"Jim Webster" wrote in message ...
"pearl" wrote in message
...
"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...
"pearl" wrote in message
...
yep and the Chinese are now becoming one of the wealthier more
industrialised countries and can afford to buy meat, and indeed they
are
buying meat, and very happy about it they are as well.
Some are, and they will pay the inevitable price.
no
Campbell TC, Junshi C. Diet and chronic degenerative diseases:
perspectives from China.
Don't tell me, tell them, obviously they aren't bothered because they
are the ones who are pushing up their meat intakes and loving it
Meat has and is being actively promoted in China. Fat is addictive..
you will pay the price, because you are the one who will not be
able to
buy food and fuel because they are using it
Assuming that "I" required food from China, which we don't,
what you are actually acknowledging here, is that an increase in
the consumption of meat in China would take away an essential
component of the world's human population's diet. Way to go!
As I said, you are having to compete with the Chinese on the world
food market, so what can you offer that the Chinese cannot?
You are competing with the Chinese on the world market to feed livestock.
I'm merely pointing out that it isn't the Chinese problem, it is your
problem as you are the one living in the country without the land to feed or
fuel itself
Nonsense.
..
yep. let the people back on the land, it worked so well in Zimbabwe
'The biggest disaster to have hit Zimbabwe is the IMF/WORLD BANK
sponsored structural adjustment program critically implemented at the
beginning of 1990.
Yeah sure. And murdering farmers had no effect whatsoever
Shit happens when people are angry enough.
Indeed let the government run the land. After all under Socialism the
Russia
imported grain, it was desperate for it, now under private ownership
Russia
and the Ukraine are major grain exporters.
'The IMF has helped foster a severe depression in Russia
Russia in the 1990s has witnessed a peacetime economic contraction
of unprecedented scale.
Except the Russians weren't producing the food before the 1990s and
now they are. Russia imported food ever since WW2 which has damn all to do
with the IMF
Of course they were producing food -- for *themselves*.
Yep, let the greedy barons farm, at least they actually produce food
'The often heard comment (one I once accepted as fact) that
"there are too many people in the world, and overpopulation is
the cause of hunger", can be compared to the same myth that
expounded sixteenth-century England and revived continuously
since.
And there's these millions of English peasants all demanding they be
allowed to give up their nice jobs and houses in town and return to
subsistence agriculture,
No way
Do a survey. All those millions of English people in the urban slums
can't afford to pay the premium price of houses in the countryside.
they have tried the diseases of poverty and weren't happy with
them,
so
they
have obviously decided to give the others a go
'The decline in infectious and communicable diseases follows an
increase in, and more equitable distribution of, economic resources.
exactly, and the Chinese aren't worried about it, having tried all the
diseases of poverty they are going to try the diseases of affluence,
Where's all the extra arable land, pasture and grain to come from?
that is your problem,
No. It is a question that you unsurprisingly cannot answer.
Oh I know the answer, we have to produce something that the
Brazilians etc need, and produce it better and cheaper than their other
customers
Non sequitur.
Or grovel to the Yanks, choice is yours really
Read the following carefully, then print it out and stick it up over
your computer; in time you may realise just how foolish you are.
'Can America feed China?
USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education),
May, 2004 by Lester R. Brown
AFTER A REMARKABLE EXPANSION of grain output from
90,000,000 tons in 1950 to 392,000,000 tons in 1998, China's grain
harvest has fallen in four of the last five years, skidding to
322,000,000 tons in 2003. This drop exceeds the total grain harvest
of Canada. Production of each of the three grains that dominate
China's agriculture--wheat, rice, and corn--has plummeted, but
wheat, grown mostly in the water-short north, has dipped the most.
With wheat stocks diminishing and domestic prices climbing,
Chinese wheat buying delegations have visited several grain-
exporting countries. Recent purchases of some 5,000,000 tons in
Australia, Canada, and the U.S. have set world wheat prices on
an upward trend.
Yet, these price rises may be only the early tremors before the
real quake. China's harvest shortfalls of recent years have been
covered by drawing down its once massive stocks of grain, but
these soon will be gone, forcing it to cover the entire shortfall
with imports. China's wheat harvest fell short of consumption in
2003 by 18,000,000 tons. After wheat stocks have vanished
within the next year or so, this entire shortfall will have to be
bolstered by imports. In some ways, China's rice deficit is even
more serious. Trying to cover its rice shortfall of 20,000,000 tons
in a world where annual rice exports total a mere 26,000,000 tons
could create economic chaos. With a corn shortfall of 15,000,000
tons and stocks already largely depleted, it soon will have to import
corn as well.
The handwriting on the wall is clear. While grain production is
dropping, demand is climbing, driven by the addition of
11,000,000 people per year and by fast rising incomes. As incomes
increase. China's citizens are moving up the food chain, consuming
more grain-fed livestock products such as pork, poultry, eggs, and,
to a lesser degree, beef and milk. The fall in grain production hugely
is due to a waning of the grain harvested area from 90,000,000
hectares in 1998 to 77,000,000 in 2003. Several trends are converging
here, including the loss of irrigation water and grainland to desert
expansion, conversion of cropland to nonfarm uses, shift of grainland
to higher value crops, and a decline in double-cropping due to the
loss of farm labor in the more prosperous coastal provinces.
Water tables are dipping throughout the northern half of the country.
As aquifers are emptied and irrigation wells go dry, farmers either
revert to low-yield dryland fanning or, in the more arid regions,
abandon it altogether. In the competition for water, cities and
industry invariably get first claim, leaving farmers with a shrinking
share of a shrinking supply. Losing water often means losing land.
Farmers are forfeiting real estate for other reasons as well. Expanding
deserts, such as the Gobi, which is consuming 4,000 square miles of
new territory each year, are devouring farmland. Paying farmers in
the north and west to plant their grainland to trees in an effort to halt
the advancing deserts is another factor reducing the grain area.
...
In a country where farms average an acre and a half, a shift is under
way to higher value fruits and vegetables to boost income. In each
of the last 11 years, the area in fruits and vegetables has increased.
In the more prosperous coastal provinces, the migration of farm
labor to cities has made it quite difficult to double-crop land. For
example, the once widespread practice of double-cropping winter
wheat and summer corn depends on quickly harvesting wheat once
it ripens in June and immediately preparing the seedbed to plant
corn. Many villagers no longer have enough labor to make this
quick transition.
Reversing the fall in grain production will not be easy. Each of
the contributing trends has a great deal of momentum. Turning
around any one of them would take an enormous effort.
Reversing all of them is inconceivable. If newly adopted
economic incentives should coincide with unusually favorable
weather this year, a modest upturn in grain production might be
possible, but it likely would be temporary.
China is the first major grain-producing country where a
combination of environmental and economic trends have
combined to reverse the historical growth in production. This
decline in a country containing more than one-fifth of the world's
population undoubtedly will trigger global effects. For instance,
China's likely need for such imports of grain comes at a time
when world stocks already are at their lowest level in 30 years
and U.S. farmers are losing irrigation water to aquifer depletion
and cities.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...32/ai_n6021789
the Brazilians have plenty to feed and fuel
themselves, it is you that is going to go short.
Assuming that "I" required food from Brazil, which we don't,
what you are actually acknowledging here, is that an increase in
the consumption of meat in Brazil would take away an essential
component of the world's human population's diet. Way to go.
Don't tell me, tell them, they are the ones doing it and they aren't
going to stop because you wring your hands at them.
What are they doing? Exporting soya for foreign livestock.
The chinese are worried,
but they do have a big GM programme
A big GM programme, eh.
'Almost all Argentine soya is GE,
Almost all traded soya is GM
All this worry, misery, trouble and strife... _for what_??
Well?
and plans to build 48 nuclear power
stations which should cut their oil and coal use
Too bad.
Don't tell me, tell them, they are doing it.
