Food Rationing Comes to America

[Troubadour]

Apparently the rapid rise in food prices - due primarily to sharply spiking oil prices - is short-circuiting some parts of the supply chain and causing shortages as consumers seek to stockpile food to avoid anticipated prices later. This has caused some retailers, including Wal-Mart, to begin strictly rationing the sale of some foodstuffs. The phenomenon will eventually be self-correcting...unless the rise in oil prices and consequent skyrocket of food prices continues to accelerate, in which case the phenomenon will spread.

http://www.newscientist.com/blog/environment/2008/04/food-rationing-hits-america.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=env1_head_Food%20rationing%20hits%20America

Oil companies, meanwhile, continue to experience record profits. Thanks, Republicans.

[preservanation]

One word...ETHANOL.
This is just one of the horrors to come if we follow the MMGW fruitcakes off the cliff like lemmings.

"Oh, at least we're doing something, unlike you Mr. presrva who wants us all to die in the doomsday Armageddon of Gores imagination."
Yeah, their doing something alright, and none of it is good.

I don't know how they can sleep at night knowing that they are burning the worlds food and starving the worlds poor in order for them to run their Volvos on the most ridiculous energy source in my life time, Ethanol..

[Troubadour]

One word...ETHANOL.

Ethanol's impact is far exceeded by the rising energy cost of farming in general.


"Oh, at least we're doing something, unlike you Mr. presrva who wants us all to die in the doomsday Armageddon of Gores imagination."


Corn ethanol subsidies are strongly supported by Republicans. First they denied global warming; then they denied anthropogenic global warming; then they figured out how they could use it to give away money to farm state campaign contributors and suddenly had a change of heart. Now that scientists have decided ethanol may be contributing to the problem of global warming, no doubt the GOP will take just as long to "discover" their error as it took them to admit the problem that precipitated it.


I don't know how they can sleep at night knowing that they are burning the worlds food and starving the worlds poor in order for them to run their Volvos on the most ridiculous energy source in my life time, Ethanol..

I can't address your fantasy world, only the reality that this country is burdened with idiots who drive SUVs and are willing to tolerate global murder and mayhem to fuel them. Corn-based ethanol is apparently a bust, but cellulosic ethanol (which does not raise food prices) is highly promising, as are pure-electric autos charged from a fully renewable grid. Let's see how willing your glorious patriotic Republican leaders are to remove corn subsidies and expand incentives for solar.

[preservanation]

Yeah, we've murdered so many people for their oil that we pay $113 a barrel and $3.50 at the pump.
Your logic is demonstrated flawed by simple observation and experience.

[Troubadour]

Yeah, we've murdered so many people for their oil that we pay $113 a barrel and $3.50 at the pump.

Yes - prices rise when you reduce the number of suppliers in an inelastic market, as do the profits of those suppliers. Since Republicans are all about "supply-side," they couldn't care less what you pay at the pump - Exxon-Mobil's profits are surging, so by GOP standards the economy is in the best shape it's ever been in, and you should be happy. The supply side of the equation won't stop prospering until the erosion of the consumer base causes a Hoover Spiral, but by then the wealthy insiders and Republican leaders will have already taken their engorged fortunes out of the market and relocated them offshore. With an impoverished America and their own fortunes secure, they can tighten their grip on power even further.

[preservanation]

idiots who drive SUVs and are willing to tolerate global murder and mayhem to fuel them. I hate to keep doing this to you, but do you have examples of this, or any proof?
What country's have we invaded and stole their oil?
Iraq sure isn't one of them.

[Trish]

I hate to keep doing this to you, but do you have examples of this, or any proof?
What country's have we invaded and stole their oil?
Iraq sure isn't one of them.

Ain't that the truth!

"Track Iraq oil cash
Thursday, April 10, 2008

American taxpayers have a right to know why Iraq's oil revenue is not bankrolling more of the cost of reconstructing that nation. Congressional investigators should conduct an audit that answers that question, especially when Iraq's oil profits may soar above $56 billion this year.

