"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 04 May 2006 13:24:50 -0400, katy
said:

Academic? There's plenty of valid literature out there regarding
small agribusiness (the family farm) and how worthwhile it would be
to pursue maintaining and increasing small farms.

Katy, I grew up in farming country. Even in the 50s the 174 acre farm he
posits as the maximum size would never have been economically viable when
compared to those around it. There's a reason why the size of farms has
grown.

And that reason is lack of labor. We all know that slaves once provided it on
big plantations. Our dirty little secret is that one's own kids provided it on
"family farms". Every generation the farmer wore out several wives producing a
dozen or more kids who did the same work as slaves on 'massa's plantation for
the same wage. Every generation the eldest inherited the farm, married one of
the girls next door (or his half-sister) and began his own crop of slaves. These
displaced the farmer's siblings who ended up in city sweat shops where a few
lived to be as old as 30. That's one reason average life expectancy was so low.
Now we rely on machines instead.

No matter how nostalgic one wishes to wax, the case for the small family
farm is based on emotion, not economics.

And misguided emotion at that. Check out some old family graveyards. You'll
find a father then his son then his son, and so on. In between each one you'll
find 3 or 4 wives plus some kids, worked to death. Then wonder what happened to
the dozen or so kids each generation who are not buried there. I'll take a
tractor and combine over that any day! Folks who yearn for the family farm have
never put up hay grin.