Topic: Agriculture vs oil - page 6. (Read 2275 times)

agriculture and oil are two very important factors because agriculture is related to food security and oil is related to energy. but currently each country has started to manage its own food security but regarding oil not all countries can manage it because they do not have sufficient oil reserves. On the other hand the food sources that we need every day are renewable resources, but oil is a nonrenewable resource. That's why currently many countries are eyeing oil and making countries that have abundant oil reserves make big profits.

Maybe if you ask me i will say that oil is no longer booming as before ever since the invention of bitcoin, to say the fact oil boom was part of the reasons many left the practice of agriculture for the gold rush in oil boom and all we could acheive after all that are these present results with inflation and recession threat.


All these were actually things of the past and not anymore invoke, except we all can realized the need of going back to the practice of agriculture which we left times back and possibly together with bitcoin, things may change and turn around.

Oil is a bigger sector of economy than agriculture. The value of oil cannot be overstated, countries have fought civil and international wars because of oil wells. The whole world revolves around oil, every country wants a treaty with an oil producing nation that is why the Saudis have become wealthy and powerful in the world today. Ever heard the term ‘oil money’? With the profits and influence they have gathered from oil exports, the country can move into other sectors like agriculture, sports, health e.t.c.

What's the point of the US becoming a member of OPEC ? They're essentially competitors of the US. Therefore, the U.S. plays its own game - its own production, plus most likely there will be oil from Venezuela, plus the U.S. has the opportunity to settle oil production issues with Saudi Arabia. And this is enough to stabilize or even manipulate the oil market. And joining OPEC is unnecessary restrictions and obligations, especially in this "alliance", there are frankly specific countries that, to put it mildly, hate the United States. Therefore, if the U.S. joins any oil union, it will be a U.S.-led union )

Let me generalize, the agricultural sector can reduce dependence on imports and achieve food security and continue to contribute foreign exchange to the country if wise management of natural resources can be the key to long-term success. Don't be overly dependent. For oil, it is not much different, the only thing that needs to be taken care of is the environmental impact that will arise in the future by establishing strict environmental regulations and if something is violated, don't hesitate to provide a deterrent effect, for example, withdraw the permit.

For me, it is possible that the two exist and can be compared if you ask why because it is also part of the economic resilience of a country so that it creates social welfare in the end.

I think both are important, but the more important point from op's question is that a country's strength is measured by oil or agriculture, I think oil, because that is what determines whether a country is strong or not.
The reason is that oil can be used during war, although agriculture is no less important, all countries can plant, but not all countries have oil resources.

Do you think any country can survive without oil or agriculture sector?  The agricultural sector also needs oil because transport requires cars and oil is needed to drive cars.  There are thousands of aspects for which oil is very important.  On the other hand, without agricultural fields, there will be no food production and no animal can live without food.  So definitely both are very important and mandatory.  But if only one has to be picked then agriculture sector should be given a little more priority as it helps save lives.  And almost every country in the world has an agricultural sector and it also helps the country to boost its economy

Oil is a mineral and it is not available in every country because of which the country that has it can export a lot of oil and because of that the economy of that country grows a lot. And this is a normal thing

If one can properly invest and maintain the agriculture sector, a lot of good can be done there. And if it spreads widely in a country, then that country grows economically from the agricultural sector as well. Because the price of food products is increasing day by day and every country has more or less food shortage. So the country which is making good profit in agriculture sector can go ahead economically even by exporting food products

Yes not only oil runs a country but food is most important to run a country. Because food keeps our lives alive, so of course, because of this, one country always maintains good relations with another country. to import and export anything as needed

I think food is the most important thing because without food life cannot survive but without oil at least it is possible to survive.  But oil also has a huge role so both are very important neither of them can be denied from the important list

I also think that choosing both of them is not wrong because basically these two things have become things that are really needed by everyone in every country. So ignoring one of them will have a bad effect on other sectors so that both must be equally maintained by each country and also well maintained by each country for the welfare and prosperity of its respective people. Moreover, now everyone can clearly see examples in various other countries that have oil and also have agriculture or one of the two.

Both are important and we don't have food if we don't have agricultural products and we can't cook foods and generate the agricultural lands if we don't have oil.

Most middle eastern countries are dependent on their oil as their main source for their industry and economy. While in other parts of the world, they're for the agriculture so it's a tie for every country has their own main niche and products that they're dependent.

and to carry all agricultural products to various regions and other countries requires fuel, that is what is always used, essentially oil is still used, unless major changes occur.

This actually hits very close to home in my case actually. I was born in Venezuela.
During many decades and even up to a century, we used to be a country which managed to survive in the international markets thanks to agriculture and some mining, but mostly agriculture or some very appreciated crops: coffee, cocoa, bananas, etc. Since we discovered we had a lot of oil we started to move from being a food producing country to being one which almost completely depended in food importations from neighbor countries both processed food and also vegetables and fruits of several sorts.
Nobody cared about it, because the price of oil was high and we could afford to buy all that food abroad, but the black swam scenario happened and oil prices dumped very badly, starting a time or scarce food, which was inimaginable in the times we produced all the food we needed.
So that is a big lesson to keep in mind to anyone who wants to know and hold some basic concept of macroeconomics. Never underestimate de importance of agriculture for the development and survival or any country, regardless of the size of it.

USA is large enough in its oil production to join OPEC if they wanted.  Its also true their consumption is massive but in resources they have more then enough, half a century forward if required.   Venezuela has the largest reserves in the world but not the efficiency to extract and refine it profitably.   Its part of a market and export vs import, some times its easier to buy production from abroad but I have no doubt USA has any lack of oil.
   Same reasoning I would apply to Russia benefiting from occupying Ukraine.   Disregarding any law or morals to their actions, there is little sense from any perspective.  Russia wont benefit from this war, at the very best they eliminate a competitor in some way but the world has plenty more waiting.
   The usable land mass of Russia is expanding massively every year, not by invasion of others but their own land sealed in permafrost is becoming available which means even more oil and gas.   Yet like Venezuela's fate they lack the people, the sophisticated industry and efficiency to profit.   War will not profit them or anyone else, the only strategy was to hurt others more then themselves and even this is questionable.

Currently, petroleum has become a very important role for the survival of human life, because oil is a source of energy. So that they, oil producing countries, really benefit and to date, demand for fossil fuels continues to increase. And indeed, when compared with countries that only rely on agriculture, the standard of living of the people is very different. However, despite this, food is still the world's main need compared to oil. because what guarantees the continuity of human life is the availability of food.

In my opinion, it is possible that Russia will be able to occupy Ukraine, because from my perspective, I see that currently America is more focused on the upheaval of the conflict taking place in the Middle East. And Ukraine is not more important than the Middle East, because so far the countries in the Middle East have accounted for America's oil supplies and needs.

The modern world, yes, still depends on hydrocarbons, and primarily oil. Gas is a more accessible resource than oil, and more widespread. Oil is a resource more concentrated in "a few hands".  And as you can see, oil has now become a tool of influence, coercion and manipulation, both in the world economy and world politics. that is why developed countries realize that this resource must be replaced. Yes, replacing the main type of raw materials in the world economy is not a simple, long and complicated process. Moreover, the closer to the reduction of available resources (available deposits), the more often oil will be used as a tool of pressure. However, there are some good nuances here:
- There is no monopolization of production sources in the hands of one group, with anti-human concepts. The US is already increasing production and reserves, Venezuela has accepted the US offer and will be entering the world market. Saudi Arabia has also spit on OPEC and is increasing production. Which means - we can expect the market to stabilize.
- The new terrorist war unleashed in the Middle East by terrorist groups, which had as one of its goals the destabilization of the region and, accordingly, a negative impact on the oil market, fortunately failed, which means that there is a high probability of additional stabilization of this market.
- Now ALL alternative energy technologies are being actively developed in the world. From renewable sources (wind, sun, waves,...) to controlled cold nuclear fusion. And as a product for the masses - it is a matter of 10-20 years. That will be just enough time to get rid of oil monopoly. Yes, oil will be used to produce plastics, but as the only fuel for transportation, for example, oil will lose its position very strongly.
 
But let's get back to the agricultural sector ! If you replace the source of energy with hydrocarbon energy, you can. I don't see any alternatives for mass production of food. Yes, I know I'm already "growing" artificial meat. And perhaps this technology will someday occupy its niche on the world market, but... Food was, is and will remain the last demanded product on earth.  The agricultural sector will be the leader here for many decades, if not centuries. And this limitation is not so much technological as physiological. This is the way the human organism, nature, and the outcome of evolutionary changes are organized.

Therefore, agro and alternative technologies of energy production are definitely tipping the scales on their side.

    The two resources are essential for a country's economic growth and they just can't be weighed as one being better than the other. There are so many reasons as to why these two reasons are essential and when argued on, they just can't be judged completely. Agriculture is essential because without it being maximized, the country will just be left to nothing to feed on. A country should invest in agriculture because against all odds, it'll create the least job opportunity for the citizens. It'll aid in crop production for export to other countries too. Agriculture is more like the basic life line in every country and shouldn't be looked down on.
    Oil on the other hand is very much essential because it yields greater revenue than any other resource of a country. When you see United Arab Emirates having a buoyant economy and even with the depreciating occurrences in other economies, they're still able to stand out to generate and expand their revenue sources, then it's all because of how well they've been able to work on their oil exploration and they've made a means to maximize their oil production. Nigeria is blessed with these two essential resources but what we're lacking is a proper hand to handling these resources without corruption or greed. If we're able to conquer selfishness and we work together to building right the country using what we have, then no doubt, we'd be able to overcoming so many setbacks the economy will throw at us.

The new world is one that is fueled by oil and that’s why, you find nations amongst the oil producing states numbering as some of the richest in the world should it’s government not be rocked by corruption.
As the human population grows, so is the need for more produce to be able to feed the populace and the rate of turn over for agriculture takes time. Fine, we’ve got genetic engineering to cut across the timing by engineering useful traits but, it’s overly not enough to bring about the turn over you could get from oil.

When it comes to economic growth. I think oil accounts more than any agro based sector could. Even agriculture can’t completely function and be more productive without oil. Oil fuels the energy that is needed to run the sector.

This might be because oil is quite limited, while agriculture can be done by many countries. As long as many machines still rely on oil as fuel, this industry will thrive until the transition period arrives. Yes... the era of EVs becoming mainstream and people moving away from high pollution engines is when the oil world will undergo a change.

I see, in the short term, oil does promise significant profits. This aligns with the high demand for oil in every country's needs. Meanwhile, for the long term, agriculture is the best bet. We all need rice and vegetables every day, and the agriculture industry can be sustainable as long as there is fertile land and water.

In my opinion, oil is still number 1 because the amount exported from there is very large, like Russia and other oil producing countries, we can see their income from that sector, although the agricultural sector is also important, but if you look at it in terms of a country's strength then oil is which determine.

I think there are countries in the world that doing well without oil. And those countries are more peaceful than the countries that have oil. Oil is not developing the places which it is discovered but develop the places are far from the oil terrain. But those places have the oil survive from the negligence agriculture. So in normal sense. Agriculture is for the poor while oil is the rich.

Those who are rich are not interested in the Agriculture but interested only in the oil while the poor since they could not benefit from the oil they went to farm and survive from there. And agriculture is the best among all.