The U.N. talks a good game about ending world hunger. (http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/)
I hesistate to agree that they will achieve their Millenium Development Goals.
The U.N. has been working behind the scenes to subvert and replace national sovereignties with their world government; where the U.S., G.B., Russsia, Japan, France, Germany, and China (a military totalitarian semi-communist regime), have the greatest influence. Meanwhile, the poor underdeveloped countries have to relinquish their economies to these foreign interests. Can a nation's welfare be relegated to a foreign multi-national group? When you bunch up the whole world together to address local issues,; Who gets help first? Your country? Your neighbor?
World Government is a trap. It's been their goal to finally gain total control of the planet by hunger or by deprivation of petroleum. UN: No ticket, no laundry!

Let's see now.... The wannabe world govt of the UN eschews the market system that brought on all this development and well fed populations. Now that they've ruined it, they bellyache it's gone.

They, the GOs, NGOs and academia have used the past 50 years of growing affluence to sap the system that fed them and to produce greedy and immoral governors and managers to bring it down from inside.

Watch. Now they'll try collectivism again to keep their positions of power, and as before, gazillions more will starve.

Is there enough food to feed people? the answer is a very simple and loud YES. The problem is not having the money to buy it but rather the irresponsibility of government. Go to any of these countries that are listed as underdeveloped or that its people are starving in great numbers and you will find a class of people who formed the power structured living in splendor and abundance, sending their offspring to the best universities outside their countries and driving the most expensive luxury cars. Building their armed forces and purchasing weapons from the arms market while the greater majority is left on its own cause as far as they are concerned " some must suffer and die so that others can party and live ". This is the general attitudes of those in power.

1 billion people!!!

And what system of government do most of those hungry people live under?

All due to the US, sitting on a lot of the best farmland of the planet having a stupid government that pays people to convert corn to ethanol.
http://chasblogspot.blogspot.com/....ng-food-costs-due-to-ethanol.html
S.

AnthonyC,

Exactly. Zimbabwae was the "Breadbasket" of Africa and was an exporter of goods to Africa, Asia and Europe. Under Mugabe they have become the most food dependent nation on that continent. Venezuela with all of its oil and gold imports 75% of all food products because the local system of farming has been squashed. In 2001 Chavez questioned a company called Vestry (sp) as to legal ownership of the lands they farmed (cattle) and they had been in business there over 50 years the end result is he closed the business that supplied 80% of all beef products inside of Venezula. While they were not an exporter of beef they were self-sufficient. In Myanmar (Burma) the government would not allow relief wokers in to assist after the tsunami and most food production is confiscated by the govt. to feed the military and ruling junta. If the UN was serious about this they would deal at the govt. level and quit putting guilt trips on everyone else.

ABC,

Get a life. The US produces enough for itself (300+ million population) and is a net exporter of products for sale and is the number one country in the world for food donations to underdeveloped countries and those affected by natural disasters. Brazil was the first country to seriously pursue ethanol, are you sure its not thier fault?

Biotuel is the 'crime against humanity.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/071027-ap-biofuel-crime.html
S.

ABC,

You cant be FOR reduction of GHG and then against the alternatative fuels and the methods for reducing the GHG emissions. So which is it, are you FOR or AGAINST GHG's. If you are FOR them you have no argument if you are AGAINST them how can you be AGAINST the alternatative fuels that reduce them?

So if the have to import, why dont they grow thier own???

Excerpt from the report you quoted,

Last March, President Bush and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva signed an agreement committing their countries to boosting ethanol production. They said increasing use of alternative fuels would lead to more jobs, a cleaner environment and greater independence from the whims of the oil market.

Ziegler called their motives legitimate, but said that ''the effect of transforming hundreds and hundreds of thousands of tons of maize, of wheat, of beans, of palm oil, into agricultural fuel is absolutely catastrophic for the hungry people.''

The world price of wheat doubled in one year and the price of corn quadrupled, leaving poor countries, especially in Africa, unable to pay for the imported food needed to feed their people, he said. And poor people in those countries are unable to pay the soaring prices for the food that does come in, he added.

"Ziegler called their motives legitimate"

What the US produces;
http://www.fao.org/es/ess/top/cou....=en&country=231&year=2005

What UK Produces;

http://www.fao.org/es/ess/top/cou....=en&country=229&year=2005

Blog comment from same report ABC cites;
This is a continuation of a long theme of demonizing. The developed world has energy rich lives and use more than their developing world counterpart, but at much higher levels of efficiency. The developing world uses less energy per person, but they have a lot more people, show almost no signs of slowing their population growth, and use their energy less efficiently. Inefficient use of energy often means that more of it is releases into the atmosphere rather than used for its intended purpose. A high efficiency furnace (as compared to an open hearth stove/fireplace) puts a greater percentage of its heat into the house or dwelling it is intended to heat (the energy that not used to heat the dwelling is released into the atmosphere, it goes up the chimney instead of into your home, and can cause global warming). The developing world uses their energy far less efficiently and thus much more of their energy usage goes to increasing global warming t

Some people larger houses, but most of those with larger houses use more energy efficient means to heat or cool them.

Ignoring WHY people make the choices they do is unlikely to lead to the improvements we all seek. Many guys buy pickups due to their choice of profession (certainly not every woman in a mini-van has a family to cart around or a job that requires this larger vehicle). No sane person wants global warming and no sane person wants to see billions of people starve to death. We ought to be willing to understand why people want to have eight kids in Rwanda AND to understand why someone in Winnetka wants a four wheel drive vehicle.

than that of the developing world, per person.

Whereas it is true that the developing world has less ability to increase its efficiency due in large part to its levels of poverty, the developed world similarly cannot do much to decrease its populations levels to combat global warming as we already have among the lowest levels of population growth in the world.

It is easy to say to people, just use smaller cars, but that does not recognize that people have bought larger cars often in reaction to the fact that the US (and much of the developed world) has the largest trucks on its roads in the world. If Americans had trucks as small as the rest of the world, they would be far more content with smaller cars. Who would feel safe driving the smallest cars around the largest trucks (those who use them the least?

If the price of food rises, then production of food will increase and increase the supply food of and then the price can begin to decline again as supply of food has begun to meet demand for food. If the developed world has no control on its population (out of control, unchecked, unfettered growth), it should not be surprised if prices for basic commodities, like food, increase.

In the developed world, we use more and more oil (because we are using larger vehicles) and we are surprised that the price rises. In the developing world, they eat more and more food (since there are more and more people) and they are surprised that the price increases.

Americans (and the rest of the developed world) needs to increase the efficiency of their energy usage and thus decrease demand and reduce greenhouse gas emissions just as the developing world needs to decrease their population pressures (reduce birth rates to more manageable levels). More people demand more resources (not solely in the developed world).

Supply and demand, it seems, is only partly understood by the author. Greater demand for food (caused in large part by overpopulation of the developing) world increases demand and thus forces the price of food to increase (and fuel among other commodities used). He understands that a decreased supply (by using food to make fuel) of food increases the price of food, but he doesn’t seem to understand that the increased price of food will generate a greater supply of food in the long run (who wants to grow food if you have to lose mosey on it?).

Fuel is NOT the only cost in food production. Fertilizer, which has also increased in price, also goes into food production. Fertilizers must be hauled from where it is produced to where it is consumed and since hauling involves machines called trucks that use fossil fuel or possibly in the future biodiesel or other alternative energy, as the price of fuel rises, so does the cost of fertilizer (also note that doesn’t include increases in production costs due to increased fuel costs-I know of few factories that do not require some sort of fuel usage). Many things used on farms to produce food have increased in price. The cost of transporting food to markets & consumers rises when the price of fuel rises (caused in large part by increased demand by the inefficient users whose population is rising out of control).

Increases in population (largely in the developing world) lead to increases in fuel prices as their is greater demand for fuel and cost of fuel increases leads to an increase in cost of food production and thus overall price of food to consumers.

Increasing use of food to create biodiesel will increase the supply of fuel and thus lower its price and thus lower the price to produce food and thus the price of food can go down.

Everyone has seen fuel costs double in the last few years (can we blame that on increased demand by the overpopulated developing world); that would put a massive pressure on price of food production.

The developed world has created a food surplus for nearly a century plus medical advances much of which it exports to the rest of the world. While it is popular among some to demonize those in the developed world for our excessive use of energy or other raw and finished materials, the developed world is infrequently given credit for exporting the medicines and food that has led to the largest population of people this planet has ever known.

the revolution is near

"Written by: chillaxin201, 28 Dec 2008 2:40 PM
From: Iraq, 10 billion dollars a month for nothing
the revolution is near "
Freedom isn't cheap but $10 billion a month is a bargain!

About population control, this island is over populated, with the demographic explosion coming our way the future does not look bright, Haiti is perfect example.

The DR is nowhere near over populated.
With a proper economy and infrastructure the DR can supoort 3 X it's current population easily.

" anthonyC, 28 Dec 2008 5:24 PM
From: United States
The DR is nowhere near over populated.
With a proper economy and infrastructure the DR can supoort 3 X it's current population easily.
"
Look at cuba 11million, costa rica 4Million, and el salvador 7million these countries are bigger than DR yet look at the size of their population

Plus, anthonyC, you have to take into account that the DR is not only feeding its own population, but also is (along with the int aid from other countries) the only thing that is keeping Haiti from sinking to the bottom of the seas. So, in good spanish "La República Dominicana está haciendo el trabajo de dos" (The DR is working for two), so antonio's remark is not off the mark, in the sense that the DR is not feeding 10 million but 20 million people. As things are standing, Hispaniola is the most overpopulated island of the Caribbean archipielago. Perhaps in no other place of the developing world the points exposed by texasshoe are more dire than on this island, specially on the haitian side, where the birth rates are along the 5 to 12 children per family, making them the nation with fhe fastest population growth on the western hemisphere.

DR will be wiser spending its ressource on reducing poverty rather than building metro.

With the world population reaching 6.7 billion people. It's evident that U.S. globalization and privatization don't alleviate hunger on this planet. As a matter of fact, it has made it worse.

Once you concentrate all the assets in the hands of the private sector, greed takes over and leads to more greed. You see the poor gets poorer and the rich gets richer. Thus, the result is more acute poverty around the world.

IMF and World bank are the tools of condemnation to poverty for developing countries. U.S. has destroyed agriculture in the region so those countries can depend on its support. Haiti for instance relies mostly on remittance from the Haitian diaspora (About 2 billion dollars a year) .

U.S. is the #1 destabilizer of Haiti.

"where the birth rates are along the 5 to 12 children per family, making them the nation with fhe fastest population growth on the western hemisphere"

This is a very serious issue and scary proposition because rapid population growth can be seen as threatening to DR in term of their way of life and identity ect..

Why poor people keep having more than one child in poor countries in Africa, China took the Bull by the horn 1 child per family, education, and force sterilzation.

U.S. is the #1 destabilizer of Haiti.
Preval is the #2 destabilizer of Haiti.
a useless goverment not bold enough, no creativity, no imagination.
Why smith here 's what coming and I would be glad to see it happens
"
He says that Haiti currently survives on international aid funding, and there is an absolute stagnation in the country's institutions. "I think that in this case the conventional concept of sovereignty should evolve given the existence of a failed state," he comments. He suggests that different options should be evaluated for a transitory administration—de facto trusteeship or shared sovereignty. While he says this is a drastic option, he says that there is an urgent need to generate governance with institutions that do away with the status quo."

cont2
Cheyre believes that the international community that is funding Haiti has the right to ask the Preval government for greater efficiency and accountability. He estimates the aid Haiti receives at around US$500 million, and in addition there is about US$134 million in international loans for services and Haitians living abroad send back US$1.3 billion in remittances.

http://www.haitipolicy.org/content/4103.htm

Infrastructure spend does reduce poverty. You talk nonsense. Assuming the number of journies in a city are approx constant the metro saves : importing gasoline for cars, buses, creates more jobs, keeps profeessional people in the country by contributiing to lifestyle etc. etc.
S.

antonioj,

Haiti does not have an identity crisis like DR. You are spitting C.I.A project for Haiti. DR will fall for that not my proud Haitians. Haitians in the diaspora will put Haiti back on top. Preval is a puppet of Bush. Aristide is the true leader. He will be back in March. Just a litlle bit of patience.

WhySmith listen man after 200 years you failed to have proper governance no shame to get outside help most of Haiti problem was cause by outside inteference, whysmith you should swallow your pride and smell the coffee if it's something that is going to move the country forward.
Do not put all your eggs in one basket with Aristide, you should have plan B too.

DR will support this because they want to lessen the burdern on their economy, they can no longer afford to absorb these Haitian migrants, I do not see what does identity have to do with.

antonioj,

You put all your trust in foreign aid. If that was the solution, how can you explain that the U.S. the richest coutry in the world, then you have Haiti the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere? Haiti is only 500 miles away from U.S. coast. How do you explain Dominicans risking their lives at high sea in shark infested water to escape poverty? My friend, don't rely on foreign aid that much. Those donor countries are your demise.

Be an Aristide. Be a Hugo Chavez. Be a Castro. That's the only way you'll truly reduce poverty in your homeland.

WAKE UP antonioj! WAKE UP my friend! You are sleeping at the wheel of poverty. Don't you see even in the U.S. it's the goverment that is rescuring or bailing out the greedy private sector.

Come up with something that makes sense. Try again.

Ah yes....The Greedy private sector.

Exactly who is the "Private Sector"?

Isn't that everyone?

No, some of the private sector are selfish parasites on society!
We are responisble citizene first, second employees, contractors etc. in public or private sectors of a planned economy.
Your stupiditiy amazes me!
S.

How can you be a parasite on society if you are the one providing jobs and paying all of the associated benefits that go with the employment.

Main Entry: par·a·site
Pronunciation: \'per-?-?sit, 'pa-r?-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, from Latin parasitus, from Greek parasitos, from para- + sitos grain, food
Date: 1539
1 : a person who exploits the hospitality of the rich and earns welcome by flattery
2 : an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism
3 : something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate return

The problems of world hunger is not the lack of food nor of its productions. The majority of the people don't want a hand out but rather to be productive and provide for themselves but world politics creates the situations and conditions that causes people to become what they don't aspire to be. They feed them religion as their hope and that in that other life all of their sufferings will be compensated with joy. These are the worst crimes against humanity and the powerful nations of the world are hypocrites but who cares when life has no meanings and death is just another fact of life, celebrate as much as life. Pretending to care about the conditions upon which many are subjected and looking towards individual to donate time, money, materials and food to the needed in some part of the world though there is no government in that so called region. If I were one of such official I will be ashamed of myself or to have my country presented as such -- begging ........................

Just one or two bankers, fund managers, people who manipulate the price of food and other articles, promote products like Gaz- guzzlers, run CNN, Microsoft , run private monopolies etc. Asset strippers that take away jobs not create them. Meaning No. 3.
S.

Yes, according to DR1 Inespre is setting up farmers markets to cut out middlemen.
Hope it works.
"
As of yesterday, Inespre was operating 22 farmer's markets in the poorer areas of Santo Domingo province and the National District, and others are in the process of being set up.
According to Jacobo, this week another 15 or 20 market sites will be prepared, with the goal for January set at 100 sites serving the public. He told El Caribe reporters during their Economic Breakfast meeting with Multimedios del Caribe that he was aiming to have 600 of these low-cost food markets set up around the country by year's end.
According to his calculations, for every RD$100 million invested in farmers' markets, as many as 350,000 families can be helped with lower cost foodstuffs, or a total of 1.8 million people on a monthly basis.
"
S.

Anyone visited the new markets?
S.