Then most definitely, moving to the city might be your vest bet even if farming is the only thing you know.

They are already farmers, so that's a moot point. How could you move your farm to the city if you did not have a farm to move?

> Even farmers have trouble being farmers these days, because they have to keep up with an increasingly mechanized profession that needs fewer of them every year.

Mechanization is causing attrition, but I am not convinced it is causing farms to fail. If you are established, it won't be mechanization that gets you.

> Then most definitely, moving tk the city might be your vest bet even if farming is the only thing you know.

Or you could just sell your business, retire off of the proceeds, and live wherever you want (which is probably not the city; I've never heard of a retired farmer keen to move to the city – in fact, rural areas are often thought of as retirement communities for former city dwellers). Like you said, it is a capital intensive business. There is an incredible amount of capital at your disposal.

You only have as much capital as the bank will lend you, and you are often living year to year on whatever your income is (which you’ll need to use a lot to either pay down loans or save so you don’t have to take out loans). And if you are successful, you buy out your less successful neighbor to expand your farm, where does your neighbor go?

Old farmers can probably retire, but what about young ones? They often just give up and move. This has been talked about a lot in the last decade, there is no big mystery or open question about it.

Other countries have it even worse than America; eg Japan.

There are other ways to acquire capital. I see a lot of people who were doctors, lawyers, and tech professionals in the farming business. That is probably not a coincidence.

> And if you are successful, you buy out your less successful neighbor to expand your farm, where does your neighbor go?

The neighbour retires. If you are the neighbour, why would you sell your piece for any less than is required for you to retire? If you plan to keep working, you may as well keep working your farm.

> Old farmers can probably retire, but what about young ones? They often just give up and move.

The young ones generally don't start in the first place unless they have a line on capital that extends beyond the bank. And so, they also have that capital to sell. But why wouldn't they simply keep on farming?

That is just the Green Acres phenomenon, they are doing it because they have capital from other professions, not because they make a lot in farming.

You have a very strange interpretation of farming in the USA, if you could provide some links/articles that back up your understand, I would take your argument more seriously. I can find a hundred articles on why farming is dying profession, and not any on why it is booming one as you seem to suggest.

I am not entirely familiar with the reference. I have heard of the show, but never seen it. But indeed they are able to start farming because they are more likely to have the capital than someone who is barely making ends meet. Nobody is questioning that it takes capital to start farming.

> You have a very strange interpretation of farming in the USA, if you could provide some links/articles that back up your understand

Well, my understanding is based on being a farmer. I have no idea what I would link to? Anything I have ever read about farming online is so dumbed down that it is basically worthless. It is a lot like when the mainstream media tries to write about tech.

> and not any on why it is booming one as you seem to suggest.

I don't know if it is booming. It can be lucrative. It is certainly not for everyone, but what is?

It’s farm hands that that really benifit from moving to city’s.

There where ~2.2 million us farms in 1982. It dropped to ~2 million in 2002 but it’s still ~2 million today.

Many of theses are more hobby projects than giant industrial operations. Even still giant subsidy’s keeps the farm sector from the kind of massive consolidation you see in most industries.

The bulk of the massive subsidy received by farms is crop insurance premium assistance though. No doubt a huge benefit if you have a weather disaster, but not anything you see directly until you have a disaster, and that only provides stability in those freak years. I am not sure that alone is keeping farms from consolidating like other industries as most other industries don't have the same kind of instability from the weather.

I would argue that in North America mega-farms, by and large, simply cannot compete with smaller farms. It takes farm expertise to run a farm and one person can only manage so much. Hiring more people with farm expertise is exceedingly difficult as anyone who has farming expertise would prefer to have their own business.

If your thing is developing search engines, chances are you're going to have to align yourself with for Google or Microsoft for the network advantage. You have almost no chance of succeeding on your own in the search engine space at this point. But food is quite different. If you produce food, there is guaranteed to be a buyer for it. There is no real network advantage to working for someone else there like you see in other industries, so why let someone else take their cut off the profit of your labour?