Viewing 4 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
  • #49350

    Here is one thing about the US , during WW2 , we were able to not only feed our own population , but we were also feeding all of our allies as well , and we were not even going full bore , all that at a time when todays agricultural advancements and knowledge didnt exist . Never underestimate a pissed off , hungry , broke population with guns . Why do you think they are trying so very hard to disarm Americans ? Because they are scared ……….plain and simple . They may put on the show of the all powerful , invincible state , but its a show , push comes to shove , the population will win .

    Profile photo of MountainBiker

    Tolik, the US population in 1940 was 132 million. It is now 322 million. During that time we lost 14% of our farmland and are currently losing about 1 million additional acres per year. In 1940 we had about 8 acres of farmland per person. Now it is about 2.8. The issue isn’t so much current capabilities, but rather the ongoing addition of about 3 million more people each year in conjunction with the loss of 1 million acres of farmland each year.

    Profile photo of L Tecolote
    L Tecolote

    Tolik, in the glorious recent past, this nation was the powerhouse, arsenal, and the breadbasket of the “free” world. Now, not so much (and not so “free.”) Not only have we reduced the farming acreage. and are continuing to import millions more to help us eat what gets grown, as MB points out, but many of the “agricultural advancements,” which produce higher tonnage, also produce lower nutrition, mineral depletion, and actual, measurable soil loss. All the anger and munitions “a pissed off , hungry , broke population with guns” can muster won’t make more food, in a world of growing population, technological sophistication, and economic competition. It also doesn’t help that most of the governmental/monetary policies those people with the guns have either asked for, or at least, tolerated, are making most of them more broke, more hungry, (and presumably) more pissed off. Would that it made them smarter.

    Evidently, most of the people, armed or not, are simply not going to bother to learn what is actually going on, except as the price of beer, hot dogs, and Cheetos slowly escalates, and their paychecks get smaller, with more and bigger deductions. I suspect that was one of the unstated premises of the simulation. Keep your powder dry — your pissed off, hungry, broke, armed neighbors may start wondering how well your garden grows.

    Cry, "Treason!"

    • This reply was modified 5 years, 6 months ago by Profile photo of L Tecolote L Tecolote.
    Profile photo of 74

    Setting aside production capabilities momentarily. I believe the first part of a crisis would start with transportation issues. No matter how much food is produced it all requires trucking to urban areas. A lot of food is shipped in from different countries. Any disruption in the distribution will cause a calamity.

    Based on the numbers MB stated we already have a good shortage.

    • This reply was modified 5 years, 6 months ago by Profile photo of 74 74.
Viewing 4 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.