|
| Its a response to one of the BTO threads of the day back then. That topic surfaces every once in a while and I think this is an excellant read. Its from an NAT'er that may not want the recognition so I just tried to copy a part of it.
{Copy}---It helps knowin' there's a lot of guys out there in support of what I was tryin' to express. It's an extremely tough issue to quantify, almost impossible, as the thread demonstrated. I think that's why so many get frustrated and resort to emotionalism while others are demanding facts and evidence. This subject does not lend itself well to such burdens of proof. I used a very poor analogy in the heat of the thread last night, but it was all I could come up with at the time. I'm still thinkin' on this thing just as I'm sure a lot of people are. Perhaps someone will be able to put this thing in an obvious light for most to see. I'm sure some of the guys arguing the other side knew EXACTLY what I was tryin' to get at but were stuck on the other side of the fence. I truly don't feel anyone cares what size a farmer is so much as the road he traveled to get there.
I think for a lot of us, a very large operation is impressive IF the farmer(s) that wear(s) it are equally impressive in motivation, OR they can be a magnet for the ill will of a community. I tend to gauge a farmer by how well their neighbors speak of them. Is this unfair ?
Also just as impressive, is the farmer that CHOOSES to remain small because HIS style of management grants him success on this scale.
And, how about the farmer that would enjoy the opportunity to expand, but didn't because the hardship caused to others would not fit well with his/her values. I know many would call this person foolish because "somebody's gonna take it, may as well be me".
Lastly, you have the farmer that everything just seems to fall in their lap. They're friends with everyone, they'll help anyone and things just always work out. This is the one I'd like to t | |
|
Mr. 7150