I'm conversing with you here, right now. You should leave.
I'm sure there are some other alternatives around too.
Don't tell me, tell them, Mind you, you'd have to convince the
Chinese government you know more about Chinese conditions that it does.
D'you think they might better than you at comprehending stuff?
and
leave the diseases of poverty to those whose countries cannot produce
enough
to eat, like for example, the UK
To eat meat, even though..
'Over 70 per cent of the land in the UK is used for agriculture, and
66 per cent of this is used as permanent pasture (1) while a high
proportion of the remainder is used to grow crops to feed livestock.
already discussed this earlier in the thread.
You cannot grow crops on land that has been converted into flood storage
because too many people live on the flood plain, you cannot grow crops on
land that washes away if you plough it because of the slope, you cannot
grow
crops on the land in the north of scotland because the rock or bog is too
cloe to the surface.
remember they have said the UK, so they include the Scottish highlands
and
the welsh mountains, look at a map and see how big an area that is
You cannot grow crops on 'pastureland' or on the land being used to
grow feed crops. Free up that land, and there's plenty to go around.
Sure pearl, grow wheat in the Lake district. Way to go as you so
quaintly say.
Table 1: Agricultural land uses in East Cumbria, 2004
Description Area (in hectares)
...
Wheat 4,5031
Total cereals 17,936
...
http://com5.uclan.ac.uk/carlisle/cre...griculture.pdf
"We grow an extensive range of organic vegetables, herbs
and fruit, and operate a local organic box scheme."
http://www.howbarroworganic.co.uk/
'Fruit and Vegetable Box Schemes: get locally grown organic
produce which has been freshly harvested by the grower
delivered to your door by Kan Foods, Kendal - [..] and
www.freshfood.co.uk
http://www.lake-district.gov.uk/inde...green-food.htm
Just ignoring the reality of what land is capable of just makes you look
silly
You've just been demoted from fool to a silly fool.
yep. And the Chinese government is interested in what the Chinese
population
wants, it doesn't give a damn what you want
It's the same sad self-serving story as elsewhere.
Hurray, she's finally got it
I 'had it' from the very beginning. Go look.
And exactly what are you going to produce to ensure you can buy food?
There's nothing to stop people producing their own food,
except for your business festering across most of the land.
You've quit raising livestock? Go look at a bag of
concentrate.
don't lecture me on cattle feed pearl. I don't buy concentrates, I buy
straights, I know the country of origin of each ingredient.
Where's your soya meal from?
duh
don't feed soya
I don't believe you.
Tough, sad for you but those of us feeding cattle aren't limited by
what vega or any other loony site says.
Bullseye. You buy what is readily available, regardless.
I'm not the one trying to change Chinese and Brazilian food policy by
posting to a UK group, now that is seriously out of touch
Where do your subscribers import soya meal from?
anywhere that produces it cheap,
Two thirds of it comes from Brazil.
but remember rape meal and maize gluten,
both food industry and biofuel byproducts are the important sources of
protein. Soya will be more for pigs and poultry.
Clearly not enough. 389,740 tonnes of soya for the dairy sector alone.
(http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/PGE...ments.01.p df)
work it out on your fingers
The Argentinians stopped exporting beef in 2006 to allow the price
at
home
to fall to ensure Argentinians had plenty of beef
SOME Argentinians.
the vast majority, Argentina has a left of centre government
Support your claim of "the vast majority".
look at the election results
How will that tell us what the level of poverty in Argentina is, jim?
Who said anything about poverty, I pointed out that the vast majority
supported the government policy on food exports. Election results are useful
indicators
The current chief of state and head of government is Néstor Kirchner.
'Menem and Kirchner have supported rightwing pro-capitalist policies
and offer nothing for the working class and poor in Argentina.
