Post Reply
Page 7 of 8  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Switch to Forum Live View USDA Admits You May Be Eating Cloned Animal Meat
3 years ago  ::  Apr 19, 2012 - 6:18PM #61
Bodean
Posts: 9,593

Apr 17, 2012 -- 5:58PM, arielg wrote:


Apr 17, 2012 -- 5:30PM, Erey wrote:


You have to think about how prevelant hunger used to be in the world.  It was almost the human condition to struggle to get enough food to eat. 


Used to be?


The world hunger problem: Facts, figures and statistics.


In the Asian, African and Latin American countries, well over 500 million people are living in what the World Bank has called "absolute poverty"

Every year 15 million children die of hunger


For the price of one missile, a school full of hungry children could eat lunch every day for 5 years


Throughout the 1990's more than 100 million children will die from illness and starvation. Those 100 million deaths could be prevented for the price of ten Stealth bombers, or what the world spends on its military in two days!


The World Health Organization estimates that one-third of the world is well-fed, one-third is under-fed one-third is starving- Since you've entered this site at least 200 people have died of starvation. Over 4 million will die this year.


One in twelve people worldwide is malnourished, including 160 million children under the age of 5. United Nations Food and Agriculture


The Indian subcontinent has nearly half the world's hungry people. Africa and the rest of Asia together have approximately 40%, and the remaining hungry people are found in Latin America and other parts of the world. Hunger in Global Economy


Nearly one in four people, 1.3 billion - a majority of humanity - live on less than $1 per day, while the world's 358 billionaires have assets exceeding the combined annual incomes of countries with 45 percent of the world's people. UNICEF


3 billion people in the world today struggle to survive on US$2/day.


In 1994 the Urban Institute in Washington DC estimated that one out of 6 elderly people in the U.S. has an inadequate diet.


In the U.S. hunger and race are related. In 1991 46% of African-American children were chronically hungry, and 40% of Latino children were chronically hungry compared to 16% of white children.


The infant mortality rate is closely linked to inadequate nutrition among pregnant women. The U.S. ranks 23rd among industrial nations in infant mortality. African-American infants die at nearly twice the rate of white infants.


One out of every eight children under the age of twelve in the U.S. goes to bed hungry every night.


Half of all children under five years of age in South Asia and one third of those in sub-Saharan Africa are malnourished.


In 1997 alone, the lives of at least 300,000 young children were saved by vitamin A supplementation programmes in developing countries.


Malnutrition is implicated in more than half of all child deaths worldwide - a proportion unmatched by any infectious disease since the Black Death


About 183 million children weigh less than they should for their age


To satisfy the world's sanitation and food requirements would cost only US$13 billion- what the people of the United States and the European Union spend on perfume each year.


The assets of the world's three richest men are more than the combined GNP of all the least developed countries on the planet.


Every 3.6 seconds someone dies of hunger


It is estimated that some 800 million people in the world suffer from hunger and malnutrition, about 100 times as many as those who actually die from it each year.


library.thinkquest.org/C002291/high/pres...


Alot of these advances in agriculture are what make it possible for people all over the world to be well fed.  They are starting to have obesity problems in the BRICS countries and it is just all trickling down. 


Whereas this is a mixed blessing it is hard to argue against the end of hunger. 


I do think we have some unintended consequesnces from all this.  Looking at all the wheat allergies.  I was reading this article that people are eating alot more wheat (26 more pounds per year) but also the wheat of today is very different than the wheat of history.  Significantly different and it was never tested.


www.spiritualityhealth.com/articles/whea...










Yeah .. but ariel ... don't look behind the cover!  Don't look!  Do NOT look inside that book!


If you do, you'll see that much of the hunger problems are the result of some despot dictator who is starving his people to death in order to sieze and keep control.


Take N. Korea .. they'd rather launch a missle in defiance of the US, than receive the 500 million pounds of food that was offered. ... but of course .. we'll still send the food.


I remember the Ethiopia thing ... the TV adds .. showing starving people.  They forgot to tell you they were all victims of a cruel despot, who was letting the food aid rot on the ships.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 19, 2012 - 7:22PM #62
arielg
Posts: 9,116

The point was that most of the so-called  "progress" that humans are so enamored of, do not solve any of the fundamental  problems of humanity. They solve one and create three others.  And you can't just blame it on a few dictators. It's much deeper than that.


