Sunday, March 20, 2022

Global Famine Feared as Russian Fleet Blocks Ukrainian Grain Ships - WHY ISN'T AMERICA GROWING ITS OWN WHEAT??? - BLAME BIG AG PIGS?

WE HAVE PLENTY OF OIL, BUT PUT OURSELVES AT THE MERCY OF THESE FUCKING MUSLIMS, WHY SHOULD WE GROW OUR OWN FOOD? NOT ENOUGH PROFIT FOR TAX SUBSIDIZED BIG AG????


Food Supply Chain Breakdown Push Prices To Skyrocket 500% As Global Starvation Plan Accelerates

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOoUTY0XE4w


Global Famine Feared as Russian Fleet Blocks Ukrainian Grain Ships

GROSSDERSCHAU, GERMANY - AUGUST 14: In this aerial view a combine harvests summer wheat at a cooperative farm on August 14, 2015 near Grossderschau, Germany. The German Farmers' Association (Deutscher Bauernverband) is due to announce annual grain harvest results this week. Some farmers have reported a disappointing harvest due to …
Sean Gallup/Getty Images
5:24

The world may be careering towards global famine as Russia blocks ships exporting grain from Ukraine.

Famine is now on the cards for many across the world, with food insecurity dramatically increasing as a result of the ongoing invasion of Ukraine and the associated sanctions war between Russia and the West.

Known as the breadbasket of Europe, Ukraine is responsible for a significant share of the world’s grain production, with both it and Russia usually exporting over 30 per cent of the world’s wheat alone.

However, according to a report by Deutsche Welle, that vital supply is now being threatened, with Russian forces blocking Ukrainian grain exports from traversing the Black Sea.

“Zero [grain] is currently being exported from the ports of Ukraine — nothing is leaving the country at all,” the publication reports Jörg-Simon Immerz, who heads up grain trading agency BayWa, as saying.

The crop trading tsar also noted that exports from Russia had become “very limited” which will likely add to supply disruptions.

As a result, a number of locations across the world are looking at serious issues regarding food security, with the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, now warning that global famine is on the cards as a result of the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine.

“For the last three years, global rates of hunger and famine have been on the rise,” The Guardian reports Fakhri as saying. “With the Russian invasion, we are now facing the risk of imminent famine and starvation in more places around the world.”

“Food should never be weaponised and no country in the world should be driven into famine and desperation,” the special rapporteur added.

Perhaps the starkest example of a nation that is under serious threat from this supply crisis is Yemen.

According to an Oxfam report, Yemen — which is already facing extreme difficulties supplying food to its people amid years of internecine warfare and a brutal Saudi military intervention — imported around 90 per cent of its food as of 2017, with a more recent report noting that 30 per cent of the country’s wheat imports alone come from Ukraine.

Now, as a result of the ongoing war in Eastern Europe, the country is facing an even worse situation than it is already in.

“Our humanitarian dollar is really being stretched to a breaking point,” said Shaza Moghraby of the UN Food Program, warning that the increased price of grain as a result of food scarcity could have devastating effects on Yemen.

“Before the Ukraine crisis erupted in February, we were warning about a year of unprecedented hunger in Yemen,” the UN official said, noting that the global organisation has already had to cut rations to the region over a lack of necessary funds.

“Those who can somehow get by, barely, will soon join the ranks of those 5 million [Yemenis at immediate risk of famine] if we continue providing them with just half of the rations,” she added.

While regions such as Yemen are most at risk from the lack of Ukrainian exports, far more wealthy regions will also likely face extreme difficulties as a result of the lack of exports.

One senior EU agri-food official has warned that there is serious “suffering” ahead for the bloc as a result of a dramatic decrease of food security, with a lack of animal feed, grain, and fertiliser likely to cause issues for Europe and beyond.

Another senior official from a major fertiliser company also echoed this sentiment, warning that a “global food crisis” was imminent over a lack of available fertiliser, in particular.

Substantial amounts of the extremely important farming resource are imported from Russia and Ukraine, with a lot of the raw materials required to make fertilisers also being imported from these two countries, compounding the issue.

