Amen. Animal agriculture (innocuously referred to as "agriculture" in the article) has to be the single biggest contributor to the existence of these superbugs.
Possibly. Agriculture uses about 50% of the world's supply of antibiotics. The rest goes to humans. That's a lot, but even without it, there are enough humans on antibiotics to breed resistant strains. Many people take low doses of antibiotics every day for certain conditions like acne.
I think a factor of importance is how much selective pressure there is that could lead to their creation. The sporadic and fairly arbitrary use in humans doesn't create a selective pressure strong enough to create these superbugs in meaningful amounts and have them survive.
When used en masse in large, concentrated populations, you're statistically much more likely to bring these superbugs into existence, and have them survive. After all, an infected human is fairly isolated. But Stick an infected chicken in a hen and you've got some trouble on your hands.
From what I've read the evidence isn't all that strong between use of antibiotics in livestock and resistance in humans.
Remember a lot of the antibiotics used in livestocks aren't even approved for use in humans. Or they were used in humans a long time ago, but no longer are.
I doubt it. I recall reading an article about antibiotic resistance in Denmark. They were nearly able to wipe it out completely by changing the way antibiotics were prescribed to people.