The green revolution, for instance, did nothing to solve the world hunger.  It just makes it possible for more people to barely survive.  In the meanwhile, they create all kinds of environmental problems.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 19, 2012 - 11:54PM #63
teilhard
Posts: 51,406

Yes ... Sadly and ironically, The "Green Revolution" and Improvements in Global Health generally have simply "bought Time," during which Time our Human Population has continued to increase FAR beyond the Carrying Capacity of The Planet ... The End Result will be a TERRIBLE Crash of The Human Population and of Global Ecosystems ...


Apr 19, 2012 -- 7:22PM, arielg wrote:


The point was that most of the so-called  "progress" that humans are so enamored of, do not solve any of the fundamental  problems of humanity. They solve one and create three others.  And you can't just blame it on a few dictators. It's much deeper than that.


The green revolution, for instance, did nothing to solve the world hunger.  It just makes it possible for more people to barely survive.  In the meanwhile, they create all kinds of environmental problems.





Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2012 - 8:51AM #64
Bodean
Posts: 9,593

Apr 19, 2012 -- 11:54PM, teilhard wrote:


Yes ... Sadly and ironically, The "Green Revolution" and Improvements in Global Health generally have simply "bought Time," during which Time our Human Population has continued to increase FAR beyond the Carrying Capacity of The Planet ... The End Result will be a TERRIBLE Crash of The Human Population and of Global Ecosystems ...




I think you guys are confusing the "Green Revolution" with the technological and chemical revolution.


We have not exceded the earths Carrying Capacity, because technology has increased the earths carrying capacity.  But .. we are approaching even the limit that we have achieved.


In contrast, the "Green Revolution" is a step backwards in that carrying capacity.  Green Policy wants to scale back technolgical advances, such as fertilizers, and the operation of machinery that increase food production.  Rediculous ideas like huge solar farms and wind tubine farms are threatening the very "nature" element that "greens" want to protect, killing birds, and taking up huge swaths of land that would otherwise be reserved for nature.


While there is some justification for the Green perspective of limiting population growth, the policy of "Social Justice" gets in the way, thus preventing the policy of population control being applied where it should be.  The highest technological societies have the lowest birth rates ... and the most affluent sectors in those societies drive the absolute lowest birth rates ....  whereas, the third world and welfare sectors that the tech societies are dragging along, through food and medicine aid, are multiplying like rabbits and rats, clinging to rediculous myths, like "sex with a virgin cures AIDS".

I find it ironic ... Greens want to "go back to nature" .. except they want nature to observe their rediculous policy of "Social Justice" ... which Nature is just not inclined to recognize.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2012 - 8:54AM #65
Bodean
Posts: 9,593

Consider this .. .how much less farm land, and thus land in general, would the US and Canadian populations need, if they were not growing a bunch of food distributed as food aid??

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2012 - 9:06AM #66
ted08721
Posts: 3,757

Monsanto, the massive biotechnology company being blamed for contributing to the dwindling bee population, has bought up one of the leading bee collapse research organizations.

www.nationofchange.org/blamed-bee-collap...

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2012 - 10:02AM #67
teilhard
Posts: 51,406

No ... The Term, "Green Revolution," was invented to refer specifically to dramatic increases in Crop Yields due to "improved" Plant Genetics and increased use of Chemical Fertilizers ...


But, yes ... We have already exceeded The Planet's Carrying capacity, and we are using up TopSoil and Fresh Water at an ever-increasing Rate ... 


Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:51AM, Bodean wrote:


Apr 19, 2012 -- 11:54PM, teilhard wrote:


Yes ... Sadly and ironically, The "Green Revolution" and Improvements in Global Health generally have simply "bought Time," during which Time our Human Population has continued to increase FAR beyond the Carrying Capacity of The Planet ... The End Result will be a TERRIBLE Crash of The Human Population and of Global Ecosystems ...




I think you guys are confusing the "Green Revolution" with the technological and chemical revolution.


We have not exceded the earths Carrying Capacity, because technology has increased the earths carrying capacity.  But .. we are approaching even the limit that we have achieved.


