Do you think the USA will fall from it's super power status in your life time?

I think it is incorrect to assume wholeheartedly that the oil is not a large part of the global food system and you also did not address the other strains on the food system. Hey, on a lighter less important but equally satisfying note, what country do you live in and how do you make your living?

Oil is still the primary source of nitrogen for farming, pretty much anywhere in the world and it will be so increasingly as the rise of corporate farm seizure increases.

This journal is pretty good in describing this seizure and its immidiate effects on rural farm communities.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Third_World/Losing_Farm.html

Taking ecological agriculture 315 in my final year as an environmental studies graduate, I learnt that the largest scale production lies completely under the rubric of oil, for the whole operation - fertilizer, pesticide(all types), gasoline for operational machinery and soil fumigants. In the west, the main reason for this is extensive need for grain that is fed to livestock. Presently, to solve this problem, everyone would have to live subsistence farming and be vegetarian. Actually vegetarianism would definitely slow the inevitable problems and catastrophes that our system has the potential to manifest and even then there is hardly any other way to do run our system for more than 300 years. At present rates we will see catastrophic changes to food quality and more importantly availability, within the next 20-100 years. The large time span depends on the variables present in the former page I wrote. Ie. whether or not a superbug, super weed or super disease(bacterial, viral or fungal) out competes our attempts through pesticides to suppress it, is something difficult to predict, such as it occured in the potato famine.

Also there are many uncertainties that GMO foods bring, which act synergistically with the previous variables. These are far to complex and would take so much time to speak clearly about. Take it from me, there is also potential problems that GMO's can bring in terms of the increased incidence of super bugs and soil health.

These are the minor ones - the two biggest are the monopolization of the seed and the depletion of oil. Into this equation it would also be applicable to include the problems that a sluggish economy brings, to food prices that have skyrocketed in price due to corporate monopolization and increased oil prices, possibly even world wide war should also be included to wholly assess the food system.

Onto your ideas, I agree that economics is far more immediate than this problem, but we were not speaking in that context, if not we would have to ensure we are speaking in the same context before we get any further. If we are speaking about food security please agree or disagree with the effects that industrial farming practice and more importantly, the monopolization will have on our food system, in regards to food availability. If not let me know what context you are assuming that our conversation is surrounded around understanding.

That would be great, OBAMA however, is another puppet and I expect alot from him in vain and in dire hope, yet emotion is hardly applicable to matters of the future. These matters involve reasoning and reasoning alone, to be trully applicable and if not will fall to the draw of blind guess.

 

I take it you are talking about the Irish Potato famine?
Where have you read there were 5 strains?
I always thought that occured because of political reasons.
There was the same problems all over Europe...but only one place had a famine of any great relevance.
So, It could have been dealt with...but it wasn't.

 

Like the problems we currently face, it is a mix of things. However, the catastrophe occurred because a fungus had infected potato crop, the main staple of the irish diet and because farmers naively reduced the bio-diversity of their farm, farming less that 5 strains. Normally, farmers would pbe planting hundreds of strains across the country and it would most likely had been the case that they found a potato that had resistance to this fungus. I learnt this in ecological agriculture 315, I am not about to find a reference I trust Tom Hutchinson on it. This is how nature works, it is balance through its biodiversity.

 

Can you please comment on the rest of my information, I would like to know whether it was helpful or needs additional information.

 

I think you need to remove a few prejudices and agendas you seem to have. I don't think you need to add anything to it though.

For me to get from my POV to yours...I would like to find some info that concurs with you that the actual fungus was the catastrophe and not the reaction to it.

 

I think we've moved far from the original question of this thread.
I happen to now live in Northern Thailand on the border with Laos.
There is quite a difference in farming as done here compared to the U.S. and other more developed countries, especially when I go across to Laos. Most of the nitrogen used here is produced from oil, but animal waste, chickens in my own case growing corn.

I have absolutely no dependency at all on oil, except for Internet access and electric power, which is produced by coal where I live but the coal needs to be delivered to the plant. Across the river in Laos, the villages lived totally independent of oil until about 3 years ago when electric power was brought to the village.