Michigan Senator Carl Levin, D-Detroit, has called for an inquiry by the Government Accountability Office. As the "post-war" war drags on into a sixth year draining resources and dollars from the U.S. treasury, why isn't the fiscal pain being salved with a thick coat of Iraq oil or at least the cash from it? No reliable figure exists for the cost of reconstruction. In 2006, the GAO said the initial $56 billion assessment was insufficient.

With our economy on the verge of recession and world oil prices at more than $100 a barrel, it's time to follow the Iraq money trail and find out where its windfall in profits has been going. We are foolish for not insisting the Iraqis do more to pay for rebuilding their country.

American taxpayers have pumped billions of dollars into rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure and training/equipping its military, while no one can say with certainty where the barrels-ful of oil money have gone. At the outset of the war, the Bush administration said Iraq would foot the bulk of the bill. Like other early projections, the truth is closer to exactly opposite of what U.S. citizens were told.

Yes, oil production has been below expectations for a variety of reasons, including terrorist sabotage and corruption, but the petrodollars are still rolling in -- and out -- to somewhere. Compared to what the U.S. is doling out, only a small percentage has been devoted to rebuilding efforts, training security forces or services for Iraqi people. Reviving this issue during an election year opens it up to political spin by both sides. That predictablemelodrama is drama worth enduring for answers to financial questions that need answers.

Mr. Levin, and Sen. John Warner, R-Virginia, members of the Armed Services Committee, sent their inquiry request last month to David M. Walker, the nation's Comptroller General and head of the GAO. The senators want answers to sensible questions taxpayers are entitled to know including: Iraq oil revenues from 2003 to 2007 and 2008 projections. How much money Iraq has earned from oil but not spent? How much the Iraqi government has deposited in banks and in which countries? Why Iraq hasn't spent more on services for its people? A breakdown of how much the U.S. has spent in the areas of security, reconstruction, governance and economic development.

Sen. Levin says reports indicate the Iraqi government has money in bank accounts around the world. Last year, the State Department estimated that Iraq oil sales generated $41 billion and with oil prices skyrocketing could collect $60 billion this year. The department's figures would put Iraq oil production at 2.2 million barrels a day this year. However, weekly averages suggest that the number is up to 2.51 million barrels a day.

This week Mr. Levin rightly addressed the oil revenue issue at the Armed Services Committee hearing that featured General David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. Mr. Walker should instruct his investigators to answer the money question.

America cannot afford to be taken for billions more, while the Iraqi government is building up a surplus instead of its own country."
http://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ssf?/base/news-2/1207833943183800.xml&coll=6

[preservanation]

I'm still hoping for a windfall in oil at some time in the future from Iraq...and Levin and others in congress seem to agree with me.

[4Reaganomics]

Yes - prices rise when you reduce the number of suppliers in an inelastic market.


When you reduce the suppy in general prices will rise as well without a change in demand.

After 9/11 we demanded less oil and oil prices dropped. OPEC cut production of oil and then prices rose. We are at OPEC's mercy now because we cannot increase the global supply. There is always a rare grasshopper somewhere that prevents us from obtaining the good we yearn for that is right below are feet.

Subsidies in general are a disgrace, let alone subsidies for Ethanol. Giving farmers more incentive to produce specific food for fuel will lead to a shortage in the production of all of the other food that we actually eat.

You don't need to study Econ to know that shortages lead to high prices.

[Troubadour]

I hate to keep doing this to you, but do you have examples of this, or any proof?

Of what?


What country's have we invaded and stole their oil?

Iraq.


Iraq sure isn't one of them.

Yes, it is. The Bush regime seized both the physical and financial infrastructure of Iraq's oil production.

When you reduce the supply in general prices will rise as well without a change in demand.

Yes, precisely. The combination of naturally declining supply and arbitrarily inflated prices enabled by oligopoly both contribute to what consumers are now paying.


We are at OPEC's mercy now because we cannot increase the global supply. There is always a rare grasshopper somewhere that prevents us from obtaining the good we yearn for that is right below are feet.

The canard that there is some vast, magical, abundant treasure trove of oil sitting beneath American soil that would more than marginally impact reliance on foreign sources has been repeatedly and overwhelmingly discredited. It is fiction, pure and simple, used by the industry as catchall lobbying propaganda, and they've used it more than once to open up alleged bonanzas with little or no effect. Frankly, even if that were not the case, it's about time the United States moved beyond oil - our energy economy is a corrupt farce with no future, and we need to finally, at long last get serious and tell the vampiric 19th-century industries that have kept us static for 30 years to shove off. America's large-scale environmental goals should be: 100% solar grid (all other renewables are just deferred solar), fully electric transportation charged from that grid, all new buildings above a certain size LEED certified, and transition to desalinized seawater rather than depleting aquifers and glacier runoff. These goals should be set to a genuinely ambitious timetable (i.e., 2015), funded accordingly, and actually treated as the necessities they are. We'll have a serious president in the White House in a few months, but Congress may be a serious obstacle to reform unless Obama's coattails are long.

[preservanation]

The Bush regime seized both the physical and financial infrastructure of Iraq's oil production. Is there something to back up this assertion?

[Troubadour]

Is there something to back up this assertion?

"After the U.S.[sic] invasion of Iraq, the United States[sic] took control of all of the Iraqi government’s bank accounts, including the income from oil sales."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621523/

[apdst]

Drill ANWR and Florida. More oil, more jobs, the best of both worlds.

[preservanation]

Originally Posted by Troudadour
The Bush regime seized both the physical and financial infrastructure of Iraq's oil production.After the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the United States took control of all of the Iraqi government’s bank accounts, including the income from oil sales. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621523/
They provide no docs to back this up...but no matter, I'll accept it.

Your cited article says absolutely Nothing about the physical infrastructure of Iraqi oil.
Do you have something else to prove your assertion?
Are you hoarding it from me?

[Troubadour]

They provide no docs to back this up...but no matter, I'll accept it.

It isn't standard practice in journalism to cite documents for claims that are not controversial. In fact, in most cases statements in the general media about Bush regime activities stem solely from the regime's own press releases.


Your cited article says absolutely Nothing about the physical infrastructure of Iraqi oil.

That part is inherent in the fact that they seized Iraq, and a moot point given control of the revenues from the sale of oil.

[preservanation]

That part is inherent in the fact that they seized Iraq, and a moot point given control of the revenues from the sale of oil.Then why is Levin demanding that the Iraqi Govt stop hoarding cash???
If what you say is true, we could just take it from them...easypeasy, no muss no fuss.

First it was 'no blood for oil', now it's 'where's our oil for blood?'.
I wish some would make up their damn minds.

[apdst]

Bio-fuel use hasn't even kicked in yet and there are potential food crises looming on the horizon.

[Troubadour]

If what you say is true, we could just take it from them...easypeasy, no muss no fuss.


The regime did take it from them. Billions of dollars of Iraqi oil money are unaccounted for from the period of their direct control, and the alleged transfer of authority to an Iraqi pseudo-entity completely dependent on regime support only added a layer of deniability without actually loosening Bush's control. I'm sure it was just an honest mistake that, following public revelations about the missing money and Congressional demands for accountability, the Pentagon hired an uncertified accounting firm with four employees to audit the entire country's oil revenue.


First it was 'no blood for oil', now it's 'where's our oil for blood?'.
I wish some would make up their damn minds.

You're saying that the idiocy of people who supported a murderous war of aggression because they believed their gasoline would be cheaper proves that opponents of the war were wrong? Oil was one of the motives for the invasion - the regime simply duped greedy, stupid people into believing the theft would benefit them personally, when its sole intention was expanding its own wealth and power. Anyway, it didn't exactly take a psychic to predict the consequences of the regime's policies, both foreign and domestic. Food shortages and massive poverty in George W. Bush's glorious low-tax capitalist paradise speak for themselves.