Capn_Zelnick t1_jb9b2fk wrote on March 7, 2023 at 12:00 PM

Reply to comment by tfks in Global food consumption alone could add nearly 1 °C to warming by 2100. Seventy five percent of this warming is driven by foods that are high sources of methane (ruminant meat, dairy and rice). by Plant__Eater

I don't suggest that the corn industry, or any other industry already discussed in different threads that has significant concequences to its subsidizing, die, just that we really don't have to spend this much on food security in order to still have a huge advantage in that regard over the rest of the world.

tfks t1_jb9ggh0 wrote on March 7, 2023 at 12:55 PM

The industry doesn't have to die. I did also use the word flounder. These industries need to be subsidized enough that they could provide food rations to the American people in times of catastrophe. If they're below that threshold and the global food supply becomes significantly restricted, it risks economic and societal collapse. Is the subsidy balanced in that way? I honestly don't know and I've never once seen anyone addressing that in these threads about food subsidies.