As you point out the conversation in this thread is beginning to cover a wide variety of topics. In todays world it's often too easy for one to identify a problem and then try to apply it in relation to the world at large. Problems which may be major in some populations may be minor in others while being no problem at all in others. Can you identify one problem that could be identified as a major problem to all humans equally world wide? I speak of economics a lot, and see it as a major problem in the U.S. and many other countries now, but it is not a problem at all where I am living. You mention oil and food, which are or are becoming major problems in many areas around the world, but again are no problem at all where I live. And looking at the news it would appear that individual States in the U.S. may not all be facing the same severity related to the economic situation. Even in the worst of times there are those who are prospering, and it can be found that in the best of times there are those who are suffering. Often we put too much value on statistical information allowing the numbers to skew our understanding of what they are telling us. If we see that 10 million people are living in poverty year after year, does that mean the same 10 million people year after year? Your interest appears to be in the field of the environment and that can also become quite complex. Although it would not have any noticeable effect on you or the rest of the world, China is having a devastating effect on many people in China, Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Viet Nam and Thailand who live along the Mekhong River, as they build dams for power generation generation up river causing a drastic change in water level and water flow. To make matters worse many large boulders were removed from the river to trade shipping to continue with the lower water level, which affected those who fish the river for a living here, not to mention the affect on the other noted countries. Can there be a single problem we might seek to solve? Reduce the dependency on resources? Do with less? Where might you suggest we begin and who will be affected?

I agree totally on the need for reasoning.

Just curious, but have you read any of the bills passed under Obama, or any of the bills currently being proposed for passage? It would appear that most Congressmen and Senators have not, and that most citizens are even less aware of what the bills contain. I would be willing to bet that if each bill put up for vote were to contain somewhere in the middle, "The first born child of each citizen shall immediately be put to death." it would be years, if not generations, before it would be discovered.

 

I agree that some parts but a minoity of the total farm land, in the world does not depend on oil. For the poorer countries, oil dependence is not yet a problem. The largest problem facing countries like yours, are in that journal article I posted, about industry taking over farms AND also how GMO plants can cross polinate with native varieties. The outcome to the first one is easy to understand, low income, have to sell land, farmers loose jobs and move to the city. The second one is more complicate because it involves law. The law in most countries referring to GMO crops is that once a crop has any of the Genetics that are patented by the GMO owners, by law it becomes property of the company. This is already happening at alarming rates in India, where cross pollination is making farmers to have to pay for their seed otherwise face incarceration. This is a grave problem and has huge implications to the food supplies of the world, in conjunction with the industrial take over of rural farming.Ie. The closer a industrialized farm is to traditional ones, the more chance there will be of cross polination and the economic problems it brings farmers. The food system to me is the gravest problem that most people face in the world right now. Many people in poorer coutries rely on food aid to survive. Food that is based in oil and cannot be grown otherwise. In the west people have not clue just how fragile this food system is and the variables that may bring it to collapse act synergistically with each other to create the notion that widespread famines will be induced in the future, espcially if you consider just how detrimental the effect of world wide war is on economies and food avaialability. |Food is the next gold.

 

Big time industry and modern society depend on oil to survive. Remove oil from the equation and we lose the capability to sustain our massive population

 

To me, life is the continual adaptation to a continuously changing environment. Environmental changes, both natural as well as human caused can be favorable for all, some or none, or can be unfavorable for all, some or none. What we see and call change in our environment is the effect and we gain understanding by determining its cause. If the effect we encounter is seen as a problem, the more fully we understand the cause the better prepared we are to decide if it is within our capacity to take any actions which we call a solution. Solutions are nothing more than human created causes, which we apply expecting them to exhibit a predetermined effect. Sometimes solutions are not well thought out and can display unexpected side effects, which can create a worse problem than what we originally set out to solve. It is difficult to separate economics and environment in todays world as both have become very important in sustaining human life. In the developed world , government, businesses, and individuals are greatly dependent on economics as a source of providing the most basic human needs. Few would exist long without earning an income, or the government providing for their basic needs which it can only do so by taxing or borrowing. Government thrive when economies are prospering, and the more an economy propers the greater the demands are placed upon the environment as businesses which produce products do so by making use of natural resources.

Industry taking over farms as you pointed out, may be a problem in many countries, but the government here has been quite determined to not allow that to occur, although the previous Prime Minister did appear to have such in the back of his mind. Many laws are ignored here in order to allow individuals to make a living, which would get people arrested in most other countries. In many ways I feel much more freedom and liberty here than I did in the U.S. or any other country I have lived previously.

One thing I see is that the developed world is finding that free trade with the undeveloped world is creating trade imbalances which are creating growing deficits. Japan was mentioned in a story I read long ago, where Japanese car sales in the U.S. were not being offset by American car sales in Japan. Japan is a small country, and in order to purchase a car there you must first show you have adequate space to park your vehicle. Motorcycles are popular because they can be brought into the house. Large cars are not so popular because there is nowhere to park them for most of the population who have very little land. China is thriving with a large, cheap labor force, and a very low cost of living, which allows them to produce products for sale abroad at very low prices while imports into China have a very small market due to the high cost or a locally produced product available at a much lower cost. This attracts U.S. businesses to locate abroad, taking advantage of the lower labor costs, elimination of some taxes, creation of a market abroad, while reducing both employment and taxes collected in the U.S. and not to mention a possible much greater negative effect on the environment where environmental protection laws are much less or not at all existent. Maybe we are seeing some side effects to free trade?

Genetically modified seeds are another thing, and in some cases, perhaps all? the seeds produced by the crop are not viable by design, creating a perpetual market for the producer. I agree that food is a major problem in some countries, but not because of a shortage of food to feed the world. Crops are often destroyed, plowed under, and farmers can be limited in how much they can plant, all in order to maintain a stable price. Most governments who receive aid prefer to receive cash instead of food, or the food might be confiscated or stolen and sold rather than distributed to those who need it most. When I first arrived in Asia over 40 years ago, I acquired a number of friends locally, and everyone I spoke to claimed that they loved American people, but hated our government. When asked why, they told me the U.S. government send aid to their government, making their government richer and more able to wield power over them. A unique case possibly?

The world is not, and never will become, a single society. Humans are individuals, with greatly differing needs and desires. Take the U.S. alone for example, one Nation, many different individuals, take a single State in the U.S. or a single country, city, neighborhood or even a single family and you will find disagreement, different views, wants and desires.

If we were to try and determine the source of all solvable problems I think the root cause in each case will bring us to humans. Perhaps the most profound intellectual insights made to date were those brought to light by Herbert Spencer and Charles Darwin in the phrase "survival of the fittest" which encompasses both economics and the environment.

Is there a rationally acceptable solution to the many problems created by humans? You mentioned war, "world wide war", and such events although not what I would consider desirable have occurred throughout history, and have brought about desirable results for some while undesirable for others. Might at some point in the future it will become necessary to depopulate in order for human kind to survive? Perhaps it's best to dwell on the problems in the most immediate future, while giving at least some thought on how our daily solutions might affect the future of others, some of whom could very well be our own offspring?

 

Perhaps it's best to dwell on the problems in the most immediate future, while giving at least some thought on how our daily solutions might affect the future of others, some of whom could very well be our own offspring?

This works if and only if the majority of people come along as well. It would make no sense to imagine that it would work, considering the small percentage of people who are capable and willing, not to mention see the need to change alot of the prolems that exist out there.

I would definitely devise a solution that involves gathering the people who already bnelieve these things. Once there is a gathering of it, we have to speak to people out on the streets in the subways, etc etc. I do however see that there will be major problems; the very fact that we are approaching individuals when they are by-themselves is problematic. Their habits would over-run any attempt to instill the type of mentality there needs to be for the changes to come, shortly after we stop talking to them. The second is that it is very hard to believe these things, they are very stressful, considering the amount of stress everyone is already under with relationships and work. The third is that people do not want to hate others. I imagine that if they do believe what they can see is true, many people around them who are ignorant and afraid of become educated, they would simply hate. They would sense this right away and just forget about what they have learnt.

Also there would be many immidiate problems that would occur when the gathering takes place. I imagine that there would be a whole host of different camps with different solutions. Niether being sure about what would change it.

Inr regards to genetically modified seeds I must say that you did not understand my post, in the context it was placed in. I agree with all that was said, but it made no reference to the severe problem that GMO's due to put our seed market at risk for being monopolized. The monopoliztion to me lays the most pressure on the rising prices of the tools to grow food and judging by the curent economic situation and the future forecasts, in the next 10-20 years would could see a drastic change in the food price of staple foods.

 

oh yeah. This will be I think within the next 5 years. I think the USA will do a little "preemptive strike" or invade "just in case".

 

Look up "Isreal and Iran" on you tube and you'll see that the next war will be involving Isreals plans to bomb Iran and Russia and the U.S. facing off. I am planning on getting out of the city for good within 10-15 years. Good riddance on so many levels, major problems will always hit cities, my life will be out in the wilderness.

 

If we look on Youtube we can find all manner of theories and predictions.
Go bury your head in the sand though.
Perhaps it is the best place to be.

 

What you say, besides some bittered comment that only is to attempt to make me feel bad so that you can feel better than me, is with good reason, the eve of world wide war is something that we will have to deal with in our time and we are by no means ready, nor will we ever be.

The videos I allude to are popular media news stations interviewing Isrealy military personal and ministers of foreign relations that claim they will attack Iran like they did to Iraq back two decades ago without anyone in the international community consenting to, if they do not halt their nuclear program. In one the Isrealy foreign minister to Australia is caught on tape saying that they will bomb Irans nuclear facilities, if they do not stop. In another, we have a top official saying the same thing. In another there is confirmation that Isreal already practiced the difficult military maneuvers that are necessary to bomb Iran extensively. They need to re-fuel their ships three times to achieve coming back and forth from the state. I think that generally the attitude towards Iran is negative in the West, especailly after this election. I hardly see any reason for taking away their nuclear program, as I have researched that Iran's Religious Law makes it against their religion to create a nuclear bomb. I have heard the aya-tolla guy, top leader of Iran say it himself and it makes sense, Islam is generally a very peaceful religion, besides a few sects. That is something I have heard from other islamists as well, in my life.

Actually I can direct you to the broadcasts

CBS - Broadcast about Isreal Preforming the Maneuvers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6xApA38InA

I imagine this should be enough to entice you to research if you are not to emotionally discomforted.

I hope this leads you to better understanding.

Oh and even if I did feel hurt, what good would it be to follow that emotion, useless, as I have no need to compromise with you, your not in direct touch with my life. Your a mere fragment of what is important and a fragment it reflects.

 

This is a collection of the information, with short clips of broadcasts from many stations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWueW7vV73U

 

I don't understand why people consider America to be on top ...

Britian has the most powerful currency.. and has more or less dominated recent history of the world ....

There is a reason why they have not joined in with the Euro yet .. and that is simply because it would be suicide financially..

Sure the Americans; Chinese; Russians may have shit loads of nuclear weapons but that does not make them a superpower in my eyes; all it takes is one of these countries to press the red button and blow everyone up .. some may call that power; I call it stupidity and shows no power at all.

and all this stuff about predictions .. all you have to do to predict something is look at our past .... and you can get a clear indicition how things are going to pan out ... much of the same

and who knows .. maybe all these dicussions we have about this kind of shit is what the media and the people who control the media want us to be wasting our time doing ... the only real war going on is the one where the rich keep gettin richer and the poor keep killing each other via misdirected aggression and anger.

 

Most people on here are american, and they love their country - that may be why they consider america to be on top. Chanting "USA! USA! USA!" (not that the lovely people on here would stoop so low as to do such a thing) is one way to make it look as if america is on top (repetition, loudness, and repetition - the trio that works every time), but is only used and believed by idiots (just kidding)

America on top?
Most of the people in the world would not agree
(95% of humans are not from the USA)
Most americans don't give a shit what those people think
(95% of americans don't have a passport)

and Britain hasn't been on top since the 19th century

 

I think if you were to look at it as a "pile of shit", most everyone could then agree that America is on top. - An American

 

From what it looks like, this has already been brought up, but I don't really think the US is a super power country anymore.
I think the only people that think that all live in America, but I don't know.

 

It does still retain a lot of military might, but then again so does China, and Russia may regroup. I don't think the U.S. will be the economic power it once was ever again, and I think that is going to be what eventually brings it down. Perhaps the EU or China will take up the title?