Surprise, surprise. This is the legacy of a corrupt financial system under the United States Federal Reserve. Last century the American people, through their elected representatives, gave Wall St the keys to the vault. Greenspan then untied all the regulatory knots and opened the spigots pouring trillions of dollars into the worlds economies and letting the hedge funds loose.

The real wealth of the world has been debased by the U.S Fed (enthusiastically assisted by Reserve banks around the world) and then leveraged into the stratosphere.

All that money has to go somewhere.

It has been into tech stocks, into stocks in general, into housing, into metals.

Now, it is flowing into food, which to a hedge fund is just another commodity.

There is too much money and leverage in the world economy and it has to be taken out. The solution of the Fed Reserve is to pour more money on the fire. The politicians run around in circles crying, ‘do something’, but don’t inflict any pain on anyone.

The world probably has more people than it can feed easily. Hence it has come down to who can pay for what food there is.

That has implications for political and economic stability, implications for the environment, and now we see, implications that go to the very heart of humanity, having enough to eat.

The bright young thing at the hedge fund computer screen making and losing millions in a flicker has no connection with the starving child in Haiti.

Greenspan unbolted the shackles from Wall St. This is the result of letting an immoral monster loose with unlimited money through the Fed’s printing press and hedge fund leverage.

A humanitarian crisis

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/world-in-crisis-soaring-food-prices/2008/04/14/1208025091644.html

Just wondering DB ... Apart from your focus on monetary policy;

Can you see any connection (or disconnection) for this international 'food crisis' in terms of sustainable development, 'climate change' and differing politico-socio ideologies?

More to the point but harder to answer ... what do you propose should be done?

DB

I have started a discussion thread regarding living sustainably and growing own produce, buying locally, organic.

Rather than focussing on the worst case scenario, I propose taking positive action and focussing on what we can do rather than what we have little or no control over.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1669

I would be interested in your POV.

Thank you.

Tensions rise as world faces short rations

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1207026487/0#0

The problem with biofuels:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1169519086

Q&A: i) Can you see any connection (or disconnection) for this international 'food crisis' in terms of sustainable development, 'climate change' and differing politico-socio ideologies?

ii) More to the point but harder to answer ... what do you propose should be done?

i) The short answer is yes. The 350 word allocation for the Forum, by necessity, means a narrow focus. The long answer would require an Article as it takes in major environmental issues, economics and definitely politico-socio ideologies. To be rich is indeed glorious, but, what did Deng Shao Ping mean by 'rich'. What do you mean by 'rich'?

ii) I am not an economist and I fear that a little knowledge is indeed dangerous. I think that John Ralston Saul is a good starting point.

Fractelle: growing own produce, buying locally, organic.

I couldn't agree more. It would save on fuel, be fresher and more healthy and, mostly, gardeners are not aggressive - well, unless their prize tomatoes are threatened. Can that be translated into feeding the world? Is there enough productive agricultural land to sustain the world population using low intensive farming methods? I simply do not know. My bit is to have a vege garden

DB

You asked: "Is there enough productive agricultural land to sustain the world population using low intensive farming methods?"

Dunno either.

But it most definitely won't hurt and as you say is much healthier and less wasteful.

The painful truth is that we are going to have to consider a major shift in ideology. For the third world countries, education and equal status of women would make a significant difference, both in terms of population stabilisation and a more peaceful society. It is a demonstrable fact that countries where women have greater participation in all aspects of human endeavour are more peaceful and productive, for example, Australia and any other western democracy you care to name. But what will it take to achieve a shift towards cooperation instead of coercion? Of education instead of occupation? - thinking of Middle East here. And what do you do about the likes of Mugabe - the little Hitlers of this world for whom power is everything?

Whatever; the next 20 years are gonna be very interesting.