Food – Major retailers in New York, in areas of New England, and on the West Coast are limiting purchases of flour, rice, and cooking oil as demand outstrips supply.
It would help if everyone did like they were asked to do back during WW2. Plant those gardens. Provide for yourself a little. Help take the load off the system. The food tastes better and you know what is on it. I have been giving food away to friends and family because I can see I have way more than needed to last until this years crop is ready.
Its nice going to the cellar instead of the store.
normallysilent, I wish i could give you a thousand positive comment ratings for that comment. My family always raised their own gardens, fresh everything, even down to the fruit, and my Dad used to grind corn for cornmeal too. Great food.
What percentage of people in the area of the story, have a single square space of greenery to grow anything?
How many have a cellar ?
The U.S. ( and the rest of the world ) is a more urban population that it was in WW2.
When you live in an apartment on the 10th floor of a city building, you can only shop cheaper.
In addition the man made global warming crowd is saying that we should all move closer together and into urban centers to stop global warming. The Man made crowd told us we should use food staples to manufacture ethanol. We are seeing the result of this approach to an unproven and primarily political issue in today's shortages. I am afraid we are only seeing the beginning. The people who have pushed for this approach of using food for fuel will NEVER admit they are wrong and reverse the damage they are creating as we write here.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
2jojoyo
slashup67
pyuuuke
harleyb761960
rylandl831968
jorgepratt19711962
MrsAnn2008
alamala
3aaralyn
Lancaster1249
ShaunPeterson
LawShepard
Watts437
Monte G
Dean129
daducha
Ciera Marie
JaylanRam
kibasilasa
jomarjarmo
Emmanuel70
getreal1
taylormclaugh
gmarlett
ind06
awongscreen
loverman
EngineerTiat
Mdiar
Uncle Dave
dwemm
Thorny904
bluetexasvalley
xiaomian1103
Beeboppin71
ecotourusa
Zuffa
truthiness
jordan11
CRYMTYPHON
libsRfunny
thoughtoffice
jwaterfalls
Charlson
Linkbuilder
Wolfie2007
STONERS
simonsez
jaxguy
GHOSTWHOWALKS
172)
This will only get worse as time goes on, if farmers don't start growing food, instead of crops for fuel!
Thanks Neo!
That really isn't as large of an issue as people are making it out to be. The real issue is the population boom we are going through. Sure biofuels are contributing to it to a certain extent, but what it all comes down to, is that we are reaching a population level where it is becoming hard to feed everyone. Especially with so many 3rd world nations becoming rich lately, and thus eating more food.
It's not becoming harder to feed everyone, it's becoming easier to scare people, manipulate shortages, and fix prices.
The causes of the shortages and high prices are diverse, and vary from country to country. They include natural disasters or adverse weather; high fuel prices, which add to transport costs; hoarding and smuggling of rice and wheat to take advantage of higher prices across national borders; and, in Pakistan, a shortage of electricity that is reportedly hampering mills from functioning at full capacity.
Only around 7 per cent of the world's rice supply is traded internationally, but it is a critical amount for any country facing a shortage because rice is also a political commodity.
Worldwide, economists are worried that the diversion of agricultural land and certain crops to biofuel production is cutting into grain and cereal production for human consumption.
http://www.independent-bangladesh.com
Well growing wealth in India and China also contributes. Because of their massive populations, just a small increase in demand because people can afford things they couldn't before can cause a huge increase in demand.
The Deniliquin mill, the largest rice mill in the Southern Hemisphere, once processed enough grain to meet the needs of 20 million people around the world. But six long years of drought have taken a toll, reducing Australia's rice crop by 98 percent and leading to the mothballing of the mill last December.
The collapse of Australia's rice production is one of several factors contributing to a doubling of rice prices in the last three months â;; increases that have led the world's largest exporters to restrict exports severely, spurred panicked hoarding in Hong Kong and the Philippines, and set off violent protests in countries including Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Haiti, Indonesia, Italy, Ivory Coast, Mauritania, the Philippines, Thailand, Uzbekistan and Yemen. Source: NYT
Good info, but you forgot to include your cite and this info, "It is difficult to definitely link short-term changes in weather to long-term climate change, but the unusually severe drought is consistent with what climatologists predict will be a problem of increasing frequency.
Indeed, the chief executive of the National Farmers' Federation in Australia, Ben Fargher, says, "Climate change is potentially the biggest risk to Australian agriculture."
Drought has already spurred significant changes in Australia's agricultural heartland. Some farmers are abandoning rice, which requires large amounts of water, to plant less water-intensive crops like wheat or, especially here in southeastern Australia, wine grapes. Other rice farmers have sold fields or water rights, usually to grape growers."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/business/worl...
"It's not becoming harder to feed everyone, it's becoming easier to scare people, manipulate shortages, and fix prices."
Garbage. People are starving around the world and you're claiming it's not becoming harder to feed everyone. People are starving here in the US, too. If it's so easy to feed everyone why is *anyone* hungry.
First, this story is about the US, and that is what my comment referred to.
Second, like I said, because there is more profit in NOT feeding everyone. Or less profit in seeing that everyone is fed. Doesn't really matter how you state it.
And third, it really is not becoming harder to feed everyone. Do you really think that we didn't know there would be shortages early enough to simply have more farmers plant more short season grains? Do you really think that the science of agriculture is not up to the task of increasing the world food supply, say, threefold in a single season if it were desired? Of course it is.
People have been starving around the world for FOREVER. This is not a new thing. We could have been feeding them all with the acres we've paid to leave fallow for the last several decades, way before population explosions, economic BOOMS in asia, and biofuels.
But millions still starved. 'Splain, Lucy.
Why are people hungry, because they choose to be. A few years ago I did a little experiment just to see how hard it was to get a meal. I spent one month in the summer paid $0 for food and ate 3 meals a day. Typically the Salvation Army handled one or two meals a day. There was another religious organization, that had a breakfast program for the homeless. I may have had to listen to a sermon or wash a few dishes, but I ate and no begging or 'dumpster diving'. I got the idea from another program they have in Texas where kids (under 18) can show up at various locations and get breakfast and lunch for free during the summer. There were those that complained about the program because they would not delivery to the kids houses.
No, no, no. The U.S.D.A. says we have no "hungry" people in the U.S. However, they do admit there are some Americans who are "nutritionally challenged". ;-)
The only people starving in the US are fashion models ...
Come on Simon, you know better then that. You must know that there are hungry families in your town and I'd bet that there are kids going to bed hungry too. Hunger is a terrible thing.
Possibly, walden, but not because of food shortages. Mom or Dad may have needed beer and cigarettes instead.
I know that you've heard some stories about folks having to choose between oil and food or prescriptions and food.
Yes and crack for food and lottery tickets for food and twinkies for food and chips for food and pig skins for food, etc.
I've heard of all those but I don't know anyone who ever had to make that choice. I see them in the food court carrying Nike boxes and their pants around their knees eating a slice of pizza.
Maybe you know some ...
You said you see "them." Who is them and how do you know just by looking at "them" that they spend money on crack and lottery tickets?
It sounds like you may have an aversion to the urban style of dress that kids are doing now. It's just how kids dress these day.
Personally, I'd rather wrongly have someone buy crack then have some kid go hungry. No doubt there are many people taking advantage.
what about the kid going hungry because the parents are buying crack instead of preforming their parental responsibilities
Do you think you have to ask anyone that question? Duh, it's as wrong as wrong is itself.
yes because when you really look into why MOST(NOTE MOST NOT ALL) of these kids are going hungry its irresponsible choices made by the parents beacuse the parents have been brought up to think the govt will take care of it.
You really are a bitter little troll.
I'm not little or bitter. There are many many many ways to get a meal in this country if you need one.
States spend a lot more buying food for kids than they spend for books. Send your kids to school where they belong and they will be fed.
I may be a troll ...
It is true that scare tactics, manipulation, etc is the norm these days. But lets face it, how are these going to work so easily if there are not so many people this earth needs to support?
I live in Wisconsin and own property. Currently most of the farm land is in the process of being converted into corn because that's where the big money is. Between the subsidies and other cash incentives it's a huge boom for the farmer. And all for ethanol. A product that reduces your fuel effiecency by about 10%, the same amount they blend with gasoline. Go figure. It doesn't burn cleaner. It takes 5 gallons of fossil fuel to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. It can't be shipped via pipeline so it must be trucked everywhere. Another knee jerk reaction by the left for a problem that really doesn't exist.
WRONG WRONG WRONG
The BIG AGRIBUSINESS folks with the huge congressional lobbies are the ones promoting the ethanol from corn deal.
"The BIG AGRIBUSINESS folks with the huge congressional lobbies"
Buying BOTH Republicans and Democrats or the legislation wouldn't have passed!
Crack up, I'm not a big farming interest. I have around 400 acres of farm land that was my grand parents place. The land was rented to neighbors for farming however this year, because of the huge subs you the kind taxpayers have provided, I've hired someone to cash crop my land. As to congress, Wisconsin used to be the dairy state until Herbie Kohl came to town as no body's senator but ours.... He sold us up the river in the East Coast Dairy Compact. You will continue to see traditional farming die and go towards grain production for fuel with people like him in office. I'm spending less that $25K for well over $250K pay back. Thank you tree hugging environmental freaks.
Follow the money, BB64.
The money to hire the large number of lobbyists that influence the Farm Bills is from agribusiness.
At best, the environmentalists are able to influence the amount of pollution that agribusiness dumps into the rivers.
Wrong. The biofuel groups are financed with big money from the Sierra Club and other groups like that. At least originally. There has been a huge push from this group starting in the late 70's, I remember them selling this when I was in jr. high.
What problem really doesn't exist?
Ethanol was sold as the solution to "global warming". This isn't the topic but because of the new air quality standards in Wisconsin, we have to use a 10% ethanol blend. We've proven that this doesn't help, in fact in simple green house gases, it causes more pollution and reduces fuel economy, so we use more gasoline. Add to that the increased use of fossil fuel for the tilling, harvesting and transporting, ethanol is a huge failure. In simple terms it takes over 5 gallons of fossil fuel to produce 1 gallon of ethanol.
True to the point. Ethanol is NOT the solution to global warming. At most it can only be considered as a temporary solution to reduce dependency for middle east oil.
"Another knee jerk reaction by the left for a problem that really doesn't exist. "
Oh really, why is Bush pushing for it. Oh thats right, his family has already been heavily investing in it. Look at what Jeb is doing down in Florida....
Its big agribusiness....
Ethanol was the beat all end all for gasoline additives. The idea was from the 1970's and was thought to be a "great" solution to the energy crisis. The problem, the study was never properly evaluated. The idea was to convert all cars to "harmless" ethanol. Brazil was shown as an example. The problem, our cars not the cars of the 70's. Between the computers and sensors, ethanol is terrible all the way around.
The largest groups to push for ethanol were your environmental groups. Big business does hold some responsibility here however, the lion share really is with groups like the Sierra Club.
As to Bush, it's the politically correct solution. Even when the environmental lobby is proven to be incorrect, please note, I didn't say wrong, they never admit to it. Bush for some reason is drinking the Kool-Aid. As to Jeb, he's not the gov. so I really don't know nor do I care what he is doing anymore. I would like both the Bush and the Clinton families to go away.
So ... now it's too many people. Well, that's easy to fix.
We are fixing it with wars and conflicts all over the world. It is just a natural consequence of population growth without limits. The physical world has limits on resources.
The fix might be easy but will be painful to swallow.
I suspect the "rationing" is more related to preventing small retailers and high-volume users of rice, flour, etc. from hoarding it to either resell at higher prices or to cut their own business costs.
Years ago, during the heady days of the early '90s when the economy was better, gas was cheap, food plentiful, and no "global warming" scares, I worked in retail. We "rationed" baby formula purchases - but not because there was a shortage.
Because we sold it so cheap, we had small store owners coming in and cleaning out the shelves. We sold it cheaper than they could get it wholesale -- we sold it at a loss, which was made up on the profit on diapers and other baby items. But we only took a loss if the small store owners removed all stock from our shelves and the intended customers had to go elsewhere and pay a higher price on baby formula.
Sounds to me like that is exactly what is happening, according to the story.
I agree with the over population statement but not too much on getting rich nation eating more food. The problem is simply too many people for earth to handle.
I was being view as evil and anti-social every time I voice the over population issue as nobody wants to face the fact that human beings have become the major threat to earth.
When we look at the problems we have now, such as traffic congestion, poverty, energy and resources depletion, environmental pollution, crime, war, etc. All these are related to overpopulation.
Business do not want to talk about it as it was widely believed that sales growth with population. Governments do not want to do anything as they want to please businesses and afraid to lose the next election if they address the issue. Probably the only government that actually tried to control overpopulation is the Chinese government. We might not like the Chinese government behaviour but this is probably the few things it did right.