The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > A world hungry for answers > Comments

A world hungry for answers : Comments

By Julian Cribb, published 1/2/2007

The greatest challenge facing humanity this century is the necessity to double global food production with far fewer resources.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Julian, if world population now is about 6.5 billion and (with rapid growth in recent decades) further average life expectancy of those currently alive is 43 years, then 3.25 billion of the current population will still be alive in 2050. How on earth can you seek a population of 2-3 billion in 2100 without mass murder, forced sterilisation etc?

Personally, I'm pro-people rather than seeking their extinction.
Posted by Faustino, Thursday, 1 February 2007 7:22:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhian

You shouldn't be so critical of Malthus. Some of his ideas are part of modern economic philosophy, like the idea that people will work harder with starvation at the door, and the idea that a growing population creates more job competition, thus lowering wages and increasing the prosperity of businesses.

The present government could arguably be adherents to the latter Malthusian idea with its use of 457 visas and high immigration.
Posted by Fester, Thursday, 1 February 2007 7:30:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fester

You're right, Malthus had some good ideas and has been rather misrepresented by both opponents and supporters in the modern era. Above all, he was motivated by compassion for the poor and disappointment at what he saw as the inability of rising agricultural productivity and output to produce sustained improvements in living conditions. In this, history has proved him wrong.

I was actually attacking neo-Malthusians – modern-day appropriators of his ideas who differ from Malthus in:
a) tending to disapprove of sustained improvements in living conditions as a legitimate socio-economic objective, and
b) perceiving rising population as a cause of persistent poverty (Malthus saw it as a consequence of rising output which rendered productivity gains ineffective in raising living standards, which is a little different).

There are several varieties of neo-Malthusians. Some appear to be misanthropists who advocate the elimination of large swathes of humanity in the name of some perceived higher good (such as VK3AUU).

Others perceive population as the root of almost every environmental, social and economic ill faced by mankind, and some appear to take perverse pleasure in anticipating widespread human misery.

My attitude is similar to Faustino’s I’m pro people. So, in his way, was poor old Malthus.
Posted by Rhian, Thursday, 1 February 2007 7:54:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
All these posts verify the ancient trueism that people believe what they want to believe and disregard all evidence.
Posted by Tony Ryan, Thursday, 1 February 2007 8:06:31 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhian.

Thanks for claryifying that. I also have a soft spot for Ned Ludd; quite a good bloke in my opinion, and moved to act by his personal experience of the industrial revolution. I certainly share your distaste of the philosophy of goosesteppers like VK3AUU. And I hold strong hopes for technology further improving the human lot, not as a means of genocide to give a few survivors a cosy life.

I do, however, believe that population growth, like the lives and thoughts of Malthus and Ludd, is often unfairly portrayed. It is not beyond human control, like the weather and tides. And its regulation does not imply genocide or racism, but can be a humanitarian measure on an equal footing with other measures for improving the human lot. It is a shame to see it discarded unfairly, when so few measures are available.
Posted by Fester, Thursday, 1 February 2007 8:40:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Agronomist,
Canada and the United States, two of the largest wheat growers with a "usual" 2 crop growing season have in the last twenty years been encouraged by wheat dumping and price management practices to diversify. Lentils, soy, rape seed, canola, and other specialty grains like quinoa and kamut are now being grown by farmers who once were exclusively wheat producers.
Others have gone into bio-fuel crop production or specializing in organic cereals.

That changes the market presumption of carry over or crop banking. Few farmers are cultivating today for the silo. They're growing for the demand and watching the market closely to ensure that they are not left holding or having to silo. That's work that never gets paid for and dumping to have empty silos for the coming harvest lowers future pricing.

Australia produces about 3 per cent of the world's wheat but has 15 per cent of global wheat trade.

Quinoa was classified as a "supercrop" by the United Nations because of its high protein content (12-18%).

All numbers I could find for world wheat production and export have declined during the last 10 years. While over all grain crop diversity per country has increased.
Posted by aqvarivs, Friday, 2 February 2007 7:46:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy