Even in a city such as New York, 53% of food agencies for the poor have had to cut portion size in 2004, and 48 have closed down for lack of food donations. This lifeboat ethics might be the case with our own refrigerators. In an unbound, unregulated economy, food is give to those who can afford what the market will bear; those who cannot post purchase price starve. One example of this was the horn of Africa’s famine in the 1980’s. Though tankers of grain headed to their European buyers, the purchase price posted by them with the market responding, Africans died of hunger. Land itself for farming is now concentrated with the few. In the U.S 124,000, entities control ½ of our agricultural land. In Guatemala, 2/3 of the agricultural land is controlled by 2% of its population. Finally, 18 transnational corporations own more global farmland than the surface area of the Netherlands, Portugal and Switzerland combined. Without land to grow food, purchasing becomes the only viable option. The most telling remarks came from the Central Intelligence Agency in December of 2000, wherein they cite economic globalization driving inequality and poverty which would stress societies to violence. Those countries and citizens left behind would feel cultural alienation, poverty, hunger, political and economic extremism and violence. Most telling of the CIA’s report in 2000 was a warning that global inequality through globalization, if continued to be pursued would cause global circumstance to deteriorate. Eight years later, those remarks proved prophetic. When the richest three people on the Earth hold more resources than the combined economic production of the least developed 48 countries on the planet economic resources must be skewed. This strategy of economic policy not just the U.S is pursuing but the world must be mediated, otherwise global upheaval will occur unlike what we are seeing today.
We have a case of the iron triangle of the ultra wealthy, where they run multi-national corporations such that they are not beholden to any one national rule of law thus immune to authority infringement. Many finance politicos to win offices that then bend further to the feudal system. These politicos then fund the systems that fuel the ambitions of the company or seek to negate the result. In health care that would be a scenario like this:
A company uses corn for fuel when other secondary bio fuels are better suited for ethanol production, in part because corn is a food source for humans and animals. But because said company owns the land, the facilities and the vertical integration of corn by products production this would drive up the price of corn, allowing them to not only profit from selling all the products they already sold, due to a higher price but the new ethanol as well. Well funded campaigns lead to choice candidates that then pass bills diverting funds and laws to subsidize the company and its ethanol products. These funds could have been used for health care expansion or other such worthy federal expenditures.
Now because corn products in the supermarket are much higher than normal, because of the corn scarcity, instead of cereal for breakfast many seek high calorie, empty nutrition products that are cheap but filling. They consume these products, which lead to diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease. Health care costs go up, so politicians fund new programs to lower the obesity rate keeping the autocracy from contracting (more employment for them) and scoring political points. What we get is less food, more expensive food, more junk food, more health problems, higher gas prices, and higher taxes to pay for a poor choice in bio fuels and to pay for more people who have become sick from eating poverty level food stuffs, because they are poor.
What is considered socialism is actually the pendulum swinging back to democracy. Once democracy is re-established and it swings further then we can think about calling it socialism.
The Great Bengal famine, the Ethiopian famine, the Great Irish famine, and the Bangladesh famine all occurred while there was an adequate or above average supply of food in the region hit by the famine. The root cause of those famines then was the lack of these countries to guarantee minimum entitlements, wherein exacerbated by the purchasing of foodstuffs from some of these countries from outside entities while reducing the food qualities internal to the famine stricken countries at that time. Minimal entitlements mean better health and a better lifestyle for everyone and would, opposite to what the ultra wealth and the multinational companies believe, guarantee a stable world for which they could continue being wealthy and keep their companies from going bankrupt. Let us tally the list of failed countries because guaranteed minimums were not supplied:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Cuba, Burma, North Korea, Sudan, Haiti Many more can be found at: List of Failed States