“Half the world’s population gets food as a result of fertilisers… and if that’s removed from the field for some crops, [the yield] will drop by 50 per cent,” Svein Tore Holsether, who heads up agri company Yara International, is reported as saying.

“For me, it’s not whether we are moving into a global food crisis – it’s how large the crisis will be,” he said.

Some countries have responded rather quickly to the impending crisis, with the Hungarian government banning grain exports and the Irish government now asking farmers to grow more grain in the hopes of mitigating some of the damage that will be done to local industry, for example.

Others, however, have seemingly not taken the threat of an impending global famine nearly as seriously.

Despite a wealth of global experts warning of the future risks, Scotland’s devolved government has chosen to prioritise its leftist green agenda over impending food shortages.

The nation’s Biodiversity Minister, Canadian-born Lorna Slater, has dismissed calls for land earmarked for rewilding to be used to grow crops, despite farmers warning of a drastic drop in Scottish food security.

“We are still in a nature emergency that hasn’t gone away… so it’s a no [to allowing farmers to grow on land marked for rewilding efforts],” the minister said, patronisingly dismissing farmers’ concerns over impending Scottish food insecurity.

Follow Breitbart London on Facebook: Breitbart London

Survey: Majority Say Biden’s Skyrocketing Gas Prices Causing Financial Hardship

People pump gas at a Giant Eagle GetGo where a gallon of unleaded regular gas is $4.19.9, while at a neighboring Sunoco station, rear, a gallon of unleaded regular is $4.39.9, in Mount Lebanon, Pa., Monday, March 7, 2022.
Gene J. Puskar/AP
2:21

A majority of Americans say the skyrocketing gas prices in President Joe Biden’s America have caused financial hardship, a Monmouth University Poll released this week found.

The survey asked respondents if rising gas prices “caused you any financial hardship” and prompted them to indicate the level. 

Overall, 68 percent said rising gas prices have caused financial hardship, and of those, 38 percent said “a great deal.” The remaining 30 percent said “some,” followed by 18 percent who said “not much.” Just 14 percent said rising gas prices have not affected them in that way “at all.”

The survey, taken March 10-14, 2022, among 809 adults, has a +/- 3.5 percent margin of error and comes as the White House fails to offer comfort, warning that prices will continue to go up.

“In terms of how far, you know, we still believe it will continue to go up,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters this week.

“Obviously, what we’re trying to do is mitigate the impact,” she added.

Prices continued to climb last week, breaking “the most expensive average gas price ever recorded” at $4.331, as Breitbart News detailed. As of Friday, March 18, the national gas average stood at $4.274. California is reporting some of the highest prices in the nation, seeing an average of $5.800.

A California street sign is shown next to the price board at a gas station in San Francisco, on March 7, 2022. The average U.S. price of regular-grade gasoline shot up a whopping 79 cents over the past two weeks to $4.43 per gallon. Industry analyst Trilby Lundberg of the Lundberg Survey says Sunday, March 13, the new price exceeds by 32 cents the prior record high of $4.11 set in July 2008. Lundberg said gas prices are likely to remain high in the short term as crude oil costs soar amid global supply concerns following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Nationwide, the highest average price for regular-grade is in the San Francisco Bay Area, at $5.79. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)

A California street sign is shown next to the price board at a gas station in San Francisco, on March 7, 2022 (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File).

Biden, however, has refused to take responsibility for bad policy — namely stampeding domestic energy — blaming rising gas prices on both Russian President Vladimir Putin as well as oil and gas companies.

“I’m sick of this stuff. … The American people think the reason for inflation is the government spending more money,” Biden said last week. “Simply. Not. True.”

“Democrats didn’t cause this problem. Vladimir Putin did,” he said, later blaming oil and gas companies as well:

A recent Trafalgar Group survey found that most Americans want Biden to prioritize increasing American energy production.

