| ▲ | all2 5 hours ago |
| > Is feeding the world a real problem? Yes, but it is not a production capacity problem. The constraints on food are mostly in the logistics chain, often having to do with corruption or distribution targets (food goes where the money is), or regulation (did you know that cherry growers in the Upper Midwest are required --_by Federal law_-- to destroy unsold crops?). A huge amount of food goes to waste simply because of regulation or subsidies, at least within the United States. |
|
| ▲ | Alupis 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Tart cherries are supply-controlled because they are processed into other goods, like pie filling, and can be stored for long duration (multiple seasons). The supply-control regulation is designed to prevent a surplus crop from depressing the market to the point where it's no longer viable to grow tart cherries - reducing future supply, ie. the regulation is designed to provide a consistent, stable supply. Surplus tart cherry crops are rarely destroyed. In the event of a surplus, they are often exported, diverted to secondary markets, donated, or carried-over into next-season's stock. |
| |
| ▲ | cogman10 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yup. The regulations on food in the US is exactly to make sure the shelves stay stocked no matter what. Without such regulations, you'd experience random items being unavailable and price shocks. One thing people often don't figure or realize is food takes time to grow. It requires long term thinking to make sure supplies are sufficient. Left to their own devices, farmers will often chase after last season's cash crop. That is bad. It's far better for farmers to stick to more predictable growing and for more dedicated incentives to be issued. | | |
| ▲ | fredthompson an hour ago | parent [-] | | Did you intend to be so insulting, condescending, and dismissive? "Left to their own devices, farmers will often chase after last season's cash crop. That is bad. It's far better for farmers to stick to more predictable growing and for more dedicated incentives to be issued." | | |
| ▲ | array_key_first 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | | It's true though, these regulations exists because speculation and profit-chasing in agriculture is what lead to the dust bowl and worsened the great depression. We really, really don't want a repeat of that. | | |
| ▲ | boothby a few seconds ago | parent [-] | | The amazing thing about people failing to learn from history is that everybody thinks they're too smart to (a) learn history or (b) follow rules enacted to prevent the disasters of yesteryear. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | bloppe 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think your fun cherry fact is pretty inaccurate. If you're referring to USDA Marketing Order #930, it's basically about setting sales limits in bumper crop years to avoid a situation where so many cherries hit the market that farmers lose money simply by harvesting them. They're free to donate the cherries etc. but again, they would be essentially wasting their own money by putting in the time and effort to harvest them beyond the amount they're allowed to sell. |
|
| ▲ | ls612 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| This is for good reason though. You want to overproduce significantly in ordinary times so that if there is a big negative shock you will still be able to produce enough to feed everyone merely by not destroying the excess anymore. |
| |
| ▲ | unglaublich 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | But in a pure market that would mean that during overproduction times, prices should be low. Which they artificially aren't through industry price fixing. | | |
| ▲ | bee_rider 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I’m not sure what a pure market is. The result that free markets are Prato optimal, though, requires conditions like low barriers to entry, perfect information, and low cost transactions… none of which seem very well met in the case of agriculture. | | |
| ▲ | adgjlsfhk1 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It turns out that low barriers to entry, perfect information and low cost transactions are almost never present. |
|
| |
| ▲ | voxl 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There is no reason to obliterate food, you should give it away to those in need. | | |
| ▲ | Alupis 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | People do not eat tart cherries directly. They are processed into other goods, like pie filling, juice concentrate, etc. Sweet cherries have no such regulation, and are the ones you consume directly as a fruit - without any additional processing. | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's a nice bit of trivia but it doesn't really affect the comment you're replying to. It's still food, full of flavor and calories, and able to be used by a home cook (by making a pie). | | |
| ▲ | Alupis 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | If you researched this regulation even a little, you'd see the crops are rarely destroyed. They are far more often exported, diverted to secondary markets, donated, or carried-over into next-season's stock. It's interesting to me how people are quick to comment about things they know nothing about... > It's still food, full of flavor and calories Tart cherries have about 1-2 calories per cherry, and do not taste good without a lot of sugar. That's why they are used in commercial processing, not generally sold as a fruit in grocery stores. | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > If you researched this regulation even a little Yeah yeah yeah I saw that in your other comment. That's a completely different argument. The argument you made in this comment is still a bad one. It's interesting to me how people are quick to move the goalposts... | | |
| ▲ | Alupis 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | So you understood the crop we're discussing is rarely destroyed - and more often donated, diverted to secondary markets (ie. sold in grocery stores), or exported - yet still felt compelled to say a home cook could use them? What was even the point of your snarky comment then? | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > So you understood the crop we're discussing is rarely destroyed - and more often donated, diverted to secondary markets (ie. sold in grocery stores), or exported - yet still felt compelled to say a home cook could use them? In the context of someone talking about home cooks using them, and you acting like "People do not eat tart cherries directly." is a counterargument, yes I felt compelled to correct that. The incorrect thing you were implying had nothing to do with how often they're actually destroyed. So why would that stop me? | | |
| ▲ | Alupis 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | People do not eat tart cherries directly. The overwhelming majority of people will never process them into something edible either. "People in need" are not going to spend time and money processing tart cherries into juice concentrate or pie filling... especially when a can of either is cheaper than the raw ingredients to make your own. Your point is ridiculous, absurd and pedantic beyond any reasonable purpose. | | |
| ▲ | nkurz 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Most of what you are saying is correct, but I feel the need to respond to your far too many repeated assertions that "People do not eat tart cherries directly": Except for when they do! I grow several varieties of sour cherries in my yard, and frequently use them whole and without further processing. Usually I use them in a recipe like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clafoutis. Sometimes I pit them first, sometimes I don't. Sometimes I'll even happily snack on them raw. No, like most small fruit you aren't going eat them because you are desperate for calories. But they actually aren't any harder to prepare or use than lots of other tasty things that people traditionally grow. | |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | nh23423fefe 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ok drive to Michigan and haul away 3 tons of cherries. | | |
| ▲ | munk-a 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Are Michigan tart cherry farmers allowed to sell direct to customers without additional licensing requirements and food inspections? | |
| ▲ | voxl 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Insightful retort, did you forget the slight issue of it being illegal? |
|
|
|
