Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fill up with E85 - Starve a Terrorist!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fill up with E85 - Starve a Terrorist!

    Cereal prices in the Middle East are mediated through state subsidies. So far, the urban poor have not been exposed directly to the rise in prices. It seems inevitable, however, that at some point the price rises will be passed on to the public through subsidy cuts, either in 2008 or in 2009, in countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Iraq, and Jordan. Subsidy cuts will, without doubt, result in immediate riots. The urban poor will not wait until they reach a starving point: they will act immediately, as they have done before, against what they will see as the government betraying its fundamental duty to provide affordable food prices.

    Egypt and Morocco are among the US’s closest allies in the region. Belonging to the so-called “moderate Arab/Muslim countries”, they have been the most accommodating in terms of supplying the US with intelligence and military cooperation against Islamist groups. In return the US has supported these regimes militarily and economically, through direct support (Egypt) or Free Trade Agreements. Political instability in these countries will put in serious risk the position of the US in the Middle East. The notion that food prices have gone up because of American (and other developed countries’) use of biofuels will not make the US more popular among people in the region.

    The American policy on biofuels is repeatedly presented as a means to improve US national security, by reducing dependency on imported oil from the Middle East. Articles on Ethanol production here in the Oil Drum (by Robert Rapier and others) have shown this to be a fiction at best, because of ethanol’s poor EROI. Now it becomes clear that the subsidising of biofuels will make the world less safe for the US, by destabilising “friendly regimes” in the Middle East and beyond.

    A few more words. Egypt, Morocco and other Middle East countries are regularly covered by Western Media, because of their economic and geo-political importance, as well as their proximity to Europe. Other countries – for example in sub-Saharan Africa – may be even more vulnerable, as many of them depend on cereal imports (although perhaps not to the same extent). It would seem likely that governments in sub-Saharan Africa have less power to mitigate price rises through generous subsidies. However, many such countries are off the radar for Western media, and the developed world will learn about the problems only through news of famines or refugee crises.

    To forecast the impact of cereal price rises, one should take into account food subsidies (where they exist) and the ability of governments to sustain them. In the Middle East, it seems, the political consequences will be almost immediate, and will come before actual food shortages. In other regions it may take a different course. In Mexico, for example, subsidies have been eliminated long ago. But as I am no expert on Mexico, I will leave this for others.

    If this short article dealt with the problem in strategic terms, in grand summaries of numbers (population, oil, food), it is important to remember that behind all these are people, real people, and many of them. Poor families in Egypt and Morocco, for whom life is already very difficult, and who survive on the bare minimum, are going to be badly hit in the next two years, when even a pita bread will become too expensive. The important issue here is not the survival of certain political regimes, but rather the survival of these families.

    Here's my solution Alzado & Achmed.....better start encouraging your Muslim buddies in Saudi to start lowering prices or ramping up those pumps, otherwise, you're gonna be eating sand.





  • #2
    What ever db51, your right in thier with, hate breeds hate, your another one of those horney *******s who cant get enough.

    What you and your hate mongers arent grasping, is the decline of the dollar, and the economic make up that exists today (free trade), says only the rich will be getting fed in the future. And a great deal of the US population, in their failure to stand up for themselves have made themselves a collection of slaves.

    Being more profitable to export grain than to consume in the US, this could get real interesting as the capital or plundering of the US farmers intensifies, reducing incentive to produce, at the same time reserves are non existent.

    The cheap food policies, and constant selling protection to plunder the farmers, has a consequences of making staring starvation in the face a reality.

    The US consumer purchased trinkets from china and oil from other nations for decades, now who has the cash to eat on? The consumers in the US have a debt burden and have lost their jobs to free trade. Who do you think is more profitable to feed now?

    The US consumer cant fill up with e85, they will need all they make to make up for the past cheap food policies, or they can starve if farmers are continually plundered of their food and told to continue reducing production as they are today.

    Comment


    • #3
      ZiVVn, China produces trinkets and we produce food and fuel. Which one is going to be more valuable in the future?

      Comment


      • #4
        <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by r3020</i>
        <br />ZiVVn, China produces trinkets and we produce food and fuel. Which one is going to be more valuable in the future?
        <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">How you gona' produce food and fuel,3020--you don't have any oil?How are the US citizens gona' buy any food ,3020--they don't have any money? db says that.

        Comment


        • #5
          Just as soon as the liberals get control, they willl print money--they've done it in the past, one of the many CHANGES that won't happen--

          Comment


          • #6
            <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by db51</i>
            <br />Cereal prices in the Middle East are mediated through state subsidies. So far, the urban poor have not been exposed directly to the rise in prices. It seems inevitable, however, that at some point the price rises will be passed on to the public through subsidy cuts, either in 2008 or in 2009, in countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Iraq, and Jordan. Subsidy cuts will, without doubt, result in immediate riots. The urban poor will not wait until they reach a starving point: they will act immediately, as they have done before, against what they will see as the government betraying its fundamental duty to provide affordable food prices.

            Egypt and Morocco are among the US’s closest allies in the region. Belonging to the so-called “moderate Arab/Muslim countries”, they have been the most accommodating in terms of supplying the US with intelligence and military cooperation against Islamist groups. In return the US has supported these regimes militarily and economically, through direct support (Egypt) or Free Trade Agreements. Political instability in these countries will put in serious risk the position of the US in the Middle East. The notion that food prices have gone up because of American (and other developed countries’) use of biofuels will not make the US more popular among people in the region.

            The American policy on biofuels is repeatedly presented as a means to improve US national security, by reducing dependency on imported oil from the Middle East. Articles on Ethanol production here in the Oil Drum (by Robert Rapier and others) have shown this to be a fiction at best, because of ethanol’s poor EROI. Now it becomes clear that the subsidising of biofuels will make the world less safe for the US, by destabilising “friendly regimes” in the Middle East and beyond.

            A few more words. Egypt, Morocco and other Middle East countries are regularly covered by Western Media, because of their economic and geo-political importance, as well as their proximity to Europe. Other countries – for example in sub-Saharan Africa – may be even more vulnerable, as many of them depend on cereal imports (although perhaps not to the same extent). It would seem likely that governments in sub-Saharan Africa have less power to mitigate price rises through generous subsidies. However, many such countries are off the radar for Western media, and the developed world will learn about the problems only through news of famines or refugee crises.

            To forecast the impact of cereal price rises, one should take into account food subsidies (where they exist) and the ability of governments to sustain them. In the Middle East, it seems, the political consequences will be almost immediate, and will come before actual food shortages. In other regions it may take a different course. In Mexico, for example, subsidies have been eliminated long ago. But as I am no expert on Mexico, I will leave this for others.

            If this short article dealt with the problem in strategic terms, in grand summaries of numbers (population, oil, food), it is important to remember that behind all these are people, real people, and many of them. Poor families in Egypt and Morocco, for whom life is already very difficult, and who survive on the bare minimum, are going to be badly hit in the next two years, when even a pita bread will become too expensive. The important issue here is not the survival of certain political regimes, but rather the survival of these families.

            Here's my solution Alzado & Achmed.....better start encouraging your Muslim buddies in Saudi to start lowering prices or ramping up those pumps, otherwise, you're gonna be eating sand.





            <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">db---What does "cereal prices in the mid-east being mediated by state subsidies mean"?Do you mean the grain that they raise--or what they buy?

            Comment


            • #7
              <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dennis</i>
              <br />Just as soon as the liberals get control, they willl print money--they've done it in the past, one of the many CHANGES that won't happen--
              <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Didn't follow that,Dennis--I believe they have been printing money--havent the conservatives been in control for sometime ?Do you want to stop printing money?

              Comment


              • #8
                A: David/Ia - just how much wheat do you think they're raising on those big sand dunes?

                Comment


                • #9
                  ivn: When the Christian Serbians were genociding the Muslims in Kosovo, who stopped the Serbs and saved the Muslims??? Answer: USA Who keeps the Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims from killing each other in Iraq??? Answer: USA. Where do you come off with this hate propaganda??? Best.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by db51</i>
                    <br />A: David/Ia - just how much wheat do you think they're raising on those big sand dunes?
                    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Syria,Turkey,Moroco,Algeria,Tunisa---5350 thousand tons Durham wheat----US 2184 thousand tons Durham wheat.Now explain--what subsidies?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      David, how is China going to produce any trinkets without food and fuel?

                      About 40% of our oil is domestic. We have huge coal reserves. Personally I would rather produce food and fuel than trinkets. Now China will have to buy food from us.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        david-Iowa,
                        The go word for the demwit campaign has been CHANGE---any bets that the printing presses continue at a faster rate?(not change as in coins)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          ivn: I see you ignored my question instead of thanking the USA for helping Muslims. When Russia took over Afghanistan and was killing Muslims, who created Osama bin Laden and backed him in running the Russians out of Afghanistan??? Answer: USA. It hurts you too much to thank the US for saving you doesn't it. lol. Best.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Well all I know for sure is that a large box of cereal (crap-not rice/oats) was $7.08 at FOOD FOR LESS--ya right! What is the current minimum wage minus taxes in the US? Less than a box of cereal.

                            I agree that the food shortage is very serious and it seems that it will also affect our country--this above price is absolutely ridiculous---we cannot starve people to death with capital greed!

                            What bothers me is that we have the technology and the capital to make hydrogen cars and hydrogen plants--thats where our focus should be...not spending billions fighting with a country over oil.

                            I wish the world were a better place--our billions could be feeding the entire middle east, Africa and elsewhere. The world has to CHANGE alright--and it has nothing to do with US family values! I get your point Db--negotiation food for oil and it may come down to that but who's to say that the middle east will not further its understanding and availability to technology? Especially when US companies are waiting with anticipation in line to open business in the middle east -- once we have democapitalized it?

                            Az is not the only person in this country who sees the imbalance and manipulation of commodities and the decline of "the American Dream" as we know it. It will be a thing of the past, feel lucky that you were a part of it. This is a great nation---we need to start doing something great with it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              mp, We are not fighting a country over oil. The war is about radicals that hate us and our freedoms. This country is great please look on the positive side .

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X