Biden’s Dept. Interior: Agency Is ‘Moving Forward’ on Oil, Gas Leases on Public Land

Oil rigs pump at sunrise on August 4, 2004 north of the Los Padres National Forest, California. The Bush administration is pushing to undo a Clinton-era decision that put 58.5 million acres of national forests off-limits to development, especially in road-less areas. The new plan would allow the nation's governors …
David McNew/Getty Images
3:30

With prices rising at the gas pump — and a court order that allows climate change consideration when developing the agency’s policies — President Joe Biden’s Department of the Interior announced on Friday it will resume plans for issuing oil and gas leases on federal land.

Biden had halted any oil and gas development on public land in the early days of his presidency and the issue has been in and out of the courts since. The case is the Louisiana v. Biden, Case No. 22-30087 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth District.

The Biden administration was fighting to include a climate change metric in its leasing decisions, while red state governors sued, claiming lease restrictions on federal land hurt American workers and states’ economies.

No announcement is posted on the Dept. of Interior’s official website as of press time, but Interior spokesperson Melissa Schwartz emailed a statement to press contacts following the court ruling issued earlier this week.

“With this ruling, the department continues its planning for responsible oil and gas development on America’s public lands and waters,” Schwartz said in the statement.

“We have heard directly from [the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)] that the district court ruling caused them to stop progress because they would have had to change the analysis, but now that’s not the case, they can move forward,” Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western Energy Alliance, said in an email.

The BLM is the entity at Interior that manages federal lands and resources.

The American Petroleum Institute (API), a trade group that represent the oil and gas industry, sent an email to reporters on Friday praising the development.

“At a time when the administration and allies around the world are calling for more American energy, we welcome the Department of the Interior’s announcement today and urge the administration to hold onshore lease sales under the Mineral Leasing Act with sufficient acreage and fair terms,” API said. “We also call on the administration to accelerate the long delayed five-year program for leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf.”

The API further pointed out the need for the Biden administration to address issues in its leasing process, such as poor planning and timeliness of processing:

Since 1980, the U.S. Secretary of the Interior has been required to prepare a 5-year program to best meet national energy needs for the 5-year period, including a schedule of oil and gas lease sales and details on the size, timing and location of proposed leasing activity. The next 5-year offshore leasing program must be in place by July 1, 2022, as the current program is scheduled to expire and there will be no opportunities to obtain new leases for federal offshore development. Unfortunately, DOI is well-behind schedule in this multi-year regulatory process and has yet to initiate the third comment period required for completion.

It is unclear how quickly this move will filter down to increase domestic production and benefit American consumers.

“Leasing is just one step in a process that companies need to take to extract oil and gas from federal lands and waters, so changes in leasing policy are not expected to have significant short-term impacts on fuel availability,” the Hill reported.

Follow Penny Starr on Twitter

Summers: I Haven’t Seen Any ‘Serious Support’ for Biden’s Claim Oil Companies Are Profiteering

2:04

During an interview aired on Friday’s edition of Bloomberg’s “Wall Street Week,” economist, Harvard Professor, Director of the National Economic Council under President Barack Obama, and Treasury Secretary under President Bill Clinton Larry Summers responded to President Joe Biden’s tweet accusing oil and gas companies of padding their profits by keeping gas prices high by stating, “there’s nothing that would support that in the president’s tweet, and I haven’t seen any analysis coming out of the administration, or anyplace else, that provided serious support for that.”

Summers said, “I wish the president got more help from his economic advisers. Those spreads between gasoline prices and refined prices vary substantially on a range of factors. There [are] lags between the price of oil and the price of gasoline. When natural gas is in short supply, when diesel is in desperately short supply, it affects the mix of products that refiners provide and ways to change that spread. Maybe there is a basis for thinking that profits are being padded, but there’s nothing that would support that in the president’s tweet, and I haven’t seen any analysis coming out of the administration, or anyplace else, that provided serious support for that.”

He continued, “Look, at a time when we have a war to fight, at a time when energy security is a central issue for us, at a time when, over time, we’re going to have to cooperate with our energy companies on the necessary transition away from fossil fuels, I think we should be very careful about accusing them of bad behavior, unless we’ve got clear evidence. Now, the administration may have clear evidence, and if so, I’ll be the first to admit that and to want to look and evaluate the evidence. But this kind of comparison that was contained in the president’s tweet, I’m afraid does not represent that kind of clear evidence.”

Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett

No comments: