This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Food Riots Commence As The Fed's Loose Money Policy Leads To First Violence Of 2011
We were only partially serious when we predicted that following the just released FAO data confirming food prices have just hit an all time high, we were expecting food riots to ensue imminently. Alas, as all too often happens these days, we were right. 2011 first and certainly not last rioting comes out of Algeria, where Bernanke's genocidal policies are first to take root. From the Associated Press: "Riots over rising food prices and chronic unemployment spiraled out
from Algeria's capital on Thursday, with youths torching government
buildings and shouting "Bring us Sugar!" Police helicopters circled over Algiers, and stores
closed early. Security officers blocked off streets in the tense
working-class neighborhood of Bab el-Oued, near the capital's ancient
Casbah, and areas outside the city were swept up in the rampages. The U.S. Embassy issued a warning to Americans in Algeria to "remain vigilant" and avoid crowds. Riots on Wednesday night in the neighborhood saw a police station, a Renault car dealership and other buildings set ablaze. Police with tear gas fired back at stone-throwing youths through the night." Algeria's violence is unfortunately just the start. The big to keep an eye out on is rice. If the liquidity makes its way there, the Chinese soft landing may just become much, much harder.
From the AP:
Wednesday's violence started after evening Muslim prayers. It came after price hikes for milk, sugar and flour in recent days, and amid simmering frustration that Algeria's abundant gas-and-oil resources have not translated into broader prosperity.
Youths resumed their outbursts Thursday afternoon.
Violence erupted across town in the El Harrach neighborhood, where youths set tires on fire and threw stones at police. Some officers were seen rounding up suspected troublemakers.
In the suburb of Rouiba, youths set fire to tires and danced around them, chanting "Bring us sugar!" Others tore down street signs and smashed streetlights with iron bars. In the suburb of Bordj El Bahri east of Algiers, rioters set fire to a post office. In nearby Dergana, youths set a town hall alight.
The violence led to blocked roads and kept schoolchildren and workers from getting home. Parents were heard talking to their children on cell phones, urging them to seek safety.
Algeria is still recovering from an insurgency that ravaged the country throughout the 1990s after the army canceled 1992 elections that fundamentalists were expected to win. Bab el-Oued is a former stronghold of that group, the now-banned Islamic Salvation Front, or FIS.
"They are right, these young people. They have no job, no housing, no visa (for other countries) and now not even bread or milk," said Amara Ourab, a resident of the neighborhood in her 50s.
Neighboring Tunisia has also seen violent protests in recent weeks over unemployment, leading to three deaths.
We can't wait for the Banzai Institute to do an artist's impression of the hand sketches taking place at the Hague's 2013 proceedings for crimes against humanity which will prominently feature just one notable Ivy league educated defendant
h/t Sean
»
- 26776 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
that might be true if the big asteroid hits the earth. Otherwise, I think ZH folks are going to think you are screaming to loud to be taken seriously.
Yeah, but it will bribe the official who's sitting on the strategic stash of the stuff you need.
Speaking of sugar, how about we stop subsidizing sugar in the US. Crony capitalism is not free market capitalism.
I look forward to the day when this shit stops. Ethanol, sugar, etc. Complete bullshit.
You are entirely correct, unfortunately it has been this way since the creation of the United States.
It is very important to understand that farm subsidies subsidize the consumer, not the producer.
Yeah, I feel to love in the mohair subsidies.
Exactly how does paying farmers not to produce subsidize the consumer?
Most farm subsidies are actually just transfer payments of money taken via taxes from the wealthy minority to pay a portion of the cost of food for the many food consumers that do not pay taxes; nearly 50% of the US, if I remember correctly.
Price paid to farmer = government subsidy + artificially low "market price"
The whole "paying farmers not to produce" is just a distraction, and represents very little of the actual payments.
This inflation effect would be additive to dollar depreciation, should tax revenue not be available to subsidize the price of food.
Spot on, and another unsustainable situation.
Armchair sophistry no substitute for hard facts
40% of EU budget big corporate Ag and fishery subsidies like farmed salmon, soon insect gene monster salmon wiping out native species and MON GMO killing birds, fish, honeybees and humans
http://www.voltairenet.org/article160224.html
US Farm subsidies paid without regard to economic need or farm conditions and designed to provide price floors, not limits for special interest lobby megacorporations
Subsidies transfer wealth from taxpayers to megacorp farmers, less than 2% of the population
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy
Again, exactly how does this benefit consumers or family farmers for that matter?
