• Roldyclark@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    131
    ·
    6 months ago

    Some stuff you can def grow yourself easily and not have to buy at the store. I don’t have to buy tomato’s all summer just from a few plants. Never buy herbs. But yeah sustenance farming I am not. Support local farmers!

      • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s super expensive… 40 a week for just veggies? I spend 40 a week on all my groceries at most.

          • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            That’s cool, I wanted to point out that saying cheap and then a price point without reference isn’t really helpful because price varies so much.

            Also, 270 per week per person!?!? What the fuck, that can’t be true, that’s more than what I extrapolated it would cost me in the European expensive countries when I visited and went to random grocery stores. As always, the american dream seems to be a scam fetish xD.

          • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            $270 includes everything like Keurig coffee pods, ground beef, and laundry detergent- not just vegetables.

            • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              That’s fair, but the comment above said that they “spend 40 a week on all my groceries at most.”

          • Sombyr@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I spend 1/3rd of that on all of my groceries combined per month. If I was spending that much per week I would be over 1000$ in debt after a single month. Is the average person really that rich? And what food are they buying that they need to spend that much?
            This is baffling to me as a poor person.

        • Roldyclark@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          American grocery store produce is really expensive now. $40 for a week of veggies would be a good deal in my area. Plus you’re supporting local agriculture.

              • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                It’s not you who said I should assume, it was them who didn’t specify, implying we should asume, sorry if I made you think otherwise. Canadians and Australians afaik aso use dollars, just not USD.

                In any case, this was quite the small complaint I had, so I’ll just drop it haha. Have a great day.

        • Pringles@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Where do you live? I’m in central Europe and hit the local currency equivalent of 60$ per person per week…

          • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            I live in a quite expensive Spanish area and we usually spend 50ish for 2 people’s worth of food. We do go out or order food on the weekend sometimes but being vegetarian we don’t spend more than 15€ on produce a week at most so 40 a week sounds a lot.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Surplusable farming is literally the basis on which all civilization is built

    Like the whole point of the way things work for us now is that you don’t have to be a farmer or a hunter or a gatherer to be able to have access to a consistent source of food.

    People romanticize about the idealic agrarian past but human civilization was literally invented over how back breakingly difficult that kind of work is for people who aren’t built for it.

    • ashok36@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      ·
      6 months ago

      Also the fact that one bad year in your tiny part of the world means you and everyone you know die slow agonizing deaths. Fun!

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is also a major point of livestock. If you have more produce than you can eat, feed the excess to some animals and they will keep those calories fresh and delicious over the winter.

        • Shard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          6 months ago

          Adding on to that, its not just the surplus produce. Its all the rest of the produce that’s unusable by us humans.

          When we grow something like corn, we’re only growing it for the kernels that we can consume. We can’t physiologically make use of the stalks, stems and leaves, but an animal like the goat? They’ll chew up anything green and turn that into usable calories we humans can make use of.

          • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            6 months ago

            Doesn’t even need to be green, just any sort of plant or really any sort of organic matter. Eating goats that have lived off of old trash is probably not the best idea though

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Which neatly raises the point of how modern large monoculture does a lot less of that kind of use of agricultural products unusuable by humans.

            Absolutelly, the whole of a cow slaughtered in a slaughterhouse is famously used (down to the hoves) and nothing thrown out, however you don’t see goats being raised on the unusable parts of a corn plant (whilst wheat straw is actually used as feed, for corn the silage for cattle made from it uses the whole plant including kernels not just the left-over unusable by humans parts).

      • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is part of the reason why early farming was so inefficient. Have a plot up the hill, have one in the valley, grow multiple crops, etc etc.

        That’s not done to have more food, that’s done so you don’t die when something bad happens.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is one of the things I find funny about modern day self sufficient communes. Subsistence farming is awful, industrialized farming is less awful, but still far more work than most are willing to ever do.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        6 months ago

        The issue is that the current farming techniques are not sustainable.

        The fertilizers and pesticides used are burning the land, polluting the underground water pools and killing a bunch of animals and insects.

        The agriculture needs to change to something sustainable.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          6 months ago

          Modern farming techniques consider sustainability, the larger problem is countries using traditional methods that are extremely harmful like burning forests.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            The industrial farming of corn in the US requires using hybrid corn strains to reach the yields it has, which in turn requires the use of fertilizers because the natural soils is incapable of sustaining the density of corn plants that hybrid varieties achive.

            Those fertilizers in turn are mainly made from Oil, which is a non-renewable resource, making the whole thing unsustainable. It’s is possible to make the fertilizers sustainably, it’s just much more expensive so that’s not done.

            The US is so deeply involved (including outright military invasions) in the Middle East from where most of the oil comes because in the US oil it’s not just a critical resource for Transportation and Energy, it’s also a critical resource for Food because it’s so incredibly dependent on corn (which is estimated to add up directly and indirectly to more than 70% of the human food chain there)

            PS: There is a book called The Omnivore’s Dilemma which is a great read on this.

            • Bertuccio@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              corn

              On indirect consumption, corn is largely used to feed cattle, make high fructose corn syrup, and other products that are not directly eaten as corn.

              This makes corn insanely inefficient as a food source.

            • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Those fertilizers in turn are mainly made from Oil,

              Fertilizer is not made from oil. Oil/gas is used to power the factory but that doesn’t make the farming unsustainable.

              Because if you use the criteria of where we get our energy from, home gardening isn’t sustainable either because your house is powered by oil/gas.

              • Aceticon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Fertilizers are made from Amonia which in turn is made using the Haber-Bosch process which requires fossil fuels to provide the necessary energy and as reactants (see this related article).

                There is also “natural” fertilizer made from organic mass left over from other activities which would otherwise go to waste, but that’s insufficient for large scale intensive farming (composting is fine for your community garden or even for supplementing low intensity agriculture, but not for the intensive industrial farming growing things like hybrid corn).

                Finally, the use of techniques like crop rotation which lets letting fields lie fallow so that natural nitrate fixation occurs and the soil recovers do not make the soil rich enough in nitrates to support hybrid corn growing because, as I mentioned, the plant density is too high to be supported by natural soil alone without further addition of fertilizers.

                • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Fertilizers are made from Amonia which in turn is made using the Haber-Bosch process which requires fossil fuels to provide the necessary energy and as reactants

                  That’s exactly what I said! Fertilizer is not made from oil. The factory is powered by oil. Just like your home where you garden is powered by oil.

          • racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            “Modern farming techniques consider sustainability”

            Yeah sure. They consider sustainability in that the current generation of poisons they use haven’t been proven unsustainable YET. When they are proven unsustainable, they’ll move to the next generation, that hasn’t been proven YET…

            Also systemically annihilating everything except that one crop you want to grow makes your farmland an ecological desert, that doesn’t sound very sustainable either.

            Unless you’re of the conviction that farmland shouldn’t be in any way part of nature, and we should concentrate on just growing crops there and every other kind of life there should be discouraged, and by doing that as dense as possible we keep more space for actual nature.

            Though i think farming that leaves meaningful room for (some) nature to coexist with it doesn’t do that much worse in yield to make the modern ‘kill everything’ approach worth it. But we’ll see what the future brings i guess.

            But just being like ‘modern farming techniques consider sustainability’ seems pretty naive to me…

          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Modern agriculture uses ammonia pellets that more than half will evaporate by the time it enters the soil and it seeps into aquifers and rivers.

            There is nothing sustainable with modern agriculture.

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        In theory, some of those communes are cool. Way less wasteful than suburban living arrangements.

        But I do worry about those communes, honestly. The demographics they attract are easy to abuse: aging conspiracy theorists with low education. If the commune owns the land, or even worse if an individual owns the land, then those people could be forced to leave and become homeless. Even if they did own property in the commune, it might be able to act as an HOA or local township and start charging them until they can claim the property that way.

    • freebee@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      There’s still different approaches to it though. The default industrial gigantic monocultures with massive aquifer drilling is for sure missing a few delayed, less visible costs in the equation. “Improve industrial farming, adjust it back to a more normal scale and add some diversity between the fields and rotate crops!” just isn’t a very catchy slogan I guess.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    100% granted. In the 100 square feet of my property I set aside for vegetable gardening in my spare time, I cannot grow as much food as a full time professional farmer can in a given 100 square feet of a multi-acre field.

    I can, however, produce more food than the non-native species of turf grass that used to grow there.

  • Match!!@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    counterpoint: industrial agriculture exists mostly to sustain animal products

    • lad@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      You mean, compared to what goes to the market for people?

      I don’t eat much of not industrial agriculture products, even local farms only produce fruits, and I would say they are also industrial (not sure where is the line)

      • Bademantel@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Cows and other farm animals need a lot of food:

        More than three-quarters of global agricultural land is used for livestock, despite meat and dairy making up a much smaller share of the world’s protein and calories. […] However, only half of the world’s croplands are used to grow crops that are consumed by humans directly. We use a lot of land to grow crops for biofuels and other industrial products, and an even bigger share is used to feed livestock.

        Source (OWID)

        • OfCourseNot@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          As per the article two thirds of that ‘agricultural land’ is graze-lands, so like a 12.5% of that agricultural land is actually farmland dedicated to feed livestock.

        • lad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I see, 25% is still not too little, I expected this to be less than 10% based on how you phrased the first comment. But you’re right, it’s possible to greatly reduce strain on land

    • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Crops like soybeans are mostly cultivated for animal consumption, but are you sure it holds for the entirety of the industrial agriculture?

    • zeekaran@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      The animal products are also just more industrial scale, subsidized farming, too.

  • Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    6 months ago

    Who the fuck prioritized efficiency over quality in their backyard garden?

    My handmade solid maple and walnut furniture will never reach the yield or cost-effectiveness as IKEA. I guess I’ll just have to burn my shop down

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      You are missing the point.

      It’s not about your shop. It’s about everyone making their own furniture… which doesn’t scale and isn’t feasible.

      • enbyecho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is a totally specious argument. Everyone doesn’t have to make 100% of their own furniture any more than every one has to grow 100% of their food.

        If I make two chairs it’s more efficient than 1 chair and I only need to spend maybe 70% more time than 1, not 100% I sell/barter one chair to my neighbor, who, because they have grown 6 tomato plants instead of 4 (at most 10% more of their labor), has excess tomatoes and gives me some in exchange.

        • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Bro I think you are vastly overestimating the produce yield of a homegrown tomato plant let alone 6

          • Peddlephile@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Two tomato plants far exceeded what we needed. We sacrificed the remainder to the possums and birds.

          • enbyecho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’m curious if you have numbers on that or you are just assuming low yields.

            I happen to know exactly how much a tomato plant grows because over 20 years of commercial farming I kept records. It varies a lot by variety and season and even how we are responding to market needs but in general I tend to get about 800-1400 lbs per 200 ft row for indeterminate tomatoes over the season. A farmer I know at lower elevation gets a lot more but they have a longer season, better soil and, crucially, water a lot more than we do – my method cuts yield but increases quality. We use a 2 ft spacing for F1 varieties so that’s about 100 plants (more like 95, but whatevs) so let’s call it 8 pounds per plant = 48 lbs of tomatoes. Again, this is quite generalized and it’s often way more. I also happen to know that’s going to be on the very low end of home garden yields because people tell me this shit. Also, for cherry tomatoes you can get probably 60-70% more since they are very prolific.

            • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              Bro we talking about a home garden here, where do you have that much space? and above all, time to do all that in your home? Not even counting the knowledge needed, fertilizer and soil and the fact that 90% of people starting this will drop it at the second week, it is still overestimating how much they will harvest at the end.

              • enbyecho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                I’m not your “bro”.

                I’m using examples from commercial small-scale farms because that shows what’s possible when done correctly and by competent people, even at hand scale. I know many home gardeners who are extremely competent and frankly using the example of incompetent home gardeners or those who “drop it at the second week” compared to competent industrial farmers is completely disingenuous and wholly illogical.

                the fact that 90% of people starting this will drop it at the second week,

                [citation needed]

          • Welt@lazysoci.al
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            They might just be in a better climate than you! I had far more delicious sun-ripened tomatoes over the summer than I could eat. More than six plants to be fair, but most self-seeded anyway.

          • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            exactly.

            i’ve been gardening for years. it’s a supplement. for like 1-2months i get nice produce that can feed a few people for a few weeks. but that’s it. i maybe produce 20lbs of produce in a year if i’m lucky. that’s over a dozen or two plants. i have a good sized garden of about 100 sq ft.

            not to mention the weather any year could totally f you. one year we had three months of drought, so i got like 2lbs of tomatoes that year.

            turns out i still buy like 95% of my produce from the grocery store… because it’s available year round and it’s hard to grow variety well unless you have multiple beds with differing soil and sun conditions.

            most folks grow tomoatoes and cukes because they are easy and produce abundantly. but i am not going to live on tomatoes and cukes 365 days a year.

            the space needed to grow squashes, berries, etc. is way way higher. you need a lot of land. and they are very low yield. a ten foot watermelon vine produces like maybe 1-2 melons per year and takes up 20 sq ft of garden space. a squash vine might produce 4-6 decent squash, etc. and a lot of veggies and plants are non complimentary, meaning they choke each other out if grown in proximity.

            the only person i know who has a varied and big garden is an engineer who has spend five figures producing dozens of beds, water systems, and etc. and he still gets a shitty yield some years due to weather and he struggles constantly with rabbits, groundhogs stealing his crop. he has a whole trap and kill system for them even now. because the critters know he is the place to go for the tasty plants. most home gardening grow a few tomato plants and make some tomato sauce and throw a dinner party and that’s the extent of their home gardening.

            it’s way more complex and difficult than some ‘hrr drr just bring back victory gardens’ nonsense. you’re average person isn’t going to be building a 1000sq ft veggie garden with fencing and dealing with all the part time job of labor and upkeep that it requires.

    • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Funny enough ‘efficiency’ industrially tends to just mean what makes the most money anyways, so most crop’s have been trained to be nutrient sparse, yet large

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Who the fuck prioritized efficiency over quality in their backyard garden?

      The Billions of human beings who rely on agriculture to live.

      • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I think the imperative phrase here is backyard garden. They aren’t referring to a 40 acre field of wheat and potatoes, they probably are thinking a 10’x10’ raised bed.

        Edit: operative not imperative

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yes but both in the comments and the post I’m comparing low yield home gardens to large yield industrialized farming. If anybody is trying to derail the conversation away from the topic of the discussion then that is on them, not me.

          • enbyecho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’d urge you to consider what “yield” is and means and how “yield” plays out over the whole length of the industrialized food chain.

            The classic example from a producer’s perspective is that commodity level production has to be sorted and doesn’t get equal value for everything produced. So you may only get top dollar for 25-50% of what you grew and far less - possibly even zero - for the rest. Incredibly, it really is sometimes cost-effective to let the produce rot in the field if prices don’t support a profit.

            Then farther down the chain you have increasing losses and waste. By some estimates that’s as much as nearly 40% of all food produced. See also here.

            These factors only very rarely are brought up in these discussions in part because folks have very narrow conceptions of what “yield” means.

  • Cylusthevirus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Why would home gardeners optimize for yield and cost effectiveness? They can’t deploy automation or economies of scale.

    You garden at home because you enjoy the flavor, freshness, and variety. Those are the perks. Miss me with those mealy, flavorless grocery store tomatoes.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I came to the realization earlier today that there are an alarming number of people who theorize that they can just live off homegrown and composting. They think they can challenge big agriculture by “going off the grid” and that society would be better without subsidized industrial farming.

      That’s why they would optimize for yield and cost effectiveness. They think they can compete.

      EDIT: Also I’ve tried making tomatoes in colder climates before and they almost always succumb to disease. Huge success with zuccini and onions, though.

      • xor@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        man, you’re going to be really alarmed when you hear about community gardens and greenhouses…

        the idea for most people isn’t to completely replace all farming, but to reduce it, grow food instead of a lawn, have some fresh delicious non-gmo shit…
        have something to fall back on when the nuclear apocalypse happens…

        industrial farming will never be as nutritious, delicious, or satisfying as home-grown…

        p.s. working with soil has natural antidepressant properties…

      • BakerBagel@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        How northern are we talking? Our tomatoes didn’t so well last year in Northern Ohio, but the summer before i was absolutely drowning in cherry tomatoes!

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          47th Lat, so a fair bit further but the high winds of my region could contribute to hanging crops declines.

          • Fermion@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            My parents are around 44 deg lat and their tomatoes do very well. It seems like something else must be limiting your success.

  • enbyecho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I ran commercially successful regenerative farms for many years. Here is the shocking truth Corporate Jesus ™ didn’t want you to know:

    You aren’t “competing” on price or quantity. You are competing on quality. Quality in taste, quality in freshness which also means quality in nutrition^ and quality in sustainability.

    So… it might cost you a bit more in money and/or time to grow food in your garden but you are getting so much more value out of it. That’s the yield and that’s the cost effectiveness.

    That’s massively more efficient than subsidizing huge-scale industrial agriculture so that some giant corporation can yield higher profits. In fact, come to think of it, shouldn’t home gardens be subsidized?

    ^ E.g. 90% of vitamin C in spinach is lost after 72 hours from harvest

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      home gardening requires time and land.

      It’s largely a privilege for those who have both. not a solution for the economically depressed who have neither.

      • enbyecho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        It’s largely a privilege for those who have both. not a solution for the economically depressed who have neither.

        I’m pretty sure that’s what Corporate Jesus would want people to believe. And to be honest, sometimes labeling something as “privileged” is just another way of reinforcing that thinking. It doesn’t have to be that way.

        1. Gardening does not require much time relative to the value of the output. Many new gardeners will say “oh but it’s so time consuming” because they are still learning and make lots of mistakes. If you have your systems up and running and your processes down, it’s a fraction of the actual value produced and is extremely efficient. Don’t get me started or I will go on about this in extreme nerdy detail from personal experience.
        2. Collective action can massively increase both the availability of suitable land and the output relative to any one individual’s effort. An obvious example of this is community gardens such as the Gill Tract in Albany, CA. If Occupy the Farm had been better supported we the people could have had the whole thing, but there still is a large garden available for use by neighboring houses. And there are community gardens and vacant land waiting to be community gardens everywhere. It just takes folks to say they can do it to make it happen.

        A key component in this is a general misunderstanding of the value of your labor. When you garden you retain 100% of the value of your labor and your time is worth much more. When you work for others and then have to pay for food at a significant markup, you are losing a very large proportion of that labor. This is one of the central lies of capitalism that forces you into wage slavery and promotes false narratives like “growing food is most efficient on a huge scale”. Efficient to whom? Not to you.

        Edit: Another related example is the Berkeley Student Farm on the Oxford Tract and 6 other urban spaces. They are doing some amazing work and it’s worth a few moments to read about them: https://www.studentfarms.berkeley.edu/

        • d2k1@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          6 months ago

          Don’t get me started or I will go on about this in extreme nerdy detail from personal experience.

          Please do! I am just starting with some gardening and haven’t much experience yet.

          • enbyecho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Please do! I am just starting with some gardening and haven’t much experience yet.

            Uh oh.

            Well I’ll just mention one thing… just. one. thing. Ok, no, let me do my top beginner mistakes, which seem to all be not understanding what plants need.

            1. Over-watering. For example, tomatoes (and solanaceae in general) like periodic deep watering and shouldn’t be overly moist. I always starve them for water until they start to get a little crispy (literally they look like shit) and do my weekly-ish harvesting the day before watering.
            2. Not hardening-off starts. Don’t plant those peppers in the ground without having them gradually outside over a few days, ending in being out overnight for a day or three.
            3. Not understanding soil and air temperatures. It’s super helpful to know the daytime highs and nightime lows and ideally soil temps as well. Some plants just really won’t grow well when it’s too hot (lettuce) or too cold (tomatoes, cukes, etc)
            4. Growing starts in your living room window because it “gets lots of sun”. If your plants are leggy and weak it’s because they get sun for part of the day and it shifts around too much.
            5. Assuming you have to nuke every living thing anywhere near your veggies. 95% of all insects are beneficials and if you do not provide habitat for them and/or you use copious pesticides, you are killing more good things than bad. On my last farm we used no pesticides, organic-approved or otherwise. This works if you have pathways of (ideally natives) for beneficials to thrive in. The classic example is flea beetles - they thrive in barren hot soil while the beneficials that would eat them avoid that. So plant your arugula near some grasses (like right up against it) and you will not likely have a flea beetle problem.
            • d2k1@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              Thank you, that was interesting. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter 🙂

              But I am not sure I understand point 2. Are you talking about seeds?

              • enbyecho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                6 months ago

                But I am not sure I understand point 2. Are you talking about seeds?

                People buy or grow “starts” - little baby plants in pots - and often don’t let them adjust to being outside before sticking them in the ground.

            • 31337@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              What are the solutions to #4? Had that problem this year. Something killed about a 1/4 of my tomato and pepper starts because they were still really small when it was time to plant them outdoors (guessing snails or cutworms; I have a lot of both).

              • enbyecho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                What are the solutions to #4? Had that problem this year.

                Cutworms and similar (I have armyworms) are very annoying. Standard advice is tilling and keeping things clear of weeds but that has the effect of removing habitat for beneficials. My approach is mechanical removal, which I’ve found very effective: go out when said critters are active, usually at night, and pick them off. It’s labor intensive but you only need to do it 1-2 times. For many worms, they’ll bury themselves just under the soil surface during the day so if you lightly till with a hand trowl or something in about a 4-6" circle around the plant you can often find them. I also just over-plant, expecting to lose some - we also have gophers here who take about a 10% tythe on nearly everything. Some folks use cardboard collars around the base of peppers and tomatoes but I didn’t find that effective and it was a pain.

                Obviously the bigger and stronger the plants are the greater the more damage they can take and still survive. Often really small solanaceae are still susceptible to damping off (too much moisture) or may just not be big enough to withstand the shock of transplanting.

                So… a cheap and very effective solution to the “living room window” problem is a mini greenhouse or cold frame of some kind, if you have the space. The idea being to give your starts a more ideal growing environment to strengthen them as much as possible before going in the ground.

                Even just a simple 2’x4’ cold frame made from scrap wood and recycled glass or plexiglass (or better, double walled greenhouse panels) can help the starts make the transition better. You can still start things inside when it’s too cold and be careful to move them around to get maximum sun, but then move it to the cold frame as soon as night time temperatures support it and then let the starts mature in there - they will do much better in the heat and light. I use a passive solar greenhouse made from an old Costco barn frame and covered in proper greenhouse plastic (about $130). I have these dark grey barrels (55 gallon food grade barrels used by factories to hold things like syrups - $15 each) that are filled with water and heat up during the day. This provides enough thermal mass that I can start things even when daytime highs are in the 30s. You can replicate this on a smaller scale in a cold frame with even just a few gallons of water.

                Other options include season extension methods like row covers (Remay or Agribon). The idea being to even out temperature extremes as much as to protect from frost. A simple hoop made from metal conduit will last way longer than PVC and can be stuck in the ground better. Heavy row covers like AG-50 will get you a lot of frost protection and even if it’s not freezing at night many starts will appreciate the higher nighttime temps. Just be sure to ventilate during the day as it can get too hot. For smaller areas an old blanket or even sheet will help retain some heat. Or alternatively, a small plastic container that you put over the start, usually just at night… like a yoghurt container or bottle of some kind.

                I use this last method quite a bit for things like watermelons where I’ve got 8’ spacing and Agribon is just not efficient. I made little “hats” out of wire and scraps of Agribon and cover the mounds (I direct seed) until they germinate and get their true leaves. I have to do this because I grow heirloom varieties that take forever and my season is relatively short.

      • zazo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        that’s why OP was suggesting we subsidize home (and I’d add allotment) gardens - give people money to plant food and flowers and they’ll be better of f both physically and mentally.

        • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          and who will till the soil, weed, fight pests, harvest, etc.

          govt going to provide the physical labor and extra hours per week that is required too?

          I mean I get it. I’m a rich white person with a lot of leisure time and I own property where I can have a garden… but turns out not everyone has this stuff. Half my younger friends have no time and no property on which to garden. And those folks are much better off that say, a single mom of two who rents and is struggling to provide her kids with food because she’s working 50 hours a week to pay rent. Should I just tell her to ‘make your own garden! that will totally feed your family of three…’ just put dozens of hours into your concrete driveway of plastic tubs that will provide you with a few weeks of vegetables, most of which will rot before you can use them… unless you want to devote more time and money into canning.

          Gardening is great. But jerking myself off and generalizing and saying everyone else should be doing what i have the luxury to do… just makes me a smug self-righteous ass. People buy food from stores because it’s convenient and fast.

          • enbyecho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Involvement in food production to some degree is involvement in your own freedom and independence from capitalist hegemony. To me it’s the opposite of privilege. It’s not a luxury and it’s so so sad that people think of it in those terms.

            Somehow along the way folks were instilled with the idea that growing their own food is hard, not efficient… even equated with being poor or some kind of peasant. And there’s a very good reason for this - big industrialized agriculture doesn’t work except at huge scales and it takes everyone buying cheetos and hot dogs for it to work. And somehow we got into this rut where you have to work 50 hours a week - paid a fraction of the real value of your labor - to afford the “value-added” food that is not nutritionally dense, tasty or grown sustainably.

            The truth is that growing food is about as simple and basic as it gets IF you have the knowledge. It is even more viable if people work collectively to get some of those economies of scale.

            So take 10 hours of that week and use it to produce valuable food for yourself and for your neighbors. 2-3 families working 10 hours a week each grows A LOT of food. You do not need a lot of land… indeed there is land out there available to be used for community gardens, for free.

            Unlike a lot of folks, I’m not going to say this can’t work in every situation because I believe it can. Further, I believe it’s an existential necessity.

          • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            and who will till the soil, weed, fight pests, harvest, etc.

            In the case of a home garden, the homeowners, just like it’s expected for a homeowner to care for all the other plants on their property.

            In the case of an allotment/community garden, community members would provide the labor. That’s how they currently work.

            I mean I get it. I’m a rich white person with a lot of leisure time and I own property where I can have a garden… but turns out not everyone has this stuff.

            I’m confused what the problem is - just because you know some people that wouldn’t benefit from a home garden subsidy, doesn’t make it a bad idea, if it encourages more people to grow food at home. It’s not a one-size-fits-all solution to be sure, but it is a solution that would work for some, with little to no downside that I can conceive of.

            Also the whole “you need a lot of land if you want to garden” thing is kind of a myth. You can do a surprising amount in containers, with vertical systems, or even indoors with grow lights or hydroponics these days.

            Edit to address your edit:

            Gardening is great. But jerking myself off and generalizing and saying everyone else should be doing what i have the luxury to do… just makes me a smug self-righteous ass. People buy food from stores because it’s convenient and fast.

            I don’t think anyone’s saying “everyone should garden”, just “more people should garden”. The original suggestion we’re discussing was to subsidize gardening, which would help reduce the barrier to entry and make it a more attractive option. Option being the keyword there - subsidizing something doesn’t mean everyone has to do it, and it certainly isn’t an attempt to belittle or shame anyone that can’t or doesn’t want to garden.

  • __Lost__@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    I don’t understand why anyone would argue against a garden. Should my yard just be grass? Why shouldn’t I plant something I can eat in it? It doesn’t matter if it’s less efficient than industrial farming, it’s basically unused land to start with.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s because nobody is arguing that. The argument is against people saying that industrial farming is evil and should be stopped, which is a bit of a past time hobby around here.

      • ZMoney@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Monoculture is terrible for the ecosystem. Fertilizer runoff causes algal blooms and dead zones in the ocean. Multinational agricultural conglomerates force developing world farmers to purchase their GMO seeds sue them for copyright infingement if they try to use their seed stock in the next season. Rainforests are being burned down to make room for pastures of methane emitting cattle and monocultured palm oil plantations. The Haber-Bosch process is responsible for 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Should I go on? At what point am I supposed to like this?

        • Bolt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Fix the system, make a new system, buy discerningly. Have a garden if you can and advocate for more of them if you want. Fight against monoculture, irresponsible fertilizer and pesticide use, copyright abuse, and more. None of that is an irreplacable part of growing food at a large and efficient scale.

          By the way, I’m curious about the Haber-Bosch figure. Isn’t that the process that allows us to easily make fertilizer, and greatly increase productivity? It seems like that 5% is doing much more heavy lifting than, for example, the ~20% from cow burps.

          • ZMoney@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Right, those are all irreplacable parts of global capitalism and its ruling oligarchy.

            Haber Bosch is basically just squeezing nitrogen and oxygen together with a catalyst to make ammonia. To generate high pressures you need energy which you get by burning hydrocarbons. Legumes and bacteria can also do this, which is why crop rotation and letting fields lie fallow has been done for centuries. But you can’t let your field lie fallow if you have to compete with other firms who are burning coal to make fertilizer…

            • Welt@lazysoci.al
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              They worked out four-crop rotation during the agrarian revolution in the 18th century, they haven’t let fields lie fallow since they worked out how to rejuvenate the soil with crops like turnips that could become horse feed…

              • ZMoney@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Pre-Columbian Meso-Americans were already exploiting nitrogen fixing bacteria with the milpa (corn, beans, squash). Anyway the point is if your yield is dependent on how much fertilizer you produce industrially then the sky is the limit for how much coal to burn.

        • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I think at the point where you have food on the table. Without haver, you wouldn’t have food on your table and you’d die from hunger

          Nobody is claiming it’s perfect, nobody is claiming things cannot or should not be improved.

          The point is that these systems are there because like it or not, they work. Haber works, you are alive, ain’t you? Now from here on we must improve.

          Rotate crops more often, cut the stranglehold from agriculture conglomerates, lower the world population by lowering birth rates, be super 8+ billion and rising is just too much for this world to handle… Things like that.

          Either way, tonight you can eat, maybe be at least a little grateful for that?

          • ZMoney@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Haber will obviously continue to be used and work but as long as there’s a fossil fuel price to make it happen expect more extreme storms, fires, droughts, floods, ocean acidification, and possibly methane clathrate release triggering a runaway greenhouse effect like during the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum.

            • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I know. Same for cars, which cause up to 25% of all CO2 exhaust, much easier to curb that. We can do with much less cars, food would be harder.

      • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Right?

        it’s no different than the yahoos who they they would run the govt better. then they try and give up because it’s ‘too hard’. this is basically the same as soveign citizen BS, but with vegetables instead of guns.

        but we can’t let a complex reality get in the way of our well-intention delusions of smugness. because apparently if every citizen isn’t providing themselve wiht their own fruits and vegetables… it’s their complicity with corporations… or something.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Should my yard just be grass?

      Definitely not!

      Why shouldn’t I plant something I can eat in it?

      Because a terrifyingly large percentage of soil is very polluted, and really isn’t suitable for growing food. If you eat a lot of homegrown food, getting the soil tested for (at least) heavy metals is probably a good idea, especially if you have little kids or pregnant people.

        • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Honestly, there are no good home tests for heavy metals, and there definitely aren’t any for everything else.

          If you eat mostly home-grown food, you can Google around for labs that do testing near you. You should be prepared for something near a 100 dollar bill though, for heavy metal tests. If you eat a 15 homegrown tomatoes and some herbs a year, then I personally wouldn’t bother testing.

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      They have to defend capitalism and the idea that overproduction is good, regardless of the waste.

      They simply don’t care, about anything but money.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I don’t understand why anyone would argue against a garden.

      I don’t understand why anyone thinks I ever argued against a garden.

  • EunieIsTheBus@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    6 months ago

    Is probably true. However, one should question their world view if they measure everything as a minimization problem with respect to cost efficience and yield.