Kirchner supports more state intervention in the economy and a
more 'traditional' Peronist policy of radical populist nationalism,
which is why his support increased during the campaign, he is
not a friend of the working class. Menem, pioneered the IMF
privatisation programme in Argentina. His programme was of a
Thatcherite neo-liberal one which marked a break with the
traditional policies of previous Peronist governments. They had
implemented radical populist nationalist policies which included
state intervention.
Corrupt politicians
Menem is from the corrupt caste of pro-capitalist politicians
who have aroused the bitter hatred of the Argentinean masses.
....
Kirchner has the backing of the current President, Eduardo
Duhalde and also supports capitalism. If elected however he
could be forced by the mass movement and a further economic
crisis to adopt more radical nationalist populist policies such as
supporting state intervention and defaulting on the foreign debt.
Socialists cannot support either in the second round. This shows
the urgent need to build a mass socialist alternative by workers,
young people, the unemployed and urban poor.
These election results unfortunately represent a disappointment
for working class of Argentina. Menem has emerged as the
leading candidate with almost 25% of the vote to Kirchner's
19.38%. The results show the absence of a mass socialist
alternative.
.....
The elections reveal the impasse which exists in Argentina. The
economic crisis has left the mass of the population devastated.
Despite claims of a small economic revival, a staggering 57.5%
of the population still live below the official poverty line. In the
poorest districts around Buenos Aires the infant mortality rate
has reached a staggering 30%. Of a total population of 37 million
an estimated 10 million do not have even the minimum level of
food declared necessary by the UN and have no access to
drinking water and electricity. This is in a country which boasted
the highest standard of living in Latin America and during the
1930's was the ninth wealthiest economy per head in the world.
The desperation of the economic situation, exhaustion and a
degree of demoralisation has meant that Menem and other
Peronist leaders where able to win a certain electoral support.
Out of desperation and the absence of an alternative, voters
returned to the political corpses of the past in a desperate hope
of reviving these ghosts re-establishing some of the stability
and economic growth of previous years.
...
The task facing the working class in Argentina is to build a
mass socialist party that will offer an alternative to the rubble
left by capitalism.
...'
http://www.socialistworld.net/eng/20...8argentia.html
already have
An additional $100 million for a population of 38 million?
That'll make it all better, will it? Band-Aid on gangrene.
'Argentina Soya-fication
Brings serious environmental, social and economic problems
by Alberto Lapolla
July 23, 2006
...
What you forget is that they will actually be eating a higher
proportion themselves, rather than exporting it to the west, so there will
be less problems.
So you say.
They have already started this, which is why they are cutting soya
exports so we go round in a circle
And livestock in the 'developed' world will eat what?
You don't fancy a sod busting life as a subsistence peasant and the world
cannot see a reason to sell you food.
It is not *my* diet that requires massive amounts of crops.
Ah yes, exactly what is your diet
I already told you, blame shifter.
not my nightmare kiddy, it is the real world, it is what is happening
out
there. They don';t give a damn about you because they are going to get
through it, because they have the food and the fuel.
.
Ipse dixit and nonsense. You need to do a course in sustainable farming.
Duhh
Sustainable farming includes crop rotations and not ploughing land that
erodes
Very good.
Remember you have
lost half the land to biofuel anyway
Support that claim with evidence.
"Road transport in the UK consumes 37.5m tonnes of petroleum products a
year. The most productive oil crop that can be grown in this country is
rape. The average yield is 3-3.5 tonnes per hectare. One tonne of rapeseed
produces 415kg of biodiesel. So every hectare of arable land could provide
1.45 tonnes of transport fuel. To run our cars and busses and lorries on
biodiesel, in other words, would require 25.9m hectares. There are 5.7m in
the UK. Even the EU's more modest target of 20% by 2020 would consume almost
all our cropland".
George Monbiot, The Guardian, 2004
That doesn't provide support for your above claim.
And you still haven't said why the Brazilians should take food out of
their
peoples mouths to give it to you
They absolutely shouldn't, but that's for you meat eaters to answer.
And of course we note that pearl refuses to answer questions on her diet
I have and you've snipped it. That makes you a silly foolish liar, jim.