The just-passed Codex Alimentarius MON Food Safety Modernization Act of Tyranny puts homegrowers and small farmers out of business leading to American illness, $500,000 fines and prison camps, starvation or both
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rep/food-safety-bill-dangerous-for-economy.html
Paying farmers or anyone else not to produce robs the middle class and raises prices
The poor and middle class pay far more in payroll and sales taxes than the wealthy minority with tax exempt foundations, 15% hedge fund taxes and corporate tax breaks
Corporations paid just 11% of tax revenues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget
Government subsidies in education, energy, food, healthcare, welfare always raised prices and unemployment while reducing supply, currently 8% constant CPI and 30.5% defacto unemployment
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts
http://cwcs.ysu.edu/resources/cwcs-projects/defacto
Hardly a distraction
Price paid to farmer = government subsidy + artificially low "market price"
*You do understand how our "progressive" income tax system works, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax
sorry but me thinks that is a bit narrow point of view. Were it not for the subsidies many of our greatest companies would NOT be in the agriculture business.
Subsidies IS the business. Just TRY and get the subsidies away from the corporations and watch the politician heads fly with negative ads and the bums bank on the street.
As fo sugar, just another bad subsidy, think of what the is doing to your heath and worse...your kids. That damn sugar is in everything...McDonalds anyone.
Cheap, that is the name of the health game in the USA...cheap additives not real food just pretent food, puff it up to look bigger...just like the economy.
the documentary "King Corn" demonstrates this pretty well. Subsidies ARE agriculture in this country
So taking money from the taxpayer (consumer) and giving to the producer, is really a subsidy of the consumer?
And poison makes you healthier, cheetos make you skinnier, and wine makes your teeth whiter.
You understand how school lunch programs work, right? The schools are not being subsidized, the poor students are. It is the same with farm subsidies.
Only if you believe the producers are actually passing the savings on via lower costs. I do not.
The farmers have no choice, because they do not set the price. Care to know who does?
Congratulations you got it EXACTLY backwards.
Money paid to a farmer NOT to produce drives the price of said good UP.
False congratulations and ALL CAPS aside, if you were correct, then school lunch subsidies would drive the price of school lunches up.
"Paying producers not to produce" is a fallacy perpetuated by the nomenclature. The payments should be called eater subsidies, rather than farm subsidies. Look at the numbers behind the headlines.
HH, gave some numbers to chew on with various links above
School lunch subsidies prove there is no free lunch; they drive food prices up by talking supply off the market and rewarding unproductive occupations
They prolong union government education bureaucracies and give megacorps a place to dump food products that are so bad they did not sell in the free market
The money goes from consumer taxpayers to big bad corps
The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_in_One_Lesson
I am not the straw horseman you are looking for. My point is this:
Act accordingly, friends.
School lunches are not the best example as they vary state to state and city to city.
Our school district has free lunches (& breakfast) for 'low' income students.
The normal cost for every other student is $3 for lunch. Yes, you can pack it cheaper, but holy crow if you can't afford to send your kids to school with a homemade lunch OR pay $3, better put down the crack pipe!
+1,000,000 for the Economics in One Lesson reference. A must read.
the domestic price of sugar is 2-3 times HIGHER than the world price. how does that fit in with your "subsidize the consumer" theory.
If this is true for retail prices (citation, please) then maybe people in America are ready, willing, and able to pay more for sugar than people in other countries? Are not the prices of many things in America higher than elsewhere?
If this is true for producer prices, it is likely because most other countries subsidize food as well. Which begs the question, why are we so eager to believe that third world countries subsidize their citizens' food costs, but we refuse to see that America does, too?
Citation here (see Sugar Racket specifically)
http://www.cato.org/search_results.php?q=sugar&btnG.x=0&btnG.y=0&site=ca...
"maybe people in America are ready, willing, and able to pay more for sugar than people in other countries? "
Are you smoking something?
All vices aside, it appears from your citation that you may not understand that there are significant differences between import tariffs and farm subsidies. This discussion has not been about who benefits from import tariffs (hint--tariffs are revenue for the federal government, not the farmers).
Additionally, a lobbyist newsletter inappropriately mixing the two terms and citing another issue of its own newsletter is hardly a strong source.
Finally, I am not a ComEx guy, but I only see one price on these sugar price charts, not two, with one showing the US price three times higher than the rest of the world.
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/chart-sugar_world.html
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/SU/M
http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=sugar
He may well be smoking, but both Coke and Pepsi have brought back sugar-only versions of their products recently due to consumer demand for a healthier alternative to HFCS. (I know, healthy soda, the irony.)
Of course the reality is that the corn lobby works to keep the sugar import taxes high so that HFCS is the "cheaper" alternative.
It's safe to say consumers are willing to spend more for sugar domestically than in other countries, but the demand is artificial. Given a choice between poison and food, most people will pay for food.
I agree, though, the sugar situation in particular is obscene.
If I may be cynical, the problem isn't inflation per se (though of course I don't support Bernanke's policies).
The problem is population growth. Third-world countries have overwhemlingly been unwilling or unable to do anything whatsoever to control the growth of their populations far beyond sustainable levels, and they've brought on themselves the risk of chaos when their unsustainable populations tip the balance.
In other cases, such as Palestine, governments have actually pursued strongly pro-population-growth policies for political reasons, all while essentially the entire country is living off the charity of others.
The planet can't comfortably support 6 billion people right now. The growth of food production hasn't kept pace with exponential population growth. It simply can't.
Nearly all of that population growth has come from the third world, and nearly all of that impact will be felt by the third world in the form of food riots and other kinds of
As individuals, humans can be brilliant. As a species we are no different than bacteria growing in a shake flask. We will consume all the resources in our environment and then eat each other.
Hedge accordingly.
Right you are, and I'm hedging away. The growth of bacteria in a flask is commonly modeled using a logistic function, and there is an inflection point between the initial period of fast growth and the inevitable decline in growth rate that accompanies limited resources. A similar equation applied to the world's population seems to indicate that we hit the inflection point a few years ago. Good times.
http://www.chem.duke.edu/~bonk/Chem8304/enote1504.html
That is one of the common scam going out. A funest one.
Contrary to bacteria cells, humans do not have standardized needs.
It always marks me as suddenly, people grow equal in this regard, a wild US tendency anytime they are at risk of being associated with reprehensible behaviours.
A jungle Amazonia dweller does not overpopulate the Eart because he got two kids. On the contrary, a US citizen whose main innovation contribution is to invent new ways to consume more without any idea of sustainability behind it is much more like to fit the part.
What we have here is a situation of a population squeezing other populations out of their resources so the former can increase its life standards. There is nothing malthusian in it. And no bacteria growth model in it.
If we did not have Fed government inflation, red tape, taxes, usury and had more freedom and free markets, prices of all things would decline as productive technology increased
Adolf Hitler, Bilderbergs, Club of Rome, Limits to Growth, Malthus, Mao, Margaret Sanger, Stalin and the climate eco nazis tried to disprove this fundamental truth for generations with demographic eugenic predictions that did not come true and hurt a lot of people
Whenever two or more leave work to plot for good comes the conspiracy to rob most for the elite special few
Academic Ehrlich's Population Bomb fallacies just one more example
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon%E2%80%93Ehrlich_wager
Unlike bacteria, humans can escape the flask.
Further, Earth is more like an agar plate. We've only colonized the surface, and not fully. There's a planet's worth of resources under your feet.
Further, you should note that outside of the laboratory flask, bacteria do NOT consume all resources. If they did, we would all be dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biofilm
Biofilms are an important model. They reduce the need for nutrients as well as the growth rate. Human cities, when populated and absent government interference, have a similar effect.
Unfortunately, the laws of thermodynamics are not in you favor. It isn't just an energy problem, it becomes a problem of an environment that will sustain humans.
We could easily go after and consume the resources under our feet. It's just that doing so would make the environment such that humans could no longer survive. think beyond energy, take a real class in thermodynamics and talk to an actual expert instead of citing "wikipedia" as your source. The internet is full of errors that allow retards like yourself to pontificate as if they actually know something.
I think if you had used the term " viruses" you would be more accurate than bacteria. "Viruses, you people are like viruses, a plague on the earth" from the MATRIX. Art initates life.
Yeah, experts. Like those guys that did the "Population Bomb". Pretty sure they were "experts" too.
"The internet is full of errors that allow retards"
That's precisely where you lost me. The internet has been largely additive to the intelligence of the general populace. Railing against internet information reveals you to be a probably second year student at a state-sponsored university who not only bought into the usual drivel of "if it's not a published, peer-reviewed study, it's not worthy of consideration", but probably took a couple of college-level science classes and thinks he's a fucking genius as a result. Congrats. Go drink another Four Loco and toast your awesomeness. Have fun at your telemarketing job when you get out.
Regarding your points more specifically, trying to fit thermodynamics into a "theory of everything" (as many, many people have unsuccessfully tried to do before) necessarily results in incompleteness because, surprise surprise, the field of physics and it's subspecialties isn't actually even close to finished with understanding the laws of pretty much fucking anything. Congrats on your 1940's understanding of science. Let me know when you get around to studying dark matter, black holes, the expansion of the universe, the loads of data and analysis contradicting the "heat death" model, and other such basic fucking information.
I have taken courses in thermo as part of a physical chemistry curriculum. You don't know SHIT about thermodynamics. ANY FUCKING THING is possible when you have energy, and we have an unlimited amount available from the sun, and a practically unlimited amount from the Earth.
Above you were saying that bacteria were going to go extinct so we wouldn't be able to cycle nutrients. This shows how incredibly STUPID and IGNORANT you are.
I fear you may underestimate humankind's ability to drive species into extinction. Hopefully you are right, and wiping out the bacteria that cycle nutrients is impossible.
BBQ sauce?
china has almost a quarter of that number and they are doing just fine
And nearly all the consumption growth has come from the first world...
The planet can not keep up pace with growth required in the first world. Period.
Malthusian tripe.
There are plenty of resources to feed 6 billion, 7 billion, 12 billion, or 100 billion. The only thing standing in the way are governments. Their subsidies and tariffs distort prices and cause misallocation of capital.
Understand that several hundred tons of bacteria exist for every human that exists. They have to get that energy from somewhere. Aquaculture can produce more than enough food for any number of people, short of a population level reaching standing room only.
There are more than enough resources to feed all the people in the world 100 times over. Yet, every year, millions die of starvation. Throw in a minor disruption in the supply chain of that food and... You do the math.
Soilent Green!
Millions die as a result of government intervention upon government intervention. People are not allowed to accumulate capital in Africa, so they are unable to leverage their labor, so they starve. It's as simple as that.
In this country, we have consumed much of the capital that has made us rich, just as though it were taken by some strongman. Starvation will come, but not because of some fundamental limit on the number of people on the planet.
+10 Tasty Wheat(s)!
+ 100 billion
http://www.youtube.com/user/BrotherJohnF?feature=mhum
I'd argue that human nature stands in the way as well. Maybe the earth could support 100 billion people eating mostly algae, but before that happened, the number of people that would kill for a cheeseburger, or even some humble tripe, would almost surely limit growth.
100 billion people would be supported principally by space based resources. Lab grown meat that is more tender than the best kobe beef you have ever eaten can be had from lab grown meat, if we invest capital in its production.
An algae based nutrition system would have a major benefit of ridding TV of the myrids of cooking shows
There aren't enough resources for everyone to live the consumptive western lifestyle. That doesn't stop them from peddling the dream however. The third world will feel the brunt of this first. Sad as it is, we will allow the flock to be culled.
America can grow ample produce for its own consumption, just dig up that nice suburban lawn, plant a vegetable garden and tell the homeowners association to get fucked.
If this was the case, the US would have done it.
I take it you haven't seen Detroit lately.
go sniff around on Youtube, you can see people like the Gervaies family who grow up to 6300 lbs of food in a year on 1/10th of an acre
A lifestyle more opulent than that of the richest man alive today can be made available to anyone and everyone, no matter their numbers, with the correct application of capital. Most of the American poor have a better lifestyle than the kings of a thousand years ago.
Many of those bacteria are cyanobacteria and get their energy from the only constant source - the Sun.
Speculation distorts prices and subsidies distort prices.
Many of those bacteria are also fixing nitrogen so that plants (that we and our protein sources eat) can grow and cycle carbon. You can not exchange bacteria weight for humans you retard. If you stop nitrogen fixation, the sulfur cycle, the phosphate cycle or the carbon cycle, it is game over. We need those bacteria to keep the cycles going. Please for the love of mike educate yourself in a real classroom with a real expert. You are spouting total crap. Let me guess, you think dinosaurs are only 6,000 years old too.
"Thermodynamics" doesn't mean we are all going to die next Thursday, FFS.
The bacteria I was referencing use up far more energy than humans do. There is plenty of it.
You just want to die. Feel free to, if death is all you want, know, or understand. You and the rest of the Malthusian death worshippers should all just kill yourselves. As it happens, I've got just the thing for you. I'd be happy to make you some cyanide pills. That way you can experience that which you seem to want so very much.
"Third-world countries have overwhemlingly been unwilling or unable to do anything whatsoever to control the growth of their populations far beyond sustainable levels"
China has reduced its fertility down to near-replacement level over the past 50 years. That's down from about 6 at the start; i.e. a phenomenal decline. India is doing almost as well, with fertility down to about 2.5 or so. Overall, the third world (with the exception of Africa) has done an outstanding job of reducing its fertility -- the precursor, of course, of population (though usually with decades of lag time before the fertility gets expressed as population, for reasons obvious to demographers, or to anyone who thinks about it for a few minutes).
Africa is a special case. Fertility is way too high, still, in Africa. And there are multiple reasons for that, mostly having to do with desperate poverty.
The developing world has done a great job of reigning itself in, and it is too bad that the same cannot be said of the developed world, which continues its wild profligacy.
The real problem is over-consumption in the developed world. The planet can comfortably support 6 billion people living modest lives (circa, say, $10K/year U.S.), but it cannot support even ONE billion wealthy people.
Between America's imploding reserve currency and exploding use of ethanol from corn as an octane dilutant, the world's least-capable people will grow increasingly pressed to find food they can afford. How can "liberals" support such a regressive and exploitative policies? How can "conservatives" support such unscientific and inefficient use of US resources and tax subsidies? Ethanol from corn is one-quarter the yield of ethanol from sugar, which the USA taxes to the benefit of sugar beet growers and so Americans pay four times the world price for the white stuff.
Yes, corn-ethanol is a boon-doggle, but they have a great lobbying effort, second only to GS. Biodiesel from Algae is the only process that will be a break-even process in term of thermodynamics. That, or hydrogen from sunlight.
I wonder if any of the newly appointed congressmen and woman would be willing to ban lobbying? New world order, same old lies.
It's those Iowans. They're ruthless when it comes to money.
I love how you know absolutely everything about all possible energy generation methods.
Why, because I have studied it and worked in the industry for 20 years?
There are real experts out there, people just need to ignore morons on the internet and start listening to people who have the experience and expertise.
You are dead on about the fucking government distorting prices. They do it with energy too. End lobbying NOW!
Such arrogance, so many appeals to authority--the true sign of a weak mind.
Guess what, kid, I'm an "expert" too. I'm a chemist who works at a biotechnology firm. I've got plenty of papers, patents, presentations, etc under my belt. I've taken classes on thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. But so what? It's the argument that matters, and yours is utter BULLSHIT.
As to your last point, it's not the lobbying that is the problem--it's the fact that the government has the power to do the things it does. "Ending lobbying" only means the politicians listen to other people, basically, you get a new set of lobbyists.
Because they benefit and profit from them?
Algerian youths rioting? Don't say!
*** yawn ***
It's like the Rainbow Coalition or any other form of rent-a-crowd protest.
They either got nothing better to do, haven't learned any different or in the best case they get paid for it.
But whatever the cause may be. They're all freakin' useless suckers of the teet.
Dumb and ignorant and useless. The Commies used them, the Nazis used them and eventually rose to power.
This is just the tip of the social iceberg. As with an iceberg, 95% is unseen until...
sugar bitchezz!
In the suburb of Rouiba, youths set fire to tires and danced around them, chanting "Bring us sugar, bitchez!"
Tyler I always like your articles but I think you and many others are wrong and here is why:
* Rising food prices are a temporary spike caused by speculators JUST LIKE IN 2008!
* Events like these are not precursors to $100 loaves of bread, they are a confluence of poor angry citizens and speculators making a buck. I would prefer lasting consumer goods inflation to disinflation because it would mean people are buying and spending cash and jobs are available. A person wanting bread who has NO JOB AND NO MONEY does not put a lot of upward pressure on prices. Hyperinflationists seem to lose sight of supply and demand laws
* There WILL NOT be lasting high inflation in consumer goods until money velocity and consumer demand increase
* Demand will not increase and money velocity will not increase until global deleveraging has occurred (look at a graph of global debt to gdp - it should be around 30-40% it is at 100%!!!!! Until it resolves THERE WILL BE NO CONSUMER goods inflation
* THE FED IS NOT PRINTING MONEY! They are issuing electronic debits to the 18 primary dealers which increase the monetary base but DO NOT increase M1 or M2. Think of an arsonist throwing more and more gasoline on a house but he does not have any matches. He could put tens times as much gas on the house but without a match there is no fire. Right now the MB is huge but people don't want money because despite articles saying FOOD PRICES ARE HIGHER they intuitively sense deflation or they have no money to affect prices. If the masses believed the prices were trending higher there would be a run on banks and cash and YES the arsonist would now have a match to set things ablaze - but it won't happen until deleveraging is done
* I hate to make predictions in print but I think this will all be 10-20 years from now. Look at the large supercycle deleveraging events from history (Japan, the US in the 30-40s and 70-80s). Deleveraging after such a long, tremendous (Fed induced) borrowing spree is a long painful process. We started (corporate, individual) 5-10 years ago but we still have a lot left as government deleveraging has not even begun in earnest
http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/crisis-explained-one-chart-debt-gdp/11570
So you agree with the Fed that higher rates are proof that the Fed lowered rates?
Of course. I always believe whatever the Fed tells me. After all, why would they lie?
<sarcasm off....for those who can't decipher sarcasm>
On another forum, we had to resort to putting all sarcasm in purple for the humor impaired.
God forbid you're color blind. It just so happens I have big problems with reds and blues. I'd better stay away from that forum. :>)
reds and greens here, and don't think that is not causing problems with the new horizontal traffic lights. Good idea about highlighting sarcasm. Getting so you can tell fanatics from fanatics without a program.
But everyone missed the point of the article, we don't have Renault car dealerships in the USA, so we are safe from riots! AND...we have Homeland Security to protect the innocent.
damn it, where is that sarcasm color choice when you need it.
They don't trust us with volunteer trolls. We get the pure bread emotionally stunted sociopaths and psychopaths.
egad
<post edited to something more simple like Buzzsaw>
egad!
You must be the smartest guy at Yahoo Finance. Bet you even have a little "Top Contributor" by your name.
You must have your PhD in economics to predict 20 years into the future. You are probably too intelligent to keep posting here. We don't have the proper education to even conceive of your greatness.
As long as the Fed doesn't literally print the dollars, then it is not printing money. Brilliant reasoning. However, they can't take the money back for the crap they bought without bankrupting the banks immediately. That, to me, is depreciation(aka inflationary, the bad kind).
You might want to read some history other than Japan and the US when they were running MASSIVE account surpluses. There is a huge, huge difference between running a large surplus and the most massive, year after year, deficit known to the history of mankind.
hey, at least we're number one. Another trillion in 7 months. God this is gonna blow soon
The house is already on fire.
So you are citing what happened in 2008 as evidence that all is well? Keep drinking the kool-aid without a proper hedge and let me know how that works out for you.
You make some good points although I can't say I fully agree with all of them. That said, kudos for using your brain and thinking independently. People using their brains and thinking for themselves would put us far ahead. Not sure why people junk others for opinions they don't agree with. Idiot comments are junk, coherently expressed views/opinions are simply views/opinions.
I did not junk him but I do find the statement that there can be no hyperinflation as people have no money and jobs to be ridiculous. In other words, Zimbabwe had a booming economy and full employment when hyperinflation started. In fact it was a contributing if not the sole factor in hyperinflation, I do not think so.
TYLER get rid of the math capture and put a hyperinflation test question in its place.
What is the best answer of the three.
Hyperinflation is most accurately described as, pick one..
A. Demand pull, consumers desire more than produced of a product raising prices for scarce goods (the full employment option above)
B. Input or push, inputs for goods rise creating a price hike from a pure production side.
C. People in a psychological reaction to morons and looters running their government begin devaluing the currency on their own.
food is not your normal "consumer good" and hyperinflation is not your normal "inflation."
I have to LOL today between the post about mass animal kills (which happen all of the time but only are being reported on this week) and this hyperbolic post. I mean, a mild Algerian protest about sugar prices being called a food riot which is also claimed to be caused by loose Fed monetary policy is hilarious. To get all of that in the the title is both commendable and farcical.
Please stick to the financial stuff, which this site is unparalleled at reporting on and commenting on. This crazy conspiracy theory stuff is embarrassing for credibility.
Well, let's see...
Riots? check
Reason:
Food availability? check
Furthermore:
Various commodity prices doubling in 2010 courtesy of infinite leverage and zero cost of capital? check
But yes, it most certainly is farcical... Though not for the reasons you believe.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/01/the-rise-of-the-new-...
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/05/the-quiet-coup/7364/
Well, maybe the CIA will go rogue and do here what they've done in 50 some other countries.
Regime Change, Bitchez!
And perhaps I'm the ghost of the late Paris Hilton.
saving farce
Im surprised they didnt replace the Jim Cramer ad with Alex Jones and his host of Hybrid seeds. BTW, Alex jones is at FULL throttle today. With all this bad news, Im debating if i should cancel my Twilight Zone box set order from Amazon. I may not be around to accept delivery
Well well. The scumbags are coming out of the woodwork today I see!I have really no pity for fools like you. Remember what Confucius said?
I find it a very positive sign. At least they have become situationally aware enough to know that their bullshit isn't working and they have to try harder.
You're not going to exhaust this crap and end it till you crack that fucking throttle open.
Man who go to sleep with itchy ass wake up with smelly finger?
Man who shit in church sit in own pew?
Man who stand on toilet high on pot?
Panties not best thing on earth, but next to it.
That confucius?
Girl who ride bicycle peddle ass all over town.
a bicycle can't stand on its own because it's two tired
Nothing hilarious about inflation exportation... and much of this "unparalleled financial stuff" was "crazy conspiracy theory" just a short time ago. Just sayin'
..
The Bernanke works are loved by everyone in the 3rd world.
Wasn't there just a "global celebration" bringing in the New Year?? Even Dick Clark continues to dance in the streets. Riots for food is just not nearly an issue until the money is taken away from this "frecked-up" reserve base.
This is nothing. They are just chanting for spices. It will be serious when they start chanting for wheat, rice and other staples.
Related: I saw on Spike TV you can make an anti-nuke radiation Hazmat suit for $5 by soaking a jumpsuit in Borax water and then heating the wetted suit up on a hot outdoor gas grill.
serious.
You really had me interested 'til: "I saw on Spike".
Bird deaths, food riots, body scanners, with each passing year, life resembles a bad sci-fi action flick.
cue Arnold:
'Doughs are innocent wimmin and children down dare!'
yeah, I stopped reading Philip K. Dick when his stories started appearing in the MSM.
lets say you are one of the richest families on earth, you know peak oil is a fact, the easy resources have all been gotten(metals, good growin dirt, etc). Lets assume you want to leave your grand children(those little silver spooned bastards) whats left. Its gonna be hard to leave them anything if everything is gone, so what do you do? Well you create mass STARVATION by hyperinflating the worlds currency(funny how all fiat currencies are being hyperinflated at the same time, coingidink?) Make food real expensive. Remember we all cant have our cake and eat it too
I would assume that the richest families on Earth are fully aware that oil is abiotic, and after the engineered collapse, they will turn the taps back on for the big party.
Do you think the rioters might just settle for Sweet and Low or Equal?
Wait and see what happens when the true extent of the crop damages and stored wheat damage comes home. This is the kind of thing that can throw most models way out of whack.
We will watch "unlikely" events happening faster and faster and with greater impact as the next 2 years roll on. Early signs of a systemic wobble.
Agri and Ag. Priceless.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com/2011/01/05/stairwell-sigtar/
...Did she just say ....Don't taze me bro ?
This isn't twitter, you twit...
Hah QN, indeed not!!!
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com/2010/12/20/twit-twit-2hooo/
ORI
...Did she just say ....Don't taze me bro ?
No.
The rough translation would be "Don't touch my junk!"
This aint nothing. It is Friday prayers that you gotta watch out for.
Newt: We'd better get back, 'cause it'll be friday soon, and they mostly come at night... mostly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY
+ 7.62x63 for the Newt quote.
You know it man. They run buck screaming wild Friday afternoons!
The woman has on a riot helmet. lulz
Iran circa 2011
Green Revolution, Bitches.
Remember Neda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Neda_Agha-Soltan
Wrong revolution moron...Only a twit would equate the coordinated raping of the World's assets by Western Central Banks with something that happened in some Sharia shithole.
I'm done - ZH is quickly becoming infested with twits!
Good luck with Twitter-Hedge TD...
http://nothingisclear.net/aboutme/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/twit.jpg
Why do you hate Neda?
What other Iranian revolution am I ignorant of, oh wise dickhead?
Is that you, dinnerjacket? If so, you suck.
Well you do already have food stamps in the USA.
This could also be USA in 2012.Things are bad and real
bad.
Tazer...in the face!!! IN THE FAAAAACE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB9_K5kmoxM
.
Sharia don't like it. Rockin the Casbah, rock the Casbah ...
Let them eat oil.
we already do
As Tyler stated, this is the inevitable consequence of ongoing Fed policy. And it's one of the black swans that could fall out of the sky all over the world like the other birds.
The prophecy of the birds was disregarded by the smug humans.
I'm all talked out on my biflation theory, but this was one of the inevitable side-effects that we've been discussing for over a year. So I would only add to Tyler's comments by saying that yes, this is the outcome of Ben's policies but wait, there's more: it's also the outcome of Greenspan and even Volcker's policies. What I'm referring to is the 4-deaceds worth of dollar printing and the supertanker-fulls that have been delivered into foreign hands to pay for everything under the sun through deficit spending. As we speak today, 50% of US public debt is in foreign hands. And the pigeons, swans and chickens are coming home to roost.
Food was much more likely than energy to be the flashpoint because agriculture sits at an increasingly vulnerable node in the global growth story. In fact, it almost contradicts the global growth story. Whereas there are big proven, untapped energy reserves sitting quietly underground for millions of years patiently waiting to be tapped, there are no large areas of arable land amenable to large production because of climate, terrain, water and fertilizer constraints. Even if there is inflation in the relative price of food from increased demand, supply is too inelastic. Add in the effects of climate change and baseline unpredictability (Queensland, I'm looking at you) and you have a very small margin for error. There's even more spooky stuff that I won't get into.
Food prices threaten globalism in the most direct way possible. It's a deal breaker for tens if not hundreds of millions. And it poses a major threat to ongoing Fed policy.
Caviar, I enjoy your posts, and agree with you on biflation. thanks
Tip o the hat to ya
Please discuss spookier stuff if you can present it as well as the above post.
excellent post. Oil and debt may be the cause, but the ultimate, immediate effect is food. I'm with Macho, let's get spooky
...... "The United Nations' food agency is warning that the price of food is at an all-time high, and appears set to climb even higher.
According to the latest food price index released by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization, the monthly tally for its standard food basket of 55 items including cereals, oilseeds, dairy, meat and sugar was 215 points in December. That was up from 205 points the month before, and almost two points higher than its record peak in June of 2008.
Since farmers in Canada, Ukraine and Russia suffered a poor harvest last year, the index has risen steadily in each of the last six months. And recent dry weather in Argentina and flooding in Australia have seen the price of soy, corn and wheat commodity crops jump by double digits in the last month alone.
Other commodities are up too, including sugar which is now commanding its highest prices in 30 years.
In 2008, rising fuel prices, weather-related crop problems and increasing demand from emerging economies such as China and India, conspired to raise food prices.
The resulting crisis saw riots erupt in dozens of countries worldwide, including Bangladesh, Cameroon, Haiti, and Somalia. Several countries, including India, Egypt, and Indonesia responded by banning exports of rice.
While those factors may not all be present to the same degree this year -- oil is nowhere near its $145 a barrel peak, for instance -- the UN's food agency warns that the risk remains. That's because, unlike developed countries where food expenditures comprise a smaller proportion of household budgets, spiking food-cost inflation can have devastating effects on those living in the world's poorest economies.
Spurred by sudden hikes in the price of milk, sugar and flour in recent days, youths took to the streets of the Algerian capital Algiers on Thursday setting tires and buildings on fire and throwing stones at police."..........
Fuel costs in the UK are at all time high thanks to yet more taxes!
+8%
You remember that it's for the greater good and in this way you can show your support for those hardworking bankers and ministers who are doing everything to make your life easier and only think in your best interest.
YOU JUST KEEP ON TRUCKING RACER!!
Get ready bitchez, they are getting all warmed up, new years beat down, st louis style.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyZHWtcooJI
As long as China keeps supplying the USA and getting paid
in dollars which China uses to buy virtually every commoditie
they want.China is cornering the world resources.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lur5-8v4T34&feature=related
Them! ants or peoples need sugar.
Orbitals
The orbital utility causes many kernel programmers a great deal of consternation, when they do not truly understand division by 0, which takes a fulcrum in one dimension and turns it into an orbital in another. The inertia side migrates toward the center and increases in size as the electrons move further away and act apparently more random on the other side. The electrons create the dimension, beyond inertia’s knowledge of itself, connecting inertia into the black hole bus.
So, the old economy is collapsing from the non-profit foundation up, as more and more individuals recognize its failed operation globally. Basically, the enterprise system has fallen out of orbit, collapsing the virtual fulcrum upon which it rested, and inertia is growing geometrically, because boomer entitlement demand is now swamping supply, which is being reported as economic activity, driving up the S&P at increasing cost, which is reflected in the oil price from an operating income point of view, and sovereign bonds from a balance sheet point of view.
You have been watching the NPV window, which is fed by gravity, nudge closed from the open position. The spring action, naturally created when momentum is added to gravity, is going to pop that window free to slide down and close. The old global economy has a deficit of $500 Trillion. Financially, it’s worth more dead than alive, which includes the finances of everyone dependent upon it, including the legacy families.
Now, zoning shut down the church and freed our girl from all the local strings, so her family has jumped in to re-establish the strings, scheduling their vacation up here, bringing up her old boyfriend. The entire social system is built around using and throwing men back into the churn.
How do you re-establish the negative feedback side by moving one wire, and then how do you adjust relativity to bring the next enterprise system into orbit? Always begin by examining the final stage in the process and work back analytically, as you work from the bottom up practically. When you are done, the enterprise system will just appear. That’s evolution.
Very interesting analogy, thesis and questions you throw up there kevinearick.
Very Frank Herbert, Dunish style. Almost like you are channeling him.
ORI
Yet again the FED blows bubbles it cannot see. And yet again it is hurting the poorest the most first, but even harder this time because they have already been severly injured by the previous massive body blows that the banksters are only just taking a step back from so they can take a bigger swing for the killer blow
The poor pay for the QE1 Coach bags and QE2... Bentleys of the rich.
Something Wicked this way comes. First the Third World, then the Third World in the First, via austerity measures, then the middle class.
The rioters were screaming: Bring us Sugar.
Let them eat NutraSweet!
Bomb scare in Baltimore. Another one in Anapolis. False flag terror???
http://www.fao.org/giews/english/fo/index.htm
Bernanke is NOT the one to blame. It's marginal, just like speculative play.
we can not make bread without sugar bitchezz!
you can make pita bread without sugar, or with honey as a substitute. Pita is common throughout the region.
It's sad and discouraging to see so many here and elsewhere buying into the 'useless eaters,' population reduction argument peddled by the global elite.
Technology has allowed mankind to do things that would have never before been thought even remotely possible.
Agriculture is not what is was 100 years ago. Yields per acre have soared.
People live longer than ever, and I have to laugh at people wanting to 'go back to the good days,' when common bacterial infections would decimate whole towns, and the average lifespan was less than 50.
You want to talk pollution? Look no further than Charles Dickens' London. It would arguably put modern day Shanghai in a good light.
I'm very realistic on the weakness in the economic structure and the vulnerabilities and crises that will be spawned by welfare/nanny state & corporatistic entitlements, but I will refuse to ignore things that are being spun to the advantage of those who really do seek global depopulation, and are caught up in their own self-worth and aggrandizement, who think it's the right thing to eliminate billions of people, as long as they and they're families are unmolested. - in other words, they want to play god, and they want to do so on specious and even laughable junk science.
Excellent post, thank you for sharing it. I'll never understand how (or why?) anyone would want to play god...let alone run another human being's life. It makes me sick.