Could you check this sentence?

[critic72]

This is a sentence excerpted from a highschool textbook in Korea.
I think there are some grammatical mistakes in this sentence and that it needs to be changed.

(Original)
The more people buy "rainforest beef", the more cattle are needed, and the more pastures are needed to feed the cattle.

(Correction): One alternative
The more "rainforest beef" people buy, the more cattle we need, and the more pastures we need to feed the cattle.

In the first place, it seems to me certain that the first subordinate clause in the original sentence is incorrect because more modifies rainforest beef and therfore it should be placed before rainforest beef.

But I'm not sure whether the main clause, the second and the third clause, is correct or not. In my opinion, the original sentence seems to be incorrect. I searched all the grammar books that I have, but I could not find any example like the second and the third, where the + comparative is used as a subject in the sentence. In the revised sentence, I chose we as a general subject but it sounds strange a little bit. In this case, I think it is better to change the whole sentence like this:

Another alternative: As people buy more rainforest beef, more cattle are needed and, as a result, more pastures as well.

What is your opinion, tdol? I really look forward to hearing your advice soon.

[Tdol]

I wouldn't say that the first sentence is wrong- you certainly will hear native speakers using that structure. In the original 'more' modifies 'people', suggesting that it is growing in popularity rather than being consumed by the same peoplke in greater quantities.

[Tdol]

PS the alternatives are fine. I'd probably use your 'correction' version first.

[Mieka]

I am very sorry to ask you but +could you check this sentence for me?

The show was very magical, but I felt that it was very artificial.

I do not know if i used the word artificial right

[Mieka]

is their any one their?

[Tdol]

Yes, Mieka, you've used it correctly.