I'd want to see the numbers on exaclty how much supposed always-up farming equipment saves in crop production, compared to farmers that don't use it.
In fact, I know for certain that the most productive farmland in the US, per area unit, is least likely to use motorized equipment of any kind. And when they do it isn't equipment on par with John Deere.
Isn’t this exactly what you’d expect? Motorized equipment is for working vast amounts of farmland as efficiently as possible, so the only farmland that would be worked by hand would have to be much more lucrative in comparison.
That’s a funny way to phrase it considering that many farmers are landlords.
If you're renting a zillion acres to someone that grows corn or wheat on it, you're not a farmer, your a landlord; the renter is the farmer.