    • Donkter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think it’s less about ruthless efficiency and more about which system will enable even the poorest in society to have nutritious food.

        • nxdefiant@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          250 years ago people would rent pineapples for parties as status symbols because they cost $8000.

          Nowadays the most expensive pineapple you can get is barely $400.

          That’s progress

        • Donkter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not saying anything about the system, just about which farming method has the most potential to equitably distribute resources.

          • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I get what you mean. Our system produces a ridiculous amount of quantity, which should be great! But in the context of where it’s firmly placed within existing socioeconomics, stupid things happen like “destroying all the product to keep the value from crashing” and the “distribution problem” that feeding the poor isn’t profitable.

            Maybe industrial agriculture wouldn’t be so terrible if food production for the human race didn’t operate on the same metrics as handbags or funkopops. =\

            • Donkter@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              I agree that commodifying food, especially locking nutrition behind class walls is barbaric. I also get that the current iteration of industrial farming is scary (don’t get me wrong, it sucks shit) and that “small scale farming solutions just haven’t been tried!” but clearly small scale farming is a long term fantasy that would take many decades of work and public acceptance, not even to mention the process of decommodifying the agriculture industry. All I’m saying is that if I’m playing in the same space, the method that would be the most environmentally friendly and efficient (not in an economic sense) is large scale industrial farms.

              • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                The other concern I have about small-scale farming I had, arose because I had this notion about “What if we could eliminate food deserts that are literally in the desert through household hydroponics?”

                It sounded like such an awesome idea. Federated food! What a revolution!

                But I also found out there’s a ton that can go very wrong when you have no idea where food came from or how it is grown.

                It’s also my experienced opinion that a not-small percentage of the human population in this metropolis range from clinically insane to dangerously ignorant.

                Industrial farming sucks in a lot of ways, but I’m also glad the (horribly underfunded) FDA and USDA exists.

                Perhaps pushes for education in this field could go a long way? It seems outside of farming communities, food production is very much thought of as “farmers’ work.” and not much else.

        • Welt@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Borlaug’s green revolution of the mid-20th century did lead to a rapid reduction in famines across Asia and Africa…

        • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I mean. It has? Even the poorest of the poor eat better than they did a couple hundred years ago

    • enbyecho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      if they measure everything as a minimization problem with respect to cost efficience and yield.

      Well to be fair, that 3rd home in the Hamptons and a bigger yacht are not going to pay for themselves.

  • GarlicToast@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    It may be true for ‘soldier’ plants. However there are thousands of plant species that can’t be both efficiently mass produced and shipped while still being of good quality. So you get a bad produce, very costly produce or both.

    I can’t afford fresh Basil leaves, I maintained a plant in my kitchen in some of the apartments I lived in. The current one doesn’t have enough sun. It took 10 minutes of work to arrange and emptying left over water.

    Also, if you never tasted cherry tomatoes straight from the plant you don’t what you are missing, and how shity is the produce in the market.

    • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      I can’t afford fresh Basil leaves, I maintained a plant in my kitchen in some of the apartments I lived in. The current one doesn’t have enough sun. It took 10 minutes of work to arrange and emptying left over water.

      The basil plants you buy in grocery stores are designed to die after a while. It’s not lack of sun or water, it’s because there are just way too many plants in the tiny pot and basil does not like to be root-bound. They basically strangle themselves to death.

      You can easily propagate the plant through cuttings or you can separate the grown plants and re-pot them in smaller groups.

      • GarlicToast@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yea, I had Basil im some apartments. The current one has no sun at-all. Basil needs some. But when I bought plants my father guided me how to split them. Gifted my friends, don’t need more then one.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      It sounds like you live in the US or something. Tomatoes from the market should be freshly picked overnight to be sold early in the morning. There’s literally no difference.

      • GarlicToast@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        I don’t live in the USA.

        I just don’t live near a tomatoes field, however, it’s not just time, perfectly ripe tomatoes don’t survive transportation well. So mass production of tomatoes requires the picking of less ripe fruit.

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I used to grow tomatoes myself and then transport them 80km away to my family. No issues there. They can survive a lot, especially if you have a refrigerated truck.

          • GarlicToast@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            I worked a few summers on a commercial organic farm and for many years in a small family plot. Maybe we are talking about different scales of transportation, quality control or different species of tomatoes.

      • enbyecho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Okay but how does this feed 8 Billion People?

        I went back and looked at some of your posts on this thread because I was thinking “they can’t really be that unimaginative” and lo and behold, it’s true, you can be!

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Sorry for not having the time and energy to respond to hundreds of comments with full paragraphs, as if it would sway you anti-industrial advocates.

      • GarlicToast@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        We don’t have a stable way to feed 8 billion people. The dependency on monoculture will cause many people to die under a changing climate.

        Self gardening may:

        1. Increase food stability
        2. Increase access to nutrients rich food, GR while saving many, reduced food quality
        3. Be fucking tasty and cheap
  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    6 months ago

    The more you grow and eat at home, the less the food industry needs to burn fuel to ship. I know you folks in the US hate doing anything to help out with the world, but if you took the saying of be the change you want to see, imagine the tens of millions of acres being wasted on lawns being put to environmental and nutritional use. Imagine instead of putting leaves into plastic bags to get shipped to a landfill, or burning, houses normalized having compost piles. You get to put waste paper and cardboard in there too instead of bagging it.

    I challenge all of yall to grow beans this season. They grow fast, they grow easy, theyre pretty nutritionally complete, they fertilize your soil themselves. Make use of your land.

    • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Yup we should normalize gardening and canning. It’s a thing my grandparents knew. Their families survived times of world wars, dust bowls and the great depression. They probably didn’t have much choice in the moment but even when times got better they kept up a wonderful little garden. Kid me didn’t get why they didn’t just buy the things they needed.

      I love the conveniences of modern farming and I use it every day. But like all big industialized systems they can be fragile. Covid was a huge problem for a lot of indistries and thankfully farming wasn’t really one of them. But if it was countless people would have struggled.

      I’m not really a prepper or anything crazy but I don’t want to forget the lessons learned just a few decades ago- gardening is great and worth the effort.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It makes sense for it to be the same as solar power: just because most of energy generation is done in big facilities and even some kinds of solar generation (such as solar concentrators) can only be done in large facilities, doesn’t make having some solar panels providing part of one’s needs (or even all of one’s needs for some of the time) less cost effective in Economic terms or a good thing in Ecologic terms.

      So it makes sense to grow some of one’s food, but maybe not go as far as raise one’s own beef or even aim for food self sufficiency, both for personal financial reasons and health reasons. That it’s also good in Ecological terms (can lower the use of things like pesticides and definitelly reduces transportation needs) is just icing on the cake.

      • blazera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Im pretty sure the easy decentralization of solar is a big reason its gotten so much pushback from politicians and lobbyists.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Imagine instead of putting leaves into plastic bags to get shipped to a landfill, or burning, houses normalized having compost piles.

      I appreciate your argument but there’s no need to throw in a strawman. Leaves in plastic bags have been illegal in most US states for decades. Yard waste must be in paper bags.

  • Annoyed_🦀 @monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    6 months ago

    Agree, but also do plant something that you’ll use just a small amount from time to time, like herbs, spices, scallion, chive, and so on. Thing that you’ll want it fresh but you can never use it all before it compost. Don’t even need a garden, just plant it in pot.

    I have screwpine leaf, lemon grass, coriander, and scallion in my garden, and i can harvest the onion when i need it.

  • Steak@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    6 months ago

    I smoke a lot of weed. Always have. Last year I grew 4 plants in my backyard garden and this year I’ve saved thousands of dollars on weed. It’s not as strong as store stuff but you get used to to it quickly and there’s less paranoia with homegrown I find. I’m always gonna grow my own weed from now on. Only reason I didn’t before was that it was illegal. This year I germinated 3 seeds but only one took so I’ll have one super tall pot plant in my backyard haha.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      While it’s still in the “vegetation” stage look up how to “clone” plants and you can make that one plant into as many as you can successfully clone!

      • Steak@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I was wondering about this. Looked it up. Definitely starting a couple clones tomorrow. Thankyou.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Alright, I’d like to retroactively change my statement to have the amendment: “Except for Weed. You can easily be self-sustaining on weed.”

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    The thing about it is that I’m keeping the benefit of the cost effectiveness myself instead of some farmers and taking heads elsewhere. It’s more efficient per dollar for ME.

      • enbyecho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Your time is not free. In fact it’s incredibly valuable. So why are you giving it away to corporations for pennies on the dollar? You could be getting 100% of the value of your time when you garden.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        That argument is nonsense for anyone who doesn’t live at work.

        • enbyecho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          It’s the same argument you made earlier:

          I’m saving money for myself with my own efforts? It’s specifically to exclude external economics.

          and here:

          The thing about it is that I’m keeping the benefit of the cost effectiveness myself

          By using your own efforts you retain more of the value for yourself. When you work for others you get paid only a fraction of the value you produce. Ie, your time is more valuable than you are getting paid for.

          • Mango@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            You think I can just go to my workplace and sit on the clock whenever I want? No. There are hours when I cannot be at work. Those hours are not equivalent to work hours.

            Also, WTF are you smoking? These arguments are nothing alike.

            • enbyecho@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m sorry you weren’t able to understand that simple point. But have a nice day!

                • enbyecho@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  You are apparently here to not read. I was literally agreeing with you.

                  Bye now.

    • enbyecho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      some farmers

      May I ask a favor? Make a distinction between small-scale direct-to-consumer farmers (ie the kind that sell at farmer’s markets) and large-scale commodity farmers and the huge agricorps that own them.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Why would I make that distinction when the point of it is that I’m saving money for myself with my own efforts? It’s specifically to exclude external economics.

        • enbyecho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Because (a) you say it in a way that comes across as derogatory. Unless you grow 100% of your food you need a farmer in there somewhere to live; (b) because the closer you get to the farmer (ie buy from small-scale farms) the more value you retain.

          • Mango@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            You’re one of those people who is anticipating being insulted somehow and just looking for a reason to complain.

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Home gardening is an important element of individual food security. It’s not meant to replace industrial agriculture which maintains food security for the nation as a whole

    • enbyecho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Home gardening is an important element of individual food security.

      And food independence

      It’s not meant to replace industrial agriculture which maintains food security for the nation as a whole

      Hard disagree. Industrial agriculture maintains profits for a few corporations. That large-scale agriculture is productive, necessary, efficient or any of that is a myth. It’s massively inefficient when viewed from the perspective of value - especially nutritional value- to the consumer.

      • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        I don’t have any love lost for mega corporate farms and agree that we need more family and cooperative owned farms that would be more concerned with sustainability and environmental impact.