this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2025
337 points (99.4% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
6213 readers
227 users here now
Rules:
- If you don't already have some understanding of what this is, try reading this post. Off-topic posts will be removed.
- Please use a high-quality source to explain why your post fits if you think it might not be common knowledge and isn't explained within the post itself.
- Links to articles should be high-quality sources – for example, not the Daily Mail, the New York Post, Newsweek, etc. For a rough idea, check out this list. If it's marked in red, it probably isn't allowed; if it's yellow, exercise caution.
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a comment removed, you're encouraged to appeal it.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the comments.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out [email protected] (also active).
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Unfoortunately, it says prices (presumably domestic) dropped though - that should be good for US consumers, all else equal.
I'd expect the people in Montana to have more/cheaper food in general at least in the short term. Farmers might make less profits, but even if they are making a short term loss - you'd expect them switch to a lower cost crop rather than stop production entirely.
In this case it is the Canadians that suffer lower food supply.
In the long run Montana food supply might suffer if their farmers struggle to get say fertiliser, pesticides, seed crops, bull semen, tractors and so on - that depends on their supply chain for those things.
Lower income might also impact the state's general ability to import other stuff, exotic foods and luxuries, but as far as domestic food is concerned I'd think they'd be ok.