Blogging on bureaucracy, organizations, USDA, agriculture programs, American history, the food movement, and other interests. Often contrarian, usually optimistic, sometimes didactic, occasionally funny, rarely wrong, always a nitpicker.
Thursday, March 21, 2019
Trump and the Administrative Procedure Act
I've posted before about the Administrative Procedure Act and the Trump administration, most recently here. Yesterday's article in the Post provides an overview of the extent of their problems, although still not pointing to the role of Judge Rao (she's been confirmed) in failing to do things in the right way.
Wednesday, March 20, 2019
Modernity Amazes Me: HD Delivery
I suspect that occasional posts on this blog show that I'm sometimes amazed by how things work today.
Another such episode today:
Yesterday I bought $300+ worth of 2 x 12 boards to replace the old ones forming the walls of my raised beds in the garden. This morning they were delivered:
Another such episode today:
Yesterday I bought $300+ worth of 2 x 12 boards to replace the old ones forming the walls of my raised beds in the garden. This morning they were delivered:
- got a phone call from the delivery telling me she was on her way
- drove to the garden plots to meet here.
- the delivery vehicle was a tractor with a flat bed trailer and a fork lift (truck?) on the back end.
- I told her where to drop the boards, she found a parking place, unstrapped the pallet with the wood, started the fork lift and moved the boards off the trailer to the spot.
- took a picture of the boards, got in the truck and drove off.
The whole process took about 45 minutes and was accomplished by one person. She wasn't a Home Depot employee, and the truck wasn't an HD vehicle, it was a Penske rental.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
College Side Entrances and Carl Van Doren
Somehow the current scandal on the "side entrances" for college admission through fake athletic credentials or fake SAT tests reminds me of Charles Van Doren.
Why? Because some of the reactions to both see (saw) the episodes as undermining the prestige and validity of the elites of society. Van Doren, for those who weren't born in the 50's, was a contestant on a televised quiz show which was a big hit. This was back in the day where, if you were lucky, you could choose among three TV networks, but more likely were limited to one or two. Van Doren was part of the educational elite, a young professor who was the son and nephew of prominent academics. Finding out that someone with such a background who seemed a model had stooped to cheating was a shock.
Van Doren and Sputnik are linked in my mind as creating and epitomizing discontent with US society of the late 50's, a discontent which both JFK and Nixon tried to ride.
Why? Because some of the reactions to both see (saw) the episodes as undermining the prestige and validity of the elites of society. Van Doren, for those who weren't born in the 50's, was a contestant on a televised quiz show which was a big hit. This was back in the day where, if you were lucky, you could choose among three TV networks, but more likely were limited to one or two. Van Doren was part of the educational elite, a young professor who was the son and nephew of prominent academics. Finding out that someone with such a background who seemed a model had stooped to cheating was a shock.
Van Doren and Sputnik are linked in my mind as creating and epitomizing discontent with US society of the late 50's, a discontent which both JFK and Nixon tried to ride.
Monday, March 18, 2019
How Big Is Denmark?
This bit quoted in Marginal Revolution struck me funny, regarding the need for subtitles in Danish movies to be played in movie theaters in Denmark?
A check of wikipedia shows Denmark to have 5.8 million inhabitants, about size of Wisconsin, but Wisconsin is about 6 times bigger. Where Wisconsin has lakes, Denmark has islands, 443 of them, some 74 of which are inhabited. That likely explains some of divergences in the Danish language.
Pedersen blames the necessity for subtitles on the evolution of the use of Danish in movies. Whereas in the past, actors were focused on articulating themselves in a way understandable for everyone, their main emphasis has now shifted to being as authentic as possible. Hence, many actors have chosen not to imitate more common dialects and have stuck to local versions of Danish. “It’s a small country, but there are big differences between the Danish dialects,” Pedersen explained.
A check of wikipedia shows Denmark to have 5.8 million inhabitants, about size of Wisconsin, but Wisconsin is about 6 times bigger. Where Wisconsin has lakes, Denmark has islands, 443 of them, some 74 of which are inhabited. That likely explains some of divergences in the Danish language.
Sunday, March 17, 2019
The Market in Farmer's Markets
The market in farmer's markets is not good, according to this NPR story. Too many markets chasing too few buyers. Another case where the free market in agriculture is overly productive.
Saturday, March 16, 2019
Kids Are (More) Less Mature These Days
Was reading a Slate article by a woman who thought she could pass on what she learned as a teenager navigating romances to her daughter. Turns out, according to the woman, her daughter needed no teaching; she found the waters very different given social media but handled them just fine.
Then there's this NYTimes piece entitled Children Are Grown, But Parenting Doesn't Stop.
I like to bridge opposites, so I suggest that in different times/societies people develop different faculties at different rates. Perhaps today's society provides more models of how to develop emotionally for people to learn from while simultaneously making it more complicated to maneuver through society. Compared to my youth individual development is more emphasized and more important, while discussion of social forces is more restricted to race and gender.
Then there's this NYTimes piece entitled Children Are Grown, But Parenting Doesn't Stop.
I like to bridge opposites, so I suggest that in different times/societies people develop different faculties at different rates. Perhaps today's society provides more models of how to develop emotionally for people to learn from while simultaneously making it more complicated to maneuver through society. Compared to my youth individual development is more emphasized and more important, while discussion of social forces is more restricted to race and gender.
Friday, March 15, 2019
Beto and the Bulletin Board
Philip Bump in the Post has an article describing Beto O'Rourke's background as a "hacker".
It brings back memories, including when Jeff Kerby started running a BBS for ASCS, and the periodic upgrades of my modem--back then progress was real and tangible.
It brings back memories, including when Jeff Kerby started running a BBS for ASCS, and the periodic upgrades of my modem--back then progress was real and tangible.
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Mom Loved Her Hens, Or the Fox in the Henhouse
But I didn't. Chickens can be vicious, particularly when you're trying to scoot eggs out from under a hen. They use their beaks to grab the skin on the back of your hand, and then they twist it, hard. Mean #%$^%^%
To confirm it, see this BBC report (via Marginal Revolution) on how the fox in the henhouse met his demise.
To confirm it, see this BBC report (via Marginal Revolution) on how the fox in the henhouse met his demise.
Monday, March 11, 2019
Dairy Supply Management for US?
Tamar Haspel, a food writer I follow on twitter, praised this article in Civil Eats about dairy supply management. The article describes rising grass roots interest in supply management among Wisconsin dairy farmers and some other areas. The Farm Bureau opposes it, of course.
Canada has used supply management for dairy, poultry and eggs since at least 1972 according to this wikipedia article. (I write "at least" because supply management was a feature of depression-era ag policies but I'm not sure Canada used it for dairy.)
Essentially supply management means assigning production quotas to farms, with penalties for over-production. The US used to have supply management in place for wheat, cotton, rice, peanuts, and tobacco, rules which dated back to the 1930's. Over time they've all been dismantled. Judging by the impace of the change on tobacco farmers, the effect of supply management was to slow the decline of farm units. In other words, it was harder to get bigger and easier to stay small, but the trends were the same. The advance of technology and the power of markets still work, just slower.
Slow is what, IMO, the proponents want. If you're a farmer in your 50's, you'd like to keep going until you can retire. Supply management might make that possible. But if you're a young go-getter in your 30's looking to expand and adopt new technologies, you don't like the concept. Politically there's always been more old farmers than young farmers.
Canada has used supply management for dairy, poultry and eggs since at least 1972 according to this wikipedia article. (I write "at least" because supply management was a feature of depression-era ag policies but I'm not sure Canada used it for dairy.)
Essentially supply management means assigning production quotas to farms, with penalties for over-production. The US used to have supply management in place for wheat, cotton, rice, peanuts, and tobacco, rules which dated back to the 1930's. Over time they've all been dismantled. Judging by the impace of the change on tobacco farmers, the effect of supply management was to slow the decline of farm units. In other words, it was harder to get bigger and easier to stay small, but the trends were the same. The advance of technology and the power of markets still work, just slower.
Slow is what, IMO, the proponents want. If you're a farmer in your 50's, you'd like to keep going until you can retire. Supply management might make that possible. But if you're a young go-getter in your 30's looking to expand and adopt new technologies, you don't like the concept. Politically there's always been more old farmers than young farmers.
Sunday, March 10, 2019
The Cost of Glasses
I've worn glasses since second or third grade, I think. After I got my first pair I remember the revelation it was to see leaves and twigs on trees rather than a green blur.
Now glasses are a technological marvel so obviously they are and should be relatively costly. I think my last pair, with all the coatings and stuff were three or four hundred dollars. But it's my eyesight, so I paid.
So I'm flabbergasted by this Vox piece drawing from an LATimes article.
Now glasses are a technological marvel so obviously they are and should be relatively costly. I think my last pair, with all the coatings and stuff were three or four hundred dollars. But it's my eyesight, so I paid.
So I'm flabbergasted by this Vox piece drawing from an LATimes article.
"This week, the Los Angeles Times spoke with two former executives of LensCrafters: Charles Dahan and E. Dean Butler, who founded LensCrafters in 1983. Both admitted that today, glasses are marked up nearly 1,000 percent.They attribute the high prices to having one big company which controls the industry.
“You can get amazingly good frames, with a Warby Parker level of quality, for $4 to $8,” said Butler. “For $15, you can get designer-quality frames, like what you’d get from Prada.”
Friday, March 08, 2019
Pork in DOD? Say It Ain't So
I think this story about how Congress highly regards certain construction projects in DOD bears out my warning to Trump back in February.
Thursday, March 07, 2019
The Virtue of Lynch Mobs
Yes, the title is bait.
I'm reading Richard Wrangham's The Goodness Paradox?, about 3/4 of the way through. I like it and the argument he makes, having read the recent book on the experiment in Russia of rearing silver foxes selected for non-aggression, which seems to support a "domestication" theory. After 40 generations the foxes were much like dogs, both physically (floppy ears, changes in skull shape, etc) and in behavior.
So in the chapter I just finished Wrangham's discussing how humans might have developed a moral sense (as part of their self-domestication). His basic theory is: lynch mobs, triggered by observations of chimpanzees. The idea is, if and when an alpha male gets too alpha, the subordinate males discover by forming a coalition they can take him out. From that we can evolve to coalitions which enforce social norms, and innate behavior which makes us hyper conscious of norms and therefore very moral.
That's a quick and dirty summary; no doubt one Wrangham would shudder at.
It's an interesting subject, and he's a careful writer. I want to see if he explains why we still generate alpha males like our current president.
[I should note, Wrangham doesn't call them "lynch mobs", but his description would match a description of a generic lynch mob--a bunch of males converging to execute justice on someone who is perceived to have violated a norm. He has some descriptions from anthropology of societies/tribes where there are strong norms covering such actions.]
I'm reading Richard Wrangham's The Goodness Paradox?, about 3/4 of the way through. I like it and the argument he makes, having read the recent book on the experiment in Russia of rearing silver foxes selected for non-aggression, which seems to support a "domestication" theory. After 40 generations the foxes were much like dogs, both physically (floppy ears, changes in skull shape, etc) and in behavior.
So in the chapter I just finished Wrangham's discussing how humans might have developed a moral sense (as part of their self-domestication). His basic theory is: lynch mobs, triggered by observations of chimpanzees. The idea is, if and when an alpha male gets too alpha, the subordinate males discover by forming a coalition they can take him out. From that we can evolve to coalitions which enforce social norms, and innate behavior which makes us hyper conscious of norms and therefore very moral.
That's a quick and dirty summary; no doubt one Wrangham would shudder at.
It's an interesting subject, and he's a careful writer. I want to see if he explains why we still generate alpha males like our current president.
[I should note, Wrangham doesn't call them "lynch mobs", but his description would match a description of a generic lynch mob--a bunch of males converging to execute justice on someone who is perceived to have violated a norm. He has some descriptions from anthropology of societies/tribes where there are strong norms covering such actions.]
Wednesday, March 06, 2019
Why Is Uber Like Farming?
Megan McArdle had an op-ed this morning arguing that Uber and Lyft were losing money because they weren't charging enough for rides.
In a way she was similar to a farmer, someone who has land and equipment available and the decision is whether to use it to the fullest or not. She, like the farmer, did, because that's what the market provides incentives for. When you look at what the farmer or driver is earning with the extra work, it may be very little, but as long as it covers the extra expenses incurred, if there's positive cash flow, the farmer or driver will likely work the hours.
A side issue: I think cars are more reliable these days and last longer. And in some cases, like mine, there's a mismatch. All of my cars have become obsolete before they really became uneconomical to drive. Repair bills were creeping up, partly because of age issues, not so much wear issues. To the extent that's true for many people, Uber and Lyft will enable fuller usage of assets. At least until the advent of self-driving cars which may change the paradigm again.
Boosters of the ride-share revolution like to point out that most of the nation’s cars spend most of their time parked; there ought to be money in liberating all that unused capital. True enough — except that someone has to drive the car, including the time spent circling as they wait for rides.The other day I noticed someone tweeting, I think, defending the usefulness of Uber. The woman was divorced, supporting kids and with an odd work schedule (might have been an adjunct academic, I forget). The point is that not only did she already have a vehicle, she had free time but at odd hours, odd enough she couldn't work a regular job, but she could drive for Uber and make money.
In 2014, journalist Timothy B. Lee spent a week driving for Lyft. He drove for 50 hours but spent only 14 of those hours actually ferrying passengers. All that circling wears out the car and burns both gas and the driver’s valuable time.
In a way she was similar to a farmer, someone who has land and equipment available and the decision is whether to use it to the fullest or not. She, like the farmer, did, because that's what the market provides incentives for. When you look at what the farmer or driver is earning with the extra work, it may be very little, but as long as it covers the extra expenses incurred, if there's positive cash flow, the farmer or driver will likely work the hours.
A side issue: I think cars are more reliable these days and last longer. And in some cases, like mine, there's a mismatch. All of my cars have become obsolete before they really became uneconomical to drive. Repair bills were creeping up, partly because of age issues, not so much wear issues. To the extent that's true for many people, Uber and Lyft will enable fuller usage of assets. At least until the advent of self-driving cars which may change the paradigm again.
Tuesday, March 05, 2019
No Bloomberg
I'm glad Mike Bloomberg isn't running. He'd be a good choice for a cabinet position assuming we can beat President Trump in 2020. Now if some of the other "B" boys (Beto, Biden, Brown, Bennet) stay out, the more centralist lane will be less crowded.
Monday, March 04, 2019
Hickenlooper, Klobuchar, Bennet, Brown
Two have announced their candidacies; two have not. Based on what I know now I could easily support any of the four The other candidates need to convince me not only that they''ll win but also they can help candidates for the Senate and House.
What I want is pragmatism in achieving liberal goals.
What I want is pragmatism in achieving liberal goals.
Sunday, March 03, 2019
FSA Reorganization
I found two new notices from FSA interesting:
One was a reorganization into Safety Net and Program Delivery Divisions. If I understand it correctly it splits program policy and automation into separate organizations. The question of the best organization has been an issue ever since the original System/36 automation of county offices in the mid 1980's. At different times and in different areas we've had policy and automation united in one person, or the responsibility in one section but with different people specializing in each, or in separate sections within the division.
When Jerry Sitter was division director in the mid 80's he split out a branch to handle automation under Mike McCann, with the policy in other branches. In a way this followed the personnel--the policy types were mostly established DC specialists, people who'd come in from the field before the System 36 arrived. The automation types were the early "SCOAPers", mostly program assistaants brought in under 2-year temporary appointments (which turned into permanent slots as time passed). It also, IMHO, reflected an attitude among management that automation was a subject they didn't really understand or feel comfortable with, so it was best housed in its own shop. There was a similar setup in the commodity loan area.
I always had my reservation with that setup--my argument was that a program specialist needed to know the whole span of operations. Just as in the pre-automation days we'd work with MSD to get forms designed and printed, procedures written, cleared and distributed, regulations written and published, automation was just another area to learn and manage. Looking back, I was reflecting my own belief in my abilities to do the whole scope of activities, and I was probably unrealistic. But I still think there's a kernel of truth there--sometimes policy issues and automation issues become one and the same.
Which leads me to the second notice: on a workaround to handle multi-county producers, which seems to me to be an example. Here the history of ASCS/FSA going back to New Deal days has been to work with producers on a county by county basis, unlike FmHA which tried to consider all of a producer's assets and liabilities when making a loan. FSA has gradually been forced to move away from a county basis with need to enforce payment limitation. My point is that a policy decision to apply rules on a producer basis, as with loans, and to allow producers one-stop shopping at one office, or at one web page, as with this notice, has big implications for automation, both in the design of the database and in the operation of the software.
One was a reorganization into Safety Net and Program Delivery Divisions. If I understand it correctly it splits program policy and automation into separate organizations. The question of the best organization has been an issue ever since the original System/36 automation of county offices in the mid 1980's. At different times and in different areas we've had policy and automation united in one person, or the responsibility in one section but with different people specializing in each, or in separate sections within the division.
When Jerry Sitter was division director in the mid 80's he split out a branch to handle automation under Mike McCann, with the policy in other branches. In a way this followed the personnel--the policy types were mostly established DC specialists, people who'd come in from the field before the System 36 arrived. The automation types were the early "SCOAPers", mostly program assistaants brought in under 2-year temporary appointments (which turned into permanent slots as time passed). It also, IMHO, reflected an attitude among management that automation was a subject they didn't really understand or feel comfortable with, so it was best housed in its own shop. There was a similar setup in the commodity loan area.
I always had my reservation with that setup--my argument was that a program specialist needed to know the whole span of operations. Just as in the pre-automation days we'd work with MSD to get forms designed and printed, procedures written, cleared and distributed, regulations written and published, automation was just another area to learn and manage. Looking back, I was reflecting my own belief in my abilities to do the whole scope of activities, and I was probably unrealistic. But I still think there's a kernel of truth there--sometimes policy issues and automation issues become one and the same.
Which leads me to the second notice: on a workaround to handle multi-county producers, which seems to me to be an example. Here the history of ASCS/FSA going back to New Deal days has been to work with producers on a county by county basis, unlike FmHA which tried to consider all of a producer's assets and liabilities when making a loan. FSA has gradually been forced to move away from a county basis with need to enforce payment limitation. My point is that a policy decision to apply rules on a producer basis, as with loans, and to allow producers one-stop shopping at one office, or at one web page, as with this notice, has big implications for automation, both in the design of the database and in the operation of the software.
Saturday, March 02, 2019
Adam Smith on Slavery
I generally think of Adam Smith as explaining what was happening in the 18th century economy, not as a social reformer. But there's this, highlighted in a recent paper.
There is not a negro from the coast of Africa who does not, in this respect, possess a degree of magnanimity which the soul of his sordid master is too often scarce capable of conceiving. Fortune never exerted more cruelly her empire over mankind, than when she subjected those nations of heroes to the refuse of the jails of Europe, to wretches who possess the virtues neither of the countries which they come from, nor of those which they go to, and whose levity, brutality, and baseness, so justly expose them to the contempt of the vanquished. (TMS 206–7.9)
Friday, March 01, 2019
Eggs: the Vindication of My Mother on Her Birthday
The Post has an article today on the increased consumption of eggs along with the revival of their reputation, recovering from concerns about dietary cholesterol.
My mother died shortly after her birthday, which was March 1, 1898, some 30 years ago. She had an origin story for her chickens: dad came home one day in the 20's or 30's, not clear which, and said they were going to add chickens to their small dairy operation. The way she told the story she clearly was not happy about the decision. But she lived with it, and she became a fierce partisan of small flocks. She griped about "city folks" coming out and going into the egg business when prices were good which created an oversupply and depressed the prices.
Given our supply of eggs, naturally we ate eggs for breakfast regularly (unless she did pancakes or french toast). 2 eggs a piece for dad and me, perhaps less for my sister who never would eat as well as mom wanted her to.
IIRC the 1960's saw the big concerns about cholesterol and a focus on eggs as one factor in arteriosclerosis. That made my mother vent. Eggs were the "perfect food". (You can google the phrase and find that is trending,.) She was very defensive. I ddn't dare tell her I'd gradually lost the 2 eggs for breakfast habit over the years.
Happy birthday Mom--you were right all along.
My mother died shortly after her birthday, which was March 1, 1898, some 30 years ago. She had an origin story for her chickens: dad came home one day in the 20's or 30's, not clear which, and said they were going to add chickens to their small dairy operation. The way she told the story she clearly was not happy about the decision. But she lived with it, and she became a fierce partisan of small flocks. She griped about "city folks" coming out and going into the egg business when prices were good which created an oversupply and depressed the prices.
Given our supply of eggs, naturally we ate eggs for breakfast regularly (unless she did pancakes or french toast). 2 eggs a piece for dad and me, perhaps less for my sister who never would eat as well as mom wanted her to.
IIRC the 1960's saw the big concerns about cholesterol and a focus on eggs as one factor in arteriosclerosis. That made my mother vent. Eggs were the "perfect food". (You can google the phrase and find that is trending,.) She was very defensive. I ddn't dare tell her I'd gradually lost the 2 eggs for breakfast habit over the years.
Happy birthday Mom--you were right all along.
Thursday, February 28, 2019
Deja Vu All Over: India vs Pakistan
It was 40+* years ago that India and Pakistan last fought a war,, but in my youth such conflicts, and the rumors and threats of conflicts, were a constant in international affairs.
* It turns out it's just 20 years, at least according to Wikipedia--there was a 1999 conflict in Kargil. They count 4 wars, and innumerable confrontations and conflicts of a lesser nature.It seems there are fewer such conflicts since the end of the Cold War--not sure there's any causal relationship but 1989 is a convenient date. Obviously there's Iraq I and Iraq II and Agfhanistan forever but I buy Steven Pinker's thesis of a gradual decrease in violence over the ages.
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
Korean War--Who Fought
Feeling nitpicky today so this Times piece upset me. It's a discussion of Vietnam and Korea relationships, quite good in most resspects. But this:
Those of us old enough to remember know that technically the United Nations fought against the North Koreans and later the Chinese. (The Soviets had been boycotting the Security Council so were not around to veto a resolution authorizing UN action against the invaders.) It was a UN coalition fighting, including British and Turkish troops as I remember it. (Wikipedia)
But what really jars is the idea that South Korea fought on the American side. The war was sold to the U.S. and UN as a fight against the North Korean invaders in which the UN was coming to the aid of South Korea, so we were fighting on South Korea's side. Since then there have been challenges to that narrative by some historians, but I think the consensus still generally supports the original take on the situation.
Vietnam’s ties with North Korea were strengthened during the Vietnam War, when North Korea dispatched dozens of fighter pilots to combat the Americans. At least 14 North Korean military personnel were killed in action in Vietnam. (About 300,000 South Koreans fought on the American side.)What's wrong? The last sentence.
Those of us old enough to remember know that technically the United Nations fought against the North Koreans and later the Chinese. (The Soviets had been boycotting the Security Council so were not around to veto a resolution authorizing UN action against the invaders.) It was a UN coalition fighting, including British and Turkish troops as I remember it. (Wikipedia)
But what really jars is the idea that South Korea fought on the American side. The war was sold to the U.S. and UN as a fight against the North Korean invaders in which the UN was coming to the aid of South Korea, so we were fighting on South Korea's side. Since then there have been challenges to that narrative by some historians, but I think the consensus still generally supports the original take on the situation.
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
Nixon: China::Trump: North Korea?
"Who lost China?" was a cry of right wing politicians in my youth. It referred to the Chinexe Communist victory in their civil war with the Kuomingtaing, which eventually fled to Taiwan to rule there for some decades. The allegation was that communists and pinkos in the State Department had undermined the the Chiang Kai-shek regime and weakened our support for him.
After the Communists took over the mainland we refused to recognize their regime, and kept them out of the UN. That was a cornerstone of American foreign policy for 25 years. No Democratic president or candidate could afford to propose to recognize the Reds, for fear of being "soft" (much like being "soft on crime" in a somewhat later time frame.
Then came Nixon, and Kissinger. Despite much criticism from the right (Bill Buckley et. al) they were able to recognize China simply because Nixon's history gave him credentials as anti-communist. Jimmy Carter completed the job of de-recognizing Taiwan and exchanging ambassadors with the People's Republic of China.
I wonder wherher there is a parallel between Trump and Nixon vis a vis North Korea. As with China, our North Korean foreign policy has been mostly frozen in stone for 65 years. There have been attempts at breakthroughs; Clinton came the closest but he couldn't get enough support to fully carry out his agreement so it teetered and then collapsed, with GWBush finally killing it.
As with China, there's a vocal group attacking any attempt to normalize relations. Also as with China, there are geopolitical game-playing reasons not to deal; I mean the idea that a deal undermines policies (non-proliferation and human rights) we generally support and can't be seen to back away from.
Trump in many ways is Nixon's opposite in terms of style and decision making process, but it's possible that he ends up making a poor deal with North Korea, "poor" at least in the view of the policy establishment who've spent their careers on the issues, but a deal which over a period of time turns out to be acceptable to the US and the world. If "period of time" is less than 18 months, such a deal might be enough to re-elect him.
After the Communists took over the mainland we refused to recognize their regime, and kept them out of the UN. That was a cornerstone of American foreign policy for 25 years. No Democratic president or candidate could afford to propose to recognize the Reds, for fear of being "soft" (much like being "soft on crime" in a somewhat later time frame.
Then came Nixon, and Kissinger. Despite much criticism from the right (Bill Buckley et. al) they were able to recognize China simply because Nixon's history gave him credentials as anti-communist. Jimmy Carter completed the job of de-recognizing Taiwan and exchanging ambassadors with the People's Republic of China.
I wonder wherher there is a parallel between Trump and Nixon vis a vis North Korea. As with China, our North Korean foreign policy has been mostly frozen in stone for 65 years. There have been attempts at breakthroughs; Clinton came the closest but he couldn't get enough support to fully carry out his agreement so it teetered and then collapsed, with GWBush finally killing it.
As with China, there's a vocal group attacking any attempt to normalize relations. Also as with China, there are geopolitical game-playing reasons not to deal; I mean the idea that a deal undermines policies (non-proliferation and human rights) we generally support and can't be seen to back away from.
Trump in many ways is Nixon's opposite in terms of style and decision making process, but it's possible that he ends up making a poor deal with North Korea, "poor" at least in the view of the policy establishment who've spent their careers on the issues, but a deal which over a period of time turns out to be acceptable to the US and the world. If "period of time" is less than 18 months, such a deal might be enough to re-elect him.
Monday, February 25, 2019
Wisconsin Dairy
Here's a good piece on the Wisconsin dairy situation, more in detail than many media reports. Many farmers going out of business, other farmers expanding their herds so the number of farms is way down (close to half in 4 years) but the number of cows is about even. What strikes me is even though herds have doubled in size, they're still below 200 cows per herd average. None of the Wisconsin counties are in the top 13 counties in the US in production (most are California), likely mostly because the big dairies (1,000+ ) aren't in Wisconsin.
I suspect from a birdseye view the same forces which are leading to the big increase in the income of the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent are also leading to the big increase in the size of dairy herds and the big increase in the value of the top companies in the US. That's just a hunch, without supporting arguments now, maybe later.
I suspect from a birdseye view the same forces which are leading to the big increase in the income of the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent are also leading to the big increase in the size of dairy herds and the big increase in the value of the top companies in the US. That's just a hunch, without supporting arguments now, maybe later.
Sunday, February 24, 2019
Brazil Grows Two Corn Crops?
Who knew that? Saw a reference to it, probably from John Phipps or Chris Clayton's feed. Here's the brief description:
The fact it's doable on a massive scale suggests to me Brazil has an advantage over US farmers, who are limited in their doublecropping to soybeans after wheat, mostly. Of course, with global warming we may be able to change that in the future. We still have an infrastructure advantage over Brazil, if I understand correctly--we've the transportation--rail and barge--to move crops to export ports easier than they currently do. But that too will change.
Brazil’s second corn crop, or safrinha, has gained attention in world markets because this year’s dry growing season likely hurt yields. Safrinha corn accounts for about 65% of the country’s corn production.It's planted in January to March after early-crop soybeans are harvested.
The fact it's doable on a massive scale suggests to me Brazil has an advantage over US farmers, who are limited in their doublecropping to soybeans after wheat, mostly. Of course, with global warming we may be able to change that in the future. We still have an infrastructure advantage over Brazil, if I understand correctly--we've the transportation--rail and barge--to move crops to export ports easier than they currently do. But that too will change.
Saturday, February 23, 2019
Slow on the Uptake
Megan McArdle is just one of the commentators who are using the Justsie Smollett "fake racist attack" episode to caution people to go slow in making judgments. The quick reaction of some Democratic politicians now looks foolish, as does the reaction of the left to the Sandmann video of last month.
Going slow is always good advice. But advice is often ignored. Daniel Kahneman wrote a good book on the subject. We all jump to conclusions and less often are we willing to reconsider, to apply reason and/or wait for more evidence.
Anyone remember McVeigh? IIRC President Clinton cautioned going slow and not blaming international terrorists. (That was before 9/11, but if my memory is correct we were hyper aware of terrorists even then.)
But then it's possible to overreact to the overreaction, which is the interesting take here.
Going slow is always good advice. But advice is often ignored. Daniel Kahneman wrote a good book on the subject. We all jump to conclusions and less often are we willing to reconsider, to apply reason and/or wait for more evidence.
Anyone remember McVeigh? IIRC President Clinton cautioned going slow and not blaming international terrorists. (That was before 9/11, but if my memory is correct we were hyper aware of terrorists even then.)
But then it's possible to overreact to the overreaction, which is the interesting take here.
Friday, February 22, 2019
Beneficial Ownership for All, Not Just Farms
If I correctly understand current payment limitation rules (dubious, at my age it's questionable what I correctly understand) farmers are required to identify the beneficial owners of the legal entities which receive farm program payments. "Beneficial owner" meaning the live body, as we used to say, who actually gets the money in the end.
That seems to me to be right and proper, so right and proper I come to agree with AEI, not something a good Dem often does, that this should be required for all legal entities. Without such a requirement the rich and powerful can hide behind a paper veil of dummy corporations, fake partnerships, and trusts.
That seems to me to be right and proper, so right and proper I come to agree with AEI, not something a good Dem often does, that this should be required for all legal entities. Without such a requirement the rich and powerful can hide behind a paper veil of dummy corporations, fake partnerships, and trusts.
Thursday, February 21, 2019
From the Ag Outlook Conference
Some items from this year's Ag Outlook conference via Illinois extension--Farm Policy.. For those who might not know, there's an annual confab in DC where USDA types and ag people get together to assess where agriculture is and where it's going. Typically the chief economist for the department gives an overview (I think this is one of the positions proposed to be moved from DC under the plans for relocating ERS , etc.)
From the slides we see that the states with the highest rate of bankruptcies for 2018 are ME, NY, and WI, with GA fourth. I think this is likely the result of the consolidation of dairy farms, a subject on which I've posted fairly often recently.
Also interesting is this graph I copied from the Farm Policy. While the line depicting the Chinese share of our export sales drops sharply, the total values don't. This may reflect the higher value of the dollar in 2018/9--our sales volume drops but the money we get stays flat? (I don't know, just guessing.)
From the slides we see that the states with the highest rate of bankruptcies for 2018 are ME, NY, and WI, with GA fourth. I think this is likely the result of the consolidation of dairy farms, a subject on which I've posted fairly often recently.
Also interesting is this graph I copied from the Farm Policy. While the line depicting the Chinese share of our export sales drops sharply, the total values don't. This may reflect the higher value of the dollar in 2018/9--our sales volume drops but the money we get stays flat? (I don't know, just guessing.)
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
Advice to Trump: Don't Play Games With Congressional Appropriators
When I joined ASCS one of the things to learn was the relationship of ASCS and CCC. Essentially the Commodity Credit Corporation was a way for USDA to put on another persona, a corporate one, allowing it to bypass the annual appropriations process.
It had the most impact for me when we were trying to impact new farm legislation and were on a very tight schedule. Lew Calderone, the head of printing, would ask whether the program specialists could justify the rush job as fitting under the CCC's responsibilities. When the answer was "yes", he could bypass requirements to go through the department and GPO and send the work to a printing contractor. (At least, that's the way I remember it.)
I was also aware that CCC and ASCS had separate inventories of personal property, depending on whether the item had been bought with appropriated funds (ASCS) or corporate funds (CCC).
The agency's ability to switch between ASCS and CCC personas was the envy of other agencies,like SCS and FmHA.
In the mid-80's through into the 90's ASCS and USDA began to use the CCC authority more widely, which is where the agency came to grief. As I understand it, the procurement and automation people used CCC funds to buy a lot of computer gear. What's worse, the computer projects didn't work out--success might have had a different result
Anyhow, the bottom line was the House Appropriations Committee put restrictions, tight restrictions, on ASCS and USDA on their spending, including spending of CCC money. As far as I know those restrictions remain in the current law.
This leads to my advice to Trump: any effort to reprogram money to build your wall runs the risk of stepping on the toes of the appropriators. If that happens, and I'm sure DOD will try to avoid touching anything in the districts of the members of House appropriations, the committee is perfectly capable of putting tight clamps in the appropriation act.
Tuesday, February 19, 2019
Spring Is Almost Here
Weather forecast for tomorrow is for snow, along with rain, and sleet, but I'm looking forward to spring and being able to garden again. The winter has been mild enough, except for one cold spell in February, that the ground is not frozen. After 40 years or so gardening in the same plot of the Reston gardens the soil is good enough that it can be worked relatively early. And beyond tomorrow's snow the forecast looks pretty good.
I wonder whether people who grew up in town (i.e., suburbs/cities) have as strong a sense of cycles as do those of us who grew up on farms? I doubt it, but don't know.
I wonder whether people who grew up in town (i.e., suburbs/cities) have as strong a sense of cycles as do those of us who grew up on farms? I doubt it, but don't know.
Saturday, February 16, 2019
Salute to the Ballantines
Betty Ballantine died at 99, following her husband Ian. They were very important in my life, because they founded the Bantam and Ballantine lines of paperbacks. In the 1950's I could find a rack or two of their paperbacks in a couple stores in Greene, NY, and at $.35 or $.50 they were affordable for a teen. I know I have a bunch of their books packed away in boxes. I remember their line of WWII books, one by Adolf Galland the German ace, and one by C. Vann Woodward on Leyte Gulf.
And the science fiction, though I can't be sure the books I remember were Ballantines, nor some of the fiction, like "God's Little Acre", the risque book of the times.
And the science fiction, though I can't be sure the books I remember were Ballantines, nor some of the fiction, like "God's Little Acre", the risque book of the times.
Friday, February 15, 2019
The Extremes of Farming: Enlightenment Versus Romance
Having just blogged about Netherlands agriculture and precision farming, I was struck this morning as I was skimming Twitter by a proposal to combine small farms with a small town (sorry but I didn't note the tweet and can't find it now). It seems to be that we can see the long time contest between the Enlightenment and the Romantic eras being reenacted today in farming.
On the one hand you have the increasing consolidation of farming in the US and elsewhere, consolidation being driven by investments in technology which increase the amount of commodities per acre and per hour of labor, with decreasing inputs per unit. It's the application of intelligence and human control to farming. On the other hand you have the less tangible byproducts and the emotions elicited by the process of organic and/or small farming.
I guess with that summary there's no hiding which side I basically favor.
On the one hand you have the increasing consolidation of farming in the US and elsewhere, consolidation being driven by investments in technology which increase the amount of commodities per acre and per hour of labor, with decreasing inputs per unit. It's the application of intelligence and human control to farming. On the other hand you have the less tangible byproducts and the emotions elicited by the process of organic and/or small farming.
I guess with that summary there's no hiding which side I basically favor.
Thursday, February 14, 2019
"Flerds" Are the Coming Thing?
See this piece.
Short explanation: a "flerd" is a "flock" + a "herd", the idea being by mixing different types of animals (usually sheep/goats with cattle) you reduce predation.
Short explanation: a "flerd" is a "flock" + a "herd", the idea being by mixing different types of animals (usually sheep/goats with cattle) you reduce predation.
Trump's Own Words
Great analysis of what Trump has said about his wall/barrier/fence and who will pay for it.
Wednesday, February 13, 2019
A Case for Intensive Farming: the Netherlands
National Geographic has a piece on Netherlands precision farming.
I've viewed with skepticism reports about the Netherlands high value of exports, figuring it was mostly flowers of all kinds. But it's the top exporter of potatoes and onions. I've been skeptical about proposals for vertical farming and urban farming, but this article is changing my mind.
What I'm taking as the bottom line is intensive farming can work in the market place. It's not clear what the additional equipment and the inputs cost, but the adoption of the techniques in the Netherlands means you likely have positive cash flow.
I do retain a bit of skepticism--Netherlands is cited as being in the top exporters of potatoes and onions, both of which strike me as unlikely to be exported over long distances because both have high water content.
From his perch 10 feet above the ground, he’s monitoring two drones—a driverless tractor roaming the fields and a quadcopter in the air—that provide detailed readings on soil chemistry, water content, nutrients, and growth, measuring the progress of every plant down to the individual potato. Van den Borne’s production numbers testify to the power of this “precision farming,” as it’s known. The global average yield of potatoes per acre is about nine tons. Van den Borne’s fields reliably produce more than 20.
I've viewed with skepticism reports about the Netherlands high value of exports, figuring it was mostly flowers of all kinds. But it's the top exporter of potatoes and onions. I've been skeptical about proposals for vertical farming and urban farming, but this article is changing my mind.
What I'm taking as the bottom line is intensive farming can work in the market place. It's not clear what the additional equipment and the inputs cost, but the adoption of the techniques in the Netherlands means you likely have positive cash flow.
I do retain a bit of skepticism--Netherlands is cited as being in the top exporters of potatoes and onions, both of which strike me as unlikely to be exported over long distances because both have high water content.
Tuesday, February 12, 2019
Is a Democratic Victory in 2020 a Cinch?
Some twitter traffic suggesting that President Trump will be defeated in 2020 by almost anyone the Democrats put up.
I violently disagree. Let me count the ways:
One: I remember the late 70's when it looked as if we liberals might be lucky enough to face Ronald Reagan in 1980. We knew we could beat him with Carter or with Kennedy. Look how that worked out.
Two:. Even if today's polls are reasonably accurate, and I don't doubt them, there's the issue of fundamentals: right now Trump is riding the best overall economy in years, perhaps better than Clinton's late 90's boom. He's also seeing "successes" in foreign policy--defeat of ISIS, withdrawal of troops from Syriana, and likely Afghanistan (by 2020), possible agreement with North Korea, renegotiated NAFTA, NATO countries responding to his harangues, etc. etc. (I put quotation marks on successes because they mostly aren't, but as of now they can be sold as such.) Those fundamentals would guarantee any normal person reelection.
Three: There's always the possibility of rally-round-the-flag episodes, a black swan event which rallies the US around its president.
Four: The reality is that some of the Democratic candidates and potentials can beat Trump, unless he has a real run of luck (somewhat like he had in 2015-16)and some can't. Right now we don't know which is which.
Five: Because we don't know the future, we need to work, and contribute, and vote as if we're underdogs.
Six: My mantra is, even if we win the presidency it doesn't do much good unless we keep the House, gain the Senate, and take some more state legislatures.
I violently disagree. Let me count the ways:
One: I remember the late 70's when it looked as if we liberals might be lucky enough to face Ronald Reagan in 1980. We knew we could beat him with Carter or with Kennedy. Look how that worked out.
Two:. Even if today's polls are reasonably accurate, and I don't doubt them, there's the issue of fundamentals: right now Trump is riding the best overall economy in years, perhaps better than Clinton's late 90's boom. He's also seeing "successes" in foreign policy--defeat of ISIS, withdrawal of troops from Syriana, and likely Afghanistan (by 2020), possible agreement with North Korea, renegotiated NAFTA, NATO countries responding to his harangues, etc. etc. (I put quotation marks on successes because they mostly aren't, but as of now they can be sold as such.) Those fundamentals would guarantee any normal person reelection.
Three: There's always the possibility of rally-round-the-flag episodes, a black swan event which rallies the US around its president.
Four: The reality is that some of the Democratic candidates and potentials can beat Trump, unless he has a real run of luck (somewhat like he had in 2015-16)and some can't. Right now we don't know which is which.
Five: Because we don't know the future, we need to work, and contribute, and vote as if we're underdogs.
Six: My mantra is, even if we win the presidency it doesn't do much good unless we keep the House, gain the Senate, and take some more state legislatures.
Monday, February 11, 2019
Amy Is In But Who Would Run With Her?
Sen. Klobuchar has officially entered the Democratic primary race.
I think I've said here, certainly on Twitter, that Il like her, mainly because I think she will appeal to independent voters along with Democrats and thus will be in a good position to beat an incumbent president and, I hope, have coattails to help candidates for the Senate and House.
That's the sort of reasoning I've used before, voting for Sen. Edwards in the 2004 primary over Keerry and Sen. Obama in 2008 over Clinton, and Clinton in 2016 over Sanders. I've more enthusiasm fro Klobuchar than I had for Edwards or Clinton, but less than for Obama. Klobuchar has a better record than Obama had but his candidacy was more historic than hers is, which made the difference in my enthusiasm.
As I see it, Klobuchar's main weakness is foreign affairs. In the past that would have meant she'd pick as vice presidential candidate someone with better credentials in that area. But, big as the Democratic field of candidates and potential candidates is, Dems don't seem to have a lot of such figures. Looking at the rosters of the Senate Foreign Affairs and Intelligence committees I don't see people with a combination of the right age, the right background, and a national reputation. The closest we can come, I think, are the two senators from VA: Kaine and Warner..
Interesting times.
I think I've said here, certainly on Twitter, that Il like her, mainly because I think she will appeal to independent voters along with Democrats and thus will be in a good position to beat an incumbent president and, I hope, have coattails to help candidates for the Senate and House.
That's the sort of reasoning I've used before, voting for Sen. Edwards in the 2004 primary over Keerry and Sen. Obama in 2008 over Clinton, and Clinton in 2016 over Sanders. I've more enthusiasm fro Klobuchar than I had for Edwards or Clinton, but less than for Obama. Klobuchar has a better record than Obama had but his candidacy was more historic than hers is, which made the difference in my enthusiasm.
As I see it, Klobuchar's main weakness is foreign affairs. In the past that would have meant she'd pick as vice presidential candidate someone with better credentials in that area. But, big as the Democratic field of candidates and potential candidates is, Dems don't seem to have a lot of such figures. Looking at the rosters of the Senate Foreign Affairs and Intelligence committees I don't see people with a combination of the right age, the right background, and a national reputation. The closest we can come, I think, are the two senators from VA: Kaine and Warner..
Interesting times.
Sunday, February 10, 2019
Blast from the Past--Investigating President Carter
FiveThirtyEight has a piece on how presidents get investigated by Congress, including an interesting graph showing investigations of presidents from Nixon to Obama.
Three points of particular interest:
Three points of particular interest:
- based only on eyeballing, ranking the presidents from least investigated to most (counting days of investigative hearings in the House) you get this list:
- GWBush
- Clinton!!
- Obama
- GHWBush
- then Carter, Nixon, and Reagan, much more investigated and hard to rank.
- the graph shows whether Congress was under the control of the president's party or not--which accounts for Bush's position, but what's most surprising to me is the high ranking of Carter.--if you discount Watergate, he likely was more investigated by his own party, than Nixon was by his opponents.
- Reagan's high ranking is partly accounted for by Dem control of the House throughout his terms in office, but it's also a reminder of how rocky his administration was and the number of scandals.
Saturday, February 09, 2019
Northam and Boyd
John Boyd, head of the National Black Farmers Association, met with Gov. Northam and offered support, according to this.
Why Blue America Is Blue--II
A Leap Too Far for the Army
As a former draftee I retain a deep skepticism of the wisdom of the US Army. So I would have said "I told you so" to the Army's plan for its "Iron Man suit", that is if I'd known about it, which I didn't.
As it turns out it was impracticable to integrate all the features desired into one outfit, so the Army appears to be separating the bits out to use individually.
As it turns out it was impracticable to integrate all the features desired into one outfit, so the Army appears to be separating the bits out to use individually.
Friday, February 08, 2019
The Marginal Utility of an Extra $50 Million
Jerry Brewer had an interesting column in the Washington Post about star basketball players seeking new teams. This was the bit which stood out to me:
In the doc [made by ESPN on Chris Paul's decision], he met with his friend, Jay-Z, the rap and entertainment mogul. Paul was telling him about various offers, ranging from $150 million to $200 million. Jay-Z listened and then spoke his mind. “Ain’t gonna change your life,” Jay-Z said about the offers. “You get 150, you get 200 — it’s the same thing. You’re gonna ride the same plane. You’re gonna wear the same sneakers. That [expletive] ain’t gonna change your life. One-fifty, 200 — same thing. . . . Your happiness, now that’s worth everything.”
Thursday, February 07, 2019
Why Blue America Is Blue I
From the Rural Blog:
That's part of the "Big Sort" which underlies our political divisions.
About 15 percent of Americans live in rural areas; the percentage has been declining for more than a century. The 35 percent of counties that have experienced long-term, significant population loss now have about 6.2 million residents, a third less than in 1950. Depopulation mostly started with young adults moving to cities or suburbs; the slide in population continued because fewer women of childbearing age were left in rural areas to boost the population"
That's part of the "Big Sort" which underlies our political divisions.
Monday, February 04, 2019
"Seeing the Whole Picture"
T.J. Stiles had some tweets participating in a discussion on Winston Churchill (Newt Gingrich had triggered it by comparing Trump's work habits to Churchill's, to which some, including Stiles, took issue).
He had this tweet in which he said it was important "to see the whole, real picture". I replied to the tweet, but have had some added thoughts.
"Seeing the whole picture" sounds good, but when you think about the meaning of the word, it's more complicated. A picture, whether painted or photographic, is basically a two-dimensional representation of reality; it's not a 360 degree holographic image. And it's static, representing a moment in time, not a movie showing the lapse of time.
I'm being nitpicky, of course. It's best to look at every corner of a picture, to look up close and stand way back, while remembering the limits of a picture in representing reality.
He had this tweet in which he said it was important "to see the whole, real picture". I replied to the tweet, but have had some added thoughts.
"Seeing the whole picture" sounds good, but when you think about the meaning of the word, it's more complicated. A picture, whether painted or photographic, is basically a two-dimensional representation of reality; it's not a 360 degree holographic image. And it's static, representing a moment in time, not a movie showing the lapse of time.
I'm being nitpicky, of course. It's best to look at every corner of a picture, to look up close and stand way back, while remembering the limits of a picture in representing reality.
Sunday, February 03, 2019
Simple Gifts--the Handshake
According to this, Quakers popularized the handshake in America. I can see them as disliking the bow or the tipping of the hat as perhaps signalling social differences. "Simple Gifts" is a Shaker song but the emotional basis is similar.
Saturday, February 02, 2019
What Historians Don't Know--the Case of Jill Lepore
So I got several books for Christmas. First I read "Becoming" which was very good. Then I read Carl Zimmer's "She Has Her Mother's Laugh", which also was very good. Now I'm ready for Jill Lepore's " These Truths, a History of the United States".
Lepore is a good writer. I think I've read most of her books and enjoyed them. She's more of a narrative historian than an analytical one, but she knows how to tell a story.
So she starts her history by imagining in the fall of 1787 readers of a New York newspaper seeing the language of the new constitution. By page ii of the Introduction she moves to the people of the United States considering whether to ratify it, "even as they went about baling hay, milling corn, tanning leather, singing hymns, and letting out the seams on last year's winter coats for mothers and fathers grown fatter, and letting down the hems, for children grown taller."
So what does she get wrong?
Obviously farmers weren't baling hay in 1787. (I know I've seen a similar error somewhere recently, forget where, might even have been Lepore in another form reusing the same material. )
I'd also challenge the idea of "milling" corn. I find to my surprise that wikipedia covers it, but I'd be more comfortable with the wording: "grinding corn".
As the proportion of Americans who farm, or grew up on farms, dwindles, the understanding of that way of life starts to vanish.
Lepore is a good writer. I think I've read most of her books and enjoyed them. She's more of a narrative historian than an analytical one, but she knows how to tell a story.
So she starts her history by imagining in the fall of 1787 readers of a New York newspaper seeing the language of the new constitution. By page ii of the Introduction she moves to the people of the United States considering whether to ratify it, "even as they went about baling hay, milling corn, tanning leather, singing hymns, and letting out the seams on last year's winter coats for mothers and fathers grown fatter, and letting down the hems, for children grown taller."
So what does she get wrong?
Obviously farmers weren't baling hay in 1787. (I know I've seen a similar error somewhere recently, forget where, might even have been Lepore in another form reusing the same material. )
I'd also challenge the idea of "milling" corn. I find to my surprise that wikipedia covers it, but I'd be more comfortable with the wording: "grinding corn".
As the proportion of Americans who farm, or grew up on farms, dwindles, the understanding of that way of life starts to vanish.
Friday, February 01, 2019
ERS on US Agriculture: the Case of Hay
Farm Policy has a post summarizing a recent ERS report on the characteristics of farms in the US.
There's the points which are not new to me: when considering total value of production the dominance of the family farm, except in the case of very high value crops and beef, especially what are known as "large-scale family farms", which are the modal and median farms in the ERS categorization Except, except in the case of hay and poultry.
Because poultry is, I think, dominated by contract farming I won't comment on it. But hay is interesting--I suspect in part it representatives the last gasp of small scale dairy farms, where the production pattern is harvesting hay in the summer and feeding the hay in the winter. But dairy itself is dominated by the large-scale family farms, likely meaning their cows don't graze the pastures, but have their feed delivered to them in their barns/feed lots. In that context a small farm can find a niche space--growing and harvesting hay is not that difficult to combine with getting income from elsewhere, like social security or off-farm employment. And the the big dairies provide a market.
There's the points which are not new to me: when considering total value of production the dominance of the family farm, except in the case of very high value crops and beef, especially what are known as "large-scale family farms", which are the modal and median farms in the ERS categorization Except, except in the case of hay and poultry.
Because poultry is, I think, dominated by contract farming I won't comment on it. But hay is interesting--I suspect in part it representatives the last gasp of small scale dairy farms, where the production pattern is harvesting hay in the summer and feeding the hay in the winter. But dairy itself is dominated by the large-scale family farms, likely meaning their cows don't graze the pastures, but have their feed delivered to them in their barns/feed lots. In that context a small farm can find a niche space--growing and harvesting hay is not that difficult to combine with getting income from elsewhere, like social security or off-farm employment. And the the big dairies provide a market.
Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Agreeing with Althouse on the Past
I've been following Ann Althouse's blog for years. In the last few years I think she's become more conservative, often defending President Trump. I also think she tends to find hidden motives buried in people's statements and in news article, explaining things by those motives rather than the simpler explanation offered by Murphy's Law and taking things at face value.
But the other day she and her son collaborated on a post with which I can agree. Basically they're remembering a past when liberals and the left were vehement in defense of free speech. Mario Savio and the Berkeley Free Speech Movement come to mind, though definitely before her son's time.
All things being equal, I think I generally lean towards free speech (joined the ACLU back in the days of the Nazis marching in Skokie) and am reluctant to see boycotts, even though they are a part of our American heritage (boycotts of British goods led up to the Revolution).
But the other day she and her son collaborated on a post with which I can agree. Basically they're remembering a past when liberals and the left were vehement in defense of free speech. Mario Savio and the Berkeley Free Speech Movement come to mind, though definitely before her son's time.
All things being equal, I think I generally lean towards free speech (joined the ACLU back in the days of the Nazis marching in Skokie) and am reluctant to see boycotts, even though they are a part of our American heritage (boycotts of British goods led up to the Revolution).
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
The Petty Frustrations of Old Age
What's bad about getting older:
- finding that after typing a few letters, you didn't get your fingers on the right keys, so "this types as " yjod yu[rd sd "
- it takes seconds to turn the newspaper pages, so you turn from page 2 to page 6.
Your temper gets shorter so you're more enraged by the petty than you should be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)