Russia's recent show of strength toward the West may come at the price of its own internal stability. On Aug. 7, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a crackdown on violations of the Kremlin's food sanctions against the European Union and the United States, during which some illegally imported food was destroyed. The move was very unpopular among Russian officials and the public. Since food imports to Russia fell by more than half within a single day of Putin's order, many criticized the Kremlin for destroying food at a time when Russians are under increased financial and economic pressure. If the Kremlin continues to crack down on those who violate the order, protests will only grow louder.
Read more at Stratfor
Read More......
Showing posts with label food. Show all posts
Showing posts with label food. Show all posts
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Friday, May 22, 2015
U.S. Gives $7 Bil in Food Benefits to “Ineligible Recipients”
The bloated federal agency charged with feeding the poor—and eradiating “food insecurity” in the U.S.—blew nearly $7 billion to provide “ineligible recipients” with the welfare benefit and there appears to be no end in sight to the fleecing.
In fact, the agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), has for years violated a measure known as the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (IPERA) that requires agencies to conduct annual risk assessments to identify programs that make “significant improper payments” of $10 million or more. Not only has the USDA violated IPERA in the last four years, it also refuses to implement a more efficient verification process before doling out benefits by asserting that it would “create barriers for families that need help.”
Read more at Judicial Watch Read More......
In fact, the agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), has for years violated a measure known as the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (IPERA) that requires agencies to conduct annual risk assessments to identify programs that make “significant improper payments” of $10 million or more. Not only has the USDA violated IPERA in the last four years, it also refuses to implement a more efficient verification process before doling out benefits by asserting that it would “create barriers for families that need help.”
Read more at Judicial Watch Read More......
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Seattle to Fine Residents for Throwing Food in the Garbage
In an attempt to shame residents of their city, a new Seattle law will levy a fine on homes that do not properly sort food out of their garbage. Emblazoned with a red citation tag, violators will start to be fined anywhere from $1-$50 in July. For now, Seattle residents will be publicly shamed by the ‘Scarlet Letter’-like tags. US Food Waste Food waste is a big, and still growing, problem. (Charles Krupa/AP Photo) "I'm sure neighbors are going to see these on their other neighbors' cans," says Rodney Watkins, a lead driver for Recology CleanScapes, a waste contractor for the city. He's on the front lines of enforcing these rules.
Read more at CNS.com Read More......
Read more at CNS.com Read More......
Sunday, November 21, 2010
ALERT: S-510 Food Takeover Act, S-787 Water Takeover Act
FREE REPUBLIC (Hat tip: Linda Weimer) - "Congress will convene November 15 to try to force into law all the things they didn't get done during the regular session. No one knows for sure just which bills will be on Nancy and Harry's agenda. It's Harry's agenda that is most important because the Senate - with 60 votes required to stop debate - offers the best opportunity to stop a bill.
S-510 - Food Safety Modernization Act - is one of the bills that must be stopped. Doreen Hannes has been following this bill for several organizations during its entire existence. Here's some of her reasons why the bill must be stopped. Doreen says:
"In a nutshell, S510 is effectively NAIS (National Animal Identification System) for everything. It is a tremendous amount of additional enforcement (fines and penalties, license revocations, further license requirements, control over processes and harvest) which are definite issues with the bill as it currently exists. However, not unlike the "Health Care" bill, they will have to pass this to see what it actually does.
"Here's why....In S 510, the FDA is instructed to follow all international agreements. One of the issues with international 'guidelines and standards' is "Good Agricultural Practices". Well those are not necessarily good. Most GAP certifying bodies have checklists about 25 pages long for growers to follow. They all require traceability (i.e., NAIS) they also require auditing, verifying and certifying the processes used to produce a consumable product for human or animal feed. Every step in GAP costs the grower of food money and a good deal of paperwork. What happens if you're better at growing food than filing forms? You will be penalized (i.e., more money). Sec 420 is exceptionally dangerous in my eyes. It subjects all farms that 'produce' milk to risk assessment and management (i.e., insurance).
"The idea that exemptions will be helpful is rose-colored-glasses thinking. Exemptions can easily be taken away or modified without Congressional oversight through the regulatory process. Most farmers aren't watching the Federal Register like hawks.
"The FDA has plenty of authority to protect the anonymous food supply already. But they don't. Instead, they put small entities out of business through Hazard Analasis & Critical Control Points (HACCP), also to be expanded in this bill, and heavier regulations that are not helpful to smaller economies of scale. The FDA inspects less than 1% of imported produce, has performed inspections on less than 25% of processing failties[sic] [facilities] that they are authorized to inspect (in a five year period) and they ALREADY have authority over live food animals on the farm. The USDA authority is over animal disease."
S-787 - Clean Water Restoration Act - will give the federal government jurisdiction over all water, everywhere, as well as jurisdiction over all activity that affects water wherever it may be. This would give to the federal government effective control over every square inch of land in the United States. It too, must be stopped. (see video 3:30)"
Please register your concerns with your senators:
S-510 - Food Safety Modernization Act - is one of the bills that must be stopped. Doreen Hannes has been following this bill for several organizations during its entire existence. Here's some of her reasons why the bill must be stopped. Doreen says:
"In a nutshell, S510 is effectively NAIS (National Animal Identification System) for everything. It is a tremendous amount of additional enforcement (fines and penalties, license revocations, further license requirements, control over processes and harvest) which are definite issues with the bill as it currently exists. However, not unlike the "Health Care" bill, they will have to pass this to see what it actually does.
"Here's why....In S 510, the FDA is instructed to follow all international agreements. One of the issues with international 'guidelines and standards' is "Good Agricultural Practices". Well those are not necessarily good. Most GAP certifying bodies have checklists about 25 pages long for growers to follow. They all require traceability (i.e., NAIS) they also require auditing, verifying and certifying the processes used to produce a consumable product for human or animal feed. Every step in GAP costs the grower of food money and a good deal of paperwork. What happens if you're better at growing food than filing forms? You will be penalized (i.e., more money). Sec 420 is exceptionally dangerous in my eyes. It subjects all farms that 'produce' milk to risk assessment and management (i.e., insurance).
"The idea that exemptions will be helpful is rose-colored-glasses thinking. Exemptions can easily be taken away or modified without Congressional oversight through the regulatory process. Most farmers aren't watching the Federal Register like hawks.
"The FDA has plenty of authority to protect the anonymous food supply already. But they don't. Instead, they put small entities out of business through Hazard Analasis & Critical Control Points (HACCP), also to be expanded in this bill, and heavier regulations that are not helpful to smaller economies of scale. The FDA inspects less than 1% of imported produce, has performed inspections on less than 25% of processing failties[sic] [facilities] that they are authorized to inspect (in a five year period) and they ALREADY have authority over live food animals on the farm. The USDA authority is over animal disease."
S-787 - Clean Water Restoration Act - will give the federal government jurisdiction over all water, everywhere, as well as jurisdiction over all activity that affects water wherever it may be. This would give to the federal government effective control over every square inch of land in the United States. It too, must be stopped. (see video 3:30)"
Please register your concerns with your senators:
- Sen. Jeff Merkley (D) - DC (202) 224-3753, Salem (503) 362-8102
Sen. Ron Wyden (D) - DC (202) 224-5244, Salem (503) 589-4555
Thursday, June 19, 2008
U.S. is a suicidal superpower
Glenn Beck (CNN) - "What country that cares about its future would do what the U.S. has to its food and fuel supply, two of the most critical things that any civilization needs to survive?"
NEW YORK -- If you're a poor sap who needs to eat or drive in the near future, then you might want to consider taking out a second mortgage (assuming you could even get one) pretty soon.
Food and gas prices have been all over the news lately, and even a big dumb rodeo clown like me can see that it's all connected. Our policies, which try to cater to everyone from oil company executives to environmentalists, end up benefiting no one -- and now we're all paying the price.
I know that real economists probably will say that the causes of these skyrocketing prices are extremely complicated to understand, but the truth is that it's actually pretty simple: We've done this to ourselves.
I don't know if it's because of our arrogance, our stupidity or maybe both, but I believe that history may one day judge America as the most suicidal superpower of all time. After all, what country that cares about its future would do what America has done to its supply of food and fuel, two of the most critical things that any civilization needs to survive?
For example, look at the way we treat our food supply. We've spent decades giving billions of dollars in government subsidies with incentives for the wrong things, we've mandated that huge areas of farmland stay open for "conservation" and we're using grains that could feed tens of millions of people to make a crappy biofuel that you can't even buy anywhere.
That's not arrogance?
Our fuel policy has been even more absurd. We're completely dependent on foreign countries, many of whom hate us, to keep our trucks moving, our planes flying and our homes warm.
That's not arrogance and suicidal stupidity?
Take a look at the top five countries we currently rely on for oil imports. You tell me if these are the five you would choose if you were creating your own world superpower from scratch: Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela.
Aside from Canada, that's not exactly a "Who's Who" list of stable, America-loving countries.
And if you think I cut off the list at five because the next five are so friendly, think again. Here's the next five: Iraq, Angola, Kuwait, Colombia, Ecuador.
The point is that we don't control our own destiny, foreigners do. Despite bipartisan hatred for high oil prices, they've gone up 49 percent since 2006. If we could've done something, anything, to stop that, we would have. But the sad fact is that we can't.
That's why, instead of offering real solutions, most politicians offer something else: blame. Democrats blame Republicans, Republicans blame Democrats, and nothing ever gets solved. President Bush provided a good example of that last week when he was asked about high oil and gas prices.
"We've had an energy policy that neglected hydrocarbons in the United States for a long period of time, and now we're paying the price. We should have been exploring for oil and gas in ANWR, for example," he said. "But, no ... our Congress kept preventing us from opening up new areas to explore in environmentally friendly ways. And now we're becoming, as a result, more and more dependent on foreign sources of oil."
Personally, I think the president is right; we should be drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In fact, we should've been drilling there a decade ago, but that's not the point anymore. Opening ANWR now would be like stopping at the bathroom on your way to the electric chair; you're only delaying the inevitable.
Should we still do it? Yes. Frankly, we need all the time we can buy ourselves to find a long-term solution; our nation's very survival is at stake. But ANWR is not the answer, it's a Band-Aid, and I worry that our shortsighted politicians would use it as an excuse not to look for viable replacements for oil, which is what we really need.
Fortunately, there is some good news in all of this: Oil prices this high mean that a lot of formerly dismissed alternatives will finally make good economic sense.
For example, back in 1980, Congress passed the Energy Security Act, which led to the creation of something called the Synthetic Fuels Corp. (SFC). Lawmakers provided SFC with up to $88 billion in loans and incentives to get started (the equivalent of about $230 billion in today's dollars) with the goal of creating two million barrels a day of synthetic oil within seven years.
So why aren't you putting SFC oil into your SUV right now? Well, it turns out that members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries didn't appreciate the competition so they started bringing down the price of oil. From 1980, when SFC launched, to 1986, when it was shut down, oil went from more than $39 a barrel to less than $8 a barrel. Suddenly, synthetic oil didn't seem so important anymore.
In announcing the SFC's closure, then-Energy Secretary John Herrington said that oil prices had simply dropped too low to make it a viable business.
But the good news is that those economics don't work anymore. The state of Montana, which is leading the synthetic fuel charge, says we can now make it for somewhere around $55 a barrel. That's more than a 50 percent discount from what it costs to buy the real stuff.
It's the opportunity of a lifetime, a chance to use OPEC's price gouging and monopoly against it.
So let me be the big, dumb rodeo clown once again and ask the obvious question: Why aren't we doing it? Read More......
NEW YORK -- If you're a poor sap who needs to eat or drive in the near future, then you might want to consider taking out a second mortgage (assuming you could even get one) pretty soon.
