The UN's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has been rattling its sabre lately, declaring that with people starving, governments all over the world will need to soon shovel out money (to the tune of $30 BILLION per year) if they want to stem the upheval inevitably brought on by commercials asking people to give money to starving Africa starring celebrities B-List or higher.

Sigh.  For a UN meeting held yesterday in Rome, the UN gathered around at least one person from every government that it could find (Paraguay sent "Lenny"- Lenny had nothing better to do, was just sitting around bored, swatting flies and reading Wikipedia articles about shampoo companies...) to fix the world's food problem.  Lots of talk and meetings and experts, and they figured out all by themselves that Money will fix the problem.

Sigh.  Covered in the meeting was the problem posed by bio-fuels, and how syphoning off food to oil production deprives people of crucial, cheap calories.  Because what people REALLY need to be eating is corn and sugar.

Sigh.  Also covered was the price dedicating all that agricultural land to bio-fuel, and how the US REALLY thinks Brazil should grow more, you know, Soy Beans and stuff that won't interfere with it not growing more bio-fuel-friendly sugar cane.

Sigh.  Also covered was how trade tarrifs and other impositions to free-trade really are what's to blame for people starving- because if food exporting countries can't export cheap corn to hungry countries because there's not enough profit in it, then those countries DESERVE to starve.

Sigh.  Also covered was how 3rd world countries shouldn't export cash crops, but instead use them to feed their people, because money (of all things) just can't solve the problem.

Huh?

I read reports like this and shake my head- consider that this crisis of food prices invites nations to bicker and back-stab, muscle one another, play global economic politics, and in general TOTALLY MISS THE POINT.  Consider the causes of this problem (my last blog offered that it all boils down to distribution, which is really a problem of oil), be