~ FOOD DOOM CONTINUED, Y'ALL: Global Food Prices Just Hit Their Highest Level Ever...!! ~

You do realise, only posting one link, and hyping it up, merely desensitises the people to the actual problem.

Which might be the intended scheme all a long.

Massively hype up minimal amounts of food price increases, just so people get used to it, so it creeps up on them, unprepared.

"What's the time, Mr Wolf?"

~ Okay Joshua, look, you can feel free to browse through all of the threads that I've ever created, all of the news and research I've ever cited, and count how many have dealt with this issue... everything from crop shortages to the Baltic Dry Index to the surprise-sized foods at the local grocery store is not just hinting, but GLARINGLY OBVIOUS that this is about to happen, and HAS BEEN happening, growing worse by the day...

Yes, I agree 100%. There is no food shortage.

My food bill has not changed the last five years.

I go to the farmers market for my meat, veggies and spices... price remains constant

Credibility aside (burden of proof is at the role of those placing a claim - you can't expect each poster to do the groundwork), the thread is still sensationalist compared to the content supplied (one link).


"everything from crop shortages to the Baltic Dry Index to the surprise-sized foods at the local grocery store is not just hinting, but GLARINGLY OBVIOUS that this is about to happen, and HAS BEEN happening, growing worse by the day..."

I was never disputing the truthfulness of the claim, just merely noting it damaging credibility of it (the title is disproportionate 'FOOD DOOM' to the link 'UN raises prices' - the logical chain of causation is missing from the thread).

If you're thinking it's a pot, kettle, black issue?

Thread: WARNING! A FULL EXPLANATION OF WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN!

In that thread I explained everything so far occurring (the conclusion is crops destruction and food shortage), using no less than 26 links performing a step-by-step logic.

On my desktop currently is another .txt file, more focused on the food shortage, which contains no less than 37 links, roughly 75% on the food shortage effects - the other 25% on weather and causation.

The problem with sensationalising a single link is it will desensitise people to the impending problem. Then it will become the 'boy who cried wolf' effect - that any real warning will be swamped by the sensationalised trivial ones.

I have the same goals. I am just suggesting a different method of going about it.

Good Evening Red.

Check this chart out. Tells you how expensive commodities

have been getting in the last twelve months!

[link to quotes.ino.com]

Inflation!

oh god no!!!!
please do not hit me with a wall of text, talk about desensitizing!!
OP made her point without leading me by the hand, thank you for respecting my intelligence OP.

Does this help they are all fairly recent.

All Evidence Points To A Dramatic Increase In Food Prices Worldwide, Possible Shortages
[link to theintelhub.com]

Global Food Prices in 2011 Face Perilous Rise
[link to www.nytimes.com]

Argentina drought causes sharp spike in corn prices
[link to www.bloomberg.com]

World Risks Food Riots as Grains Climb, Economist Chalmin Says
[link to www.businessweek.com]

Obama and Sarkozy to address rocketing Global food prices at talks
[link to www.france24.com]

UN warns record food prices put millions at risk
[link to www.google.com]

Global wheat reserves drop to 175.2 million tons
[link to www.bloomberg.com]

World Food Prices Surge to Record, Passing Levels That Sparked 2008 Riots
[link to www.bloomberg.com]

South Korea Buries One Million Pigs Alive As It Grapples With Foot And Mouth Disease Outbreak
[link to news.sky.com]

Pesticides Threaten Ant-Eating Tradition in Brazil
[link to www.nytimes.com]

World food prices could go unaffordable this year
[link to www.commodityonline.com]

"Nowhere to Hide" from Rising Food Prices
[link to www.cbsnews.com]

Headline from Australia
Next shock will be high food prices
[link to www.smh.com.au]

Wow. So witty. If you consider 3 paragraphs to be a wall of text, then I'd hate to see your reaction to a newspaper or an article.

"talk about desensitizing!!"

Funnily enough, supplied thread went on for 12 pages where people generally responded positively and decided to stock supplies. With the occasional shill replies.

"OP made her point without leading me by the hand"

Credibility (EG reputation, believability) is not the same thing as making a point.

One involves convincing doubtful people (Eg sceptics, disillusioned people), the other involves conveying an understanding.

"thank you for respecting my intelligence OP."

Yeah, kept it short, especially for you.

These might be useful. I'll tack them into the compilation if any of the links are missing.

i was referring to 37 links . txt sitting on your desktop. while i appreciate information, overload kinda kills the fun for me.
yes thanks for keeping it short, i prefer to do my own thinking.

Here are a few more:

What happens next: THE US CONSUMER SECTOR GETS CRUSHED
[link to www.marketskeptics.com]

Gwynne Dyer: Riots spread as global food shortage worsens
[link to www.nzherald.co.nz]

Food Riots and the Mass Liquidation of Foreign Exchange Reserves
[link to www.marketskeptics.com]

The 37 links are only really there for people who don't believe this stuff is occurring. Like, citation references to support/verify the claim. I don't imagine everyone will click on the links supplied [nor would I expect them to] (I quote extracts from the links highlighting the specific points).

But there are some surprising elements in there - some of which seems almost incredulous (did you know Russia's wildfires were the worst in 1,000 years?), and would seem so absurd that without a link to back it up, it might be dismissed.

The links are primarily there for anti-shilling usage/support. The sheer number and diversity just hammers the point home of how frequent it is.

[If your concern is length, I typically supply a summary (a few paragraphs) or a tl;dr version (Literally a line)].

[Also, free bump]

Thank you. I don't seem to be processing the links properly due to stress.

I... recently uncovered a problem in the works. It's much bigger than the food shortage. If that wasn't bad enough. The links and evidence are there, I am just not processing it correctly. From what I can tell, not even the military are expecting it.

I've only got a

Woah. Deja vu. Not like any other deja vu I've had. That was like... a snap. Suddenly there and gone.

Simple hint: explody-wody.

I'm not going to post details until I can compile a convincing enough case for it.

joshua...

ahhh, glad to see we are on the same side here then.
between mother natures wrath and the banksters profiteering affordable food shortages are creating chaos. if droughts and floods, plus QE2 inspired inflation, brought us Tunisia and egypt do you think these uprisings may disrupt supplies further and create a negative feedback loop?

well prices have a long way to go up

The precious metals boat has sailed the food boat is next
and most important

I went and picked up a few groceries yesterday. Some items have stayed pretty much the same (dairy and bread). Some items have gone thru the roof (egg's $3.00 a dz, bacon $4.40 for a lb of store brand).

I try to help whenever I'm not entirely useless.

"do you think these uprisings may disrupt supplies further and create a negative feedback loop?"

It seems like the most logical conclusion. Suez canal gets disrupted, shipping and oil supplies to europe up in cost, transportation costs of foods up, food prices up, other countries get hit. Either europe goes, breaking the euro, pulling down america with it, or the costs pass to america, the dollar breaks, and america pulls down europe.

Yes, basically.

Joshua Flynn...SHILL!

Here's some history on sugar prices in America

Since 1980, the sugar program has cost consumers and taxpayers the equivalent of more than $3 million for each American sugar grower. Some people win the lottery; other people grow sugar.

Sugar sold for 21 cents a pound in the United States when the world sugar price was less than 3 cents a pound.

Congress, in a moment of economic sobriety, abolished sugar quotas in June 1974. But, on May 5, 1982, President Reagan reimposed import quotas. The quotas sought to create an artificial shortage of sugar that would drive up U.S. prices and force consumers to unknowingly support American sugar growers. And by keeping the subsidies covert and off-budget, quotas did not interfere with Reagan's bragging about how he was cutting wasteful government spending.

While USDA bureaucrats worked overtime to minutely regulate the quantity of sugar allowed into the United States, a bomb went off that destroyed their best-laid plans. On November 6, 1984, both Coca Cola and Pepsi announced plans to stop using sugar in soft drinks, replacing it with high-fructose corn syrup. At the drop of two press releases, U.S. sugar consumption decreased by more than 500,000 tons a year — equal to the entire quotas of 25 of the 42 nations allowed to sell sugar to the United States. The quota program drove sugar prices so high that it wrecked the market for sugar — and thereby destroyed the government's ability to control sugar supply and demand.

Here's the link to the entire story
[link to www.fff.org]

I actually consider that a compliment, so thank you.

It's my real name by the way, so I've got nothing to hide.

Study this chart and tell me what is really going on!!!!!
[link to www.ers.usda.gov]
Sorry I gave you the wrong link

pretty sad when i now consider real sugar like a health food
HFCS is a disgusting poison that is harder to make i think than sugar??

For those of you that like charts instead of data, this will give you an idea.
[link to www.ilfb2.org]

monsanto, conagra and other mega farmers cashing in on a spike in food prices...

[link to www.docstoc.com]

Did you try clicking the link in the thread itself I just tried a total of nine from both posts and all worked fine for me.

There is no point worrying about circumstances beyond your control however, details such as obtaining extra food is a prudent measure these days especially if there are shortages or inflation gone wild.

[link to www.msu.edu (secure)]
The original supplied link (ignoring estimates) infers imported amounts is increasing whilst stocks are depleting (2008-2009), and that the prices have been doctored for no apparent reason (2007-2008).

[link to www.ers.usda.gov]
For the second table, it infers, though misleadingly, that people spend less on food. However, because the 'family income' is in billions, this infers it is an 'average' of all incomes, which includes both rich (which would have a very small margin used on food) and poor (which would have a large margin used on budget brand foods - foods cheaper than conventional by default) and is ergo misleading as a fair basis for interpretation of actual food prices.

That is to say, if a person used to buy medium range goods, and is forced to downgrade to budget range goods, this would not be reflected in the table (the price would appear the 'same' even though quality of food has gone down).

Your original table refutes the second table.

The links worked fine. I am just not absorbing them properly anymore (in context to the text document on my desktop) as trying to fit it all in is doing my head in - as it keeps reminding me not only of the impending food disaster, but the much bigger one in the pipeline.

As for food shortages? Government and military units watching this have absolutely no reason to bother 'hitlisting me' as they are now - I am unable to buy any food or stock supplies as I have no income. If this thing kicks off, I am dead by default anyway.

Only reason I posted it is so other people have a chance to survive. But the bigger impending disaster would pretty much nullify it, especially if you were to live in the USA.