Food and gas prices have been all over the news lately, and even a big dumb rodeo clown like me can see that it's all connected. Our policies, which try to cater to everyone from oil company executives to environmentalists, end up benefiting no one -- and now we're all paying the price.
I know that real economists probably will say that the causes of these skyrocketing prices are extremely complicated to understand, but the truth is that it's actually pretty simple: We've done this to ourselves.
I don't know if it's because of our arrogance, our stupidity or maybe both, but I believe that history may one day judge America as the most suicidal superpower of all time. After all, what country that cares about its future would do what America has done to its supply of food and fuel, two of the most critical things that any civilization needs to survive?
For example, look at the way we treat our food supply. We've spent decades giving billions of dollars in government subsidies with incentives for the wrong things, we've mandated that huge areas of farmland stay open for "conservation" and we're using grains that could feed tens of millions of people to make a crappy biofuel that you can't even buy anywhere.
That's not arrogance?
Our fuel policy has been even more absurd. We're completely dependent on foreign countries, many of whom hate us, to keep our trucks moving, our planes flying and our homes warm.
That's not arrogance and suicidal stupidity?
Take a look at the top five countries we currently rely on for oil imports. You tell me if these are the five you would choose if you were creating your own world superpower from scratch: Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela.
Aside from Canada, that's not exactly a "Who's Who" list of stable, America-loving countries.
And if you think I cut off the list at five because the next five are so friendly, think again. Here's the next five: Iraq, Angola, Kuwait, Colombia, Ecuador.
The point is that we don't control our own destiny, foreigners do. Despite bipartisan hatred for high oil prices, they've gone up 49 percent since 2006. If we could've done something, anything, to stop that, we would have. But the sad fact is that we can't.
That's why, instead of offering real solutions, most politicians offer something else: blame. Democrats blame Republicans, Republicans blame Democrats, and nothing ever gets solved. President Bush provided a good example of that last week when he was asked about high oil and gas prices.
"We've had an energy policy that neglected hydrocarbons in the United States for a long period of time, and now we're paying the price. We should have been exploring for oil and gas in ANWR, for example," he said. "But, no ... our Congress kept preventing us from opening up new areas to explore in environmentally friendly ways. And now we're becoming, as a result, more and more dependent on foreign sources of oil."
Personally, I think the president is right; we should be drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In fact, we should've been drilling there a decade ago, but that's not the point anymore. Opening ANWR now would be like stopping at the bathroom on your way to the electric chair; you're only delaying the inevitable.
Should we still do it? Yes. Frankly, we need all the time we can buy ourselves to find a long-term solution; our nation's very survival is at stake. But ANWR is not the answer, it's a Band-Aid, and I worry that our shortsighted politicians would use it as an excuse not to look for viable replacements for oil, which is what we really need.
Fortunately, there is some good news in all of this: Oil prices this high mean that a lot of formerly dismissed alternatives will finally make good economic sense.
For example, back in 1980, Congress passed the Energy Security Act, which led to the creation of something called the Synthetic Fuels Corp. (SFC). Lawmakers provided SFC with up to $88 billion in loans and incentives to get started (the equivalent of about $230 billion in today's dollars) with the goal of creating two million barrels a day of synthetic oil within seven years.
So why aren't you putting SFC oil into your SUV right now? Well, it turns out that members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries didn't appreciate the competition so they started bringing down the price of oil. From 1980, when SFC launched, to 1986, when it was shut down, oil went from more than $39 a barrel to less than $8 a barrel. Suddenly, synthetic oil didn't seem so important anymore.
In announcing the SFC's closure, then-Energy Secretary John Herrington said that oil prices had simply dropped too low to make it a viable business.
But the good news is that those economics don't work anymore. The state of Montana, which is leading the synthetic fuel charge, says we can now make it for somewhere around $55 a barrel. That's more than a 50 percent discount from what it costs to buy the real stuff.
It's the opportunity of a lifetime, a chance to use OPEC's price gouging and monopoly against it.
So let me be the big, dumb rodeo clown once again and ask the obvious question: Why aren't we doing it? Read More......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