In contrast, the "Green Revolution" is a step backwards in that carrying capacity.  Green Policy wants to scale back technolgical advances, such as fertilizers, and the operation of machinery that increase food production.  Rediculous ideas like huge solar farms and wind tubine farms are threatening the very "nature" element that "greens" want to protect, killing birds, and taking up huge swaths of land that would otherwise be reserved for nature.


While there is some justification for the Green perspective of limiting population growth, the policy of "Social Justice" gets in the way, thus preventing the policy of population control being applied where it should be.  The highest technological societies have the lowest birth rates ... and the most affluent sectors in those societies drive the absolute lowest birth rates ....  whereas, the third world and welfare sectors that the tech societies are dragging along, through food and medicine aid, are multiplying like rabbits and rats, clinging to rediculous myths, like "sex with a virgin cures AIDS".

I find it ironic ... Greens want to "go back to nature" .. except they want nature to observe their rediculous policy of "Social Justice" ... which Nature is just not inclined to recognize.





Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2012 - 10:07AM #68
arielg
Posts: 9,116

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:06AM, ted08721 wrote:


Monsanto, the massive biotechnology company being blamed for contributing to the dwindling bee population, has bought up one of the leading bee collapse research organizations.

www.nationofchange.org/blamed-bee-collap...




This is a good example of how the mindless human manipulation called "progress" goes on creating bigger and bigger problems in their attempt to "solve" a problem created by prior manipulation.  Real  progress should be based on a wider or holistic  understanding, not just the knoweledge  required  to  make more money.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2012 - 10:24AM #69
Find1Answer
Posts: 7,292

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:54AM, Bodean wrote:

Consider this .. .how much less farm land, and thus land in general, would the US and Canadian populations need, if they were not growing a bunch of food distributed as food aid??


This food aid is a misnomer unless you realize what direction the aid is going to.   Foreign aid money the congress diverts money to industrial farmers like Archer Midland.     The congress pays them a bunch of money to grow GMO corn and wheat.   These foodstuffs are run through the transportation cycle,  more money for that.    Eventually the food is sent on a big ship that get to the country,  foro example African continent.      By the time it gets there it may be spoiled but it still goes through many hands like your corrupt ruler that has been propped up by the US.      I read an article that said that countries that receive foreign aid plead for the water systems and the seeds to grow their own and produce independence instead of the way it is done.     Our foreign aid packages are being skimmed hard right off of the top to our corporate industry.


Haiti is another example,  you know how much money has been directed to them.     Monsanto was paid millions for GMO seed stock that the Haitians rightfully rejected.    They did not want their fledging argriculture based on  GMO.


The whole system has been looted.

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2012 - 11:44AM #70
Bodean
Posts: 9,593

Apr 20, 2012 -- 10:24AM, Find1Answer wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:54AM, Bodean wrote:


Consider this .. .how much less farm land, and thus land in general, would the US and Canadian populations need, if they were not growing a bunch of food distributed as food aid??




This food aid is a misnomer unless you realize what direction the aid is going to.   Foreign aid money the congress diverts money to industrial farmers like Archer Midland.     The congress pays them a bunch of money to grow GMO corn and wheat.   These foodstuffs are run through the transportation cycle,  more money for that.    Eventually the food is sent on a big ship that get to the country,  foro example African continent.      By the time it gets there it may be spoiled but it still goes through many hands like your corrupt ruler that has been propped up by the US.      I read an article that said that countries that receive foreign aid plead for the water systems and the seeds to grow their own and produce independence instead of the way it is done.     Our foreign aid packages are being skimmed hard right off of the top to our corporate industry.


Haiti is another example,  you know how much money has been directed to them.     Monsanto was paid millions for GMO seed stock that the Haitians rightfully rejected.    They did not want their fledging argriculture based on  GMO.


The whole system has been looted.





Yeah find .. but it is because of the expanded government powers and relationships with corporate interests resulting from expanding government influence .. a key issue in the Civil War.


LOOK .. if the Government doesn't have the money to pay Monsanto Billions for Food Aid, then that aspect goes away.  Yet another straw in the hat for us Smaller Government Types who want the corrupt, dirty scoundrels to get the hell out of our lives.


WE THE PEOPLE can take care of ourselves thankyou.  We don't need your big brother antics that benefit your cronies.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 7 of 8  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook