We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12496398 and marked it off-topic.

are we for the legalization of drugs today or against?

Heroin, basically a form of Morphine, has legit medical uses. Just like LSD and other fairly simple, potent molecules. Banning any R&D outright on them was a huge setback for medicine.

speak for yourself, there are plenty of people who think full and unquestionable legalization is the best way to start addressing addiction in modern society rather than treating it like a literal war.

I am living in a city whose drug strategy is a model for others [0]. You can both help the junkies and prosecute the dealers all without gang shootings on the streets.

[0] http://www.dw.com/en/frankfurt-still-germanys-drug-capital-b...

There is often more than one reasonable approach to a problem.

Portugal did and is seeing benefits.

it didn't, portugal _decriminalized_ possession of drugs, in an amounts reputed for "personal use".

It's still illegal to sell drugs, and if you are caught with a joint you have to face social support, can get various licenses removed, get fined, lose welfare benefits etc.

It's a much better policy than the war on drugs, but it's not legalisation.

>Nobody in their right mind wants to legalize heroin.

What cave do you live in where heroin and other opiate usage isn't already a massive issue, even though it's illegal?

Are you going to start mainlining heroin just because it's legal? I'm not. The point of legalization is to stop throwing addicts in jail.

> The point of legalization is to stop throwing addicts in jail.

What cave do you live in where you have to legalize heroin to do that? Please visit the link I posted before your comment.

You do not have to legalize heroin to supply clean needles, clean rooms and not prosecute junkies. You can do all that, still keep it illegal to sell and hunt down the dealers.

I think it's less about legalization but rather about decriminalizing it. Making these drugs legal could potentially be dangerous as it sends a message that they are safe to use.

But if you get caught buying or possessing drugs for personal use, this shouldn't have any legal consequences. Portugal is one example, but many European countries do this at least for some drugs.

Jethro: "Your herbicide is too deadly, how can I drink my beer and aim the sprayer at the same time without getting this shit all over my crops and killin em?"

Sales Rep: "Oh, you mean you'd use more if it didn't do that... well I mean, I suppose... we could genetically engineer new crops so you could spray as much as you wanted without harming them"

Jethro: "We farmers are simple folk and we are environmentalist - so - I appreciate such a simple solution. We also need more gopher poison when you get a chance"

I like the idea that "Jethro" is still running the farm. It's not usually true, but I guess it makes for a more amusing anecdote.

The funny thing is there's basically a jethro in my family but I won't get into that here. In California there's still some specialty crops on expensive land that allow for family owned operations but even here it's probably going to be a thing of the past soon.

I worked on an avocado ranch (insert unnamed corporate sponsor here) in undergrad and I met a lot of "jethros" - there's a fraternity called AGR, I think that's where they trained them.

Even the guys with agribusiness degrees at cal poly were hicks, I used to drink beers on the job, etc. And I was in charge of killing the gophers, sometimes with horrible poison, sometimes with "rodex".

The day I quit, I said something about the entire field of agriculture not being interesting enough and I switched majors the next quarter.

The typical US farm is a family owned business.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/201431/eib24b_1_.pdf

A key para Ninety-eight percent of U.S. farms are family farms. The remaining 2 percent are nonfamily farms, which produce 15 percent of the value of agricultural output (fig. 4). Two features of family farms stand out. First, there are many small family farms (< $250,000 annual sales), making up 90 percent of all U.S. farms. Second, large-scale family farms account for 60 percent of all production.

So large closely held farms produce 60% of US output and smaller farms produce another 25% of US output.

The number of "family farms", however you choose to define that as a meaningful term, is roughly the same percentage. the output has dropped below 50% of total agricultural output however.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib-economic-informatio...

Farming is still an industry of family businesses. Ninety-nine percent of farms are family farms, and they account for 90 percent of farm production. Small farms make up 90 percent of the farm count and operate 46 percent of the Nation's farmland. Most farm production, however, occurs on midsize and large-scale family farms.

It's also worth asking the question, "Is the term 'family farm' meaningful in many of these cases?"

If you choose to include midsize and large scale family farms in "family farms", then your source contradicts, the output has dropped below 50% of total agricultural output however. It says as much in the portion you quoted.

Farms have gotten larger as equipment has gotten larger and more effective. This isn't particularly shocking. But much of the consolidation has been individuals and families building up large farms over time.

It certainly appears that production will continue to concentrate under fewer and fewer operators, so the scary stories about the corporate takeover of farming can still come true.

Again, are they "scary stories" or just the reality of where most of our food comes from? I'm also still curious about just how meaningful the term "Family farm" is.

Reread my initial comment. Look for where I use the term. I avoided it on purpose because I think that part of it is a boring discussion.

The majority of our food comes from huge farms running huge machinery. Thousands and thousands of those huge farms are owned by small groups (there's a few million farms in the US, so even 1% of them is still a lot). Are those groups families? Some of the are, some of them aren't.

one thing I noticed is that the document didn't define "family farm" to my satisfaction, but maybe I missed it.

It is worth noting that my family/their farm qualifies some of them as 1%ers (bayfront house in Newport which has architectural significance, members of several country clubs, etc). Personally I have decided to forego 100% of my inheritance and let my sisters take it (I have no problem with being rich, but I do believe that having an inheritance hanging over your head is an innovation killer)

that's really interesting although slightly dated dated (it goes against my preconceived notions either way though) - the "million dollar farms" section is notable given the increase recorded from 2003 to 2004, I wonder whether those numbers have shifted significantly in the last decade.