but now we see that...
I interpreted the discussion of dying cities in fertile land (Buffalo, Rochester, etc) as evidence that we had already destroyed farming land for suburban development - but now we see that urbanism is a better way forward and we should stop the suburban sprawl.
This article examines the ways in which modern economic strategies and policies, including the green new deal, make poor decisions when it comes to agricultural policies. Charles Marohn of Strong...
This article examines the ways in which modern economic strategies and policies, including the green new deal, make poor decisions when it comes to agricultural policies. Charles Marohn of Strong Towns is quoted in one section; I highly recommend looking into the Strong Towns movement if you're interested in local-focused ideas on urban development and land use.
I hate the basically deny the premise of the article, but it failed to convince me that land is super important. The reason we no longer consider land to be a factor in production is because it simply isn't important in the current days. We don't need more land for productive growth, most of that occurs in office buildings and (automated) factories which are very space efficient. Land will only matter if (and very possibly) we pollute enough land that we lack enough to grow food. But we're still pretty far from that.
I think the article is saying that land is important -- specifically, good farming land that is being destroyed for unproductive suburban development. Is that something you disagree with?
I interpreted the discussion of dying cities in fertile land (Buffalo, Rochester, etc) as evidence that we had already destroyed farming land for suburban development - but now we see that urbanism is a better way forward and we should stop the suburban sprawl.
This article examines the ways in which modern economic strategies and policies, including the green new deal, make poor decisions when it comes to agricultural policies. Charles Marohn of Strong Towns is quoted in one section; I highly recommend looking into the Strong Towns movement if you're interested in local-focused ideas on urban development and land use.