Food Shortages Result in Major Riots
CNN reports that “[r]iots from Haiti to Bangladesh to Egypt over the soaring costs of basic foods have brought the issue to a boiling point and catapulted it to the forefront of the world’s attention.” Jeffrey Sachs, director of Columbia University’s Earth Institute said: “This is the world’s big story.” On “Good Morning America” Sachs explained: “The finance ministers were in shock, almost in panic this weekend. There are riots all over the world in the poor countries … and, of course, our own poor are feeling it in the United States.”
World Bank President Robert Zoellick has said the surging costs could mean “seven lost years” in the fight against worldwide poverty.
“While many are worrying about filling their gas tanks, many others around the world are struggling to fill their stomachs, and it is getting more and more difficult every day,” Zoellick said late last week in a speech opening meetings with finance ministers. “The international community must fill the at least $500 million food gap identified by the U.N.’s World Food Programme to meet emergency needs,” he said. “Governments should be able to come up with this assistance and come up with it now.”
The White House announced Monday evening that an estimated $200 million in emergency food aid would be made available through the U.S. Agency for International Development.
“This additional food aid will address the impact of rising commodity prices on U.S. emergency food aid programs, and be used to meet unanticipated food aid needs in Africa and elsewhere,” the White House said in a news release.
“In just two months,” Zoellick said in his speech, “rice prices have skyrocketed to near historical levels, rising by around 75 percent globally and more in some markets, with more likely to come. In Bangladesh, a 2-kilogram bag of rice … now consumes about half of the daily income of a poor family.” The price of wheat has jumped 120 percent in the past year, he said — meaning that the price of a loaf of bread has more than doubled in places where the poor spend as much as 75 percent of their income on food.
“This is not just about meals forgone today or about increasing social unrest. This is about lost learning potential for children and adults in the future, stunted intellectual and physical growth,” Zoellick said.
The results:
In Haiti, the prime minister was kicked out of office Saturday, and hospital beds are filled with wounded following riots sparked by food prices.
In Egypt, rioters have burned cars and destroyed windows of numerous buildings as police in riot gear have tried to quell protests.
Images from Bangladesh and Mozambique tell a similar story.
Some experts blame ethanol: “The basic argument is that because ethanol comes from corn, the push to replace some traditional fuels with ethanol has created a new demand for corn that has thrown off world food prices.” The U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food even called using food crops to create ethanol “a crime against humanity.”
Environmental organizations, though, disagree: “The contrived food vs. fuel debate has reared its ugly head once again,” the Renewable Fuels Association says on its Web site, adding that “numerous statistical analyses have demonstrated that the price of oil — not corn prices or ethanol production — has the greatest impact on consumer food prices because it is integral to virtually every phase of food production, from processing to packaging to transportation.”
But there’s more to it than that: another major reason is rising demand, facilitated by baby booms in certain countries (like China, India, and so on).
Now, it is clear that something has to be done, and that the poor who cannot afford food have to be helped. But the question is what policies will work, and what food policies will not work. Socializing food, subsidizing this or that, will make matters even worse; we’ve learned that in the past. Experts need to look at the situation, explain why the prices of food are rising so fast, and then come up with solutions that will actually work (instead of merely making people feel good in the short term).










Socializing and subsidising food does not work. Yes, but how does free market capitalism provide a solution to high food prices?
I don’t know whether to laugh or scream at that ridiculous DD post. The article above states that Bush (evil American conservative that he is) has immediately pledged for the US to make up 40% of the entire emergency need on its own, yet of course, the DD blogger explains that American conservatives believe that the solution is to allow people to die so that there will be less food needed. And then he goes on with some absurd notion that if the Dems were in control, we’d have a planned global economy. Uhh, OK. Our current Dem led Congress can hardly pass a bill to find their way out of a paper bag, but obviously if they were in complete control of the US govt they’d be quite capable of taking control of all of the planet’s food resources and distributing them equitably.
Last time I looked it was the environmentalists who were claiming that the planet was over-populated, not the conservatives.
Ronnie - mainly by not subsidizing the production of ethanol. Anyone with a brain that were seeing the trends could see the vast amount of farmland being given over to this extremely wasteful "energy" source. You barely get back the energy it takes to grow, harvest, distill & refine it without counting the wasted water, pesticides, etc.
State and federal governments, spurred on by Al Gore and the likes started putting massive subisidies in place (because left to the free market, the costs of doing something stupid like this would never get off the ground). Countries around the world are now cutting down forests in order to make farmland - to make up for our idiocy - we can no longer produce the corn and wheat this country needs, let alone be the foodbasket to the world.
I won’t even get into whether global warming is real or not - there are plenty of technologies - wind, solar, nuclear, and soon fuel cells with just a short bit more of innovation that will solve pollution problems as well as energy independence, but "biofuels" became "the next big thing" and in just a few years has completely screwed up supply/ demand.
Socialist policies caused the current problems? Really? Seems to me like like the current markets are quite free and unfettered, and that the socialist policies are enacted as breaks from this default, neo-liberal situation. Seems. I’m not saying I know how things have been and are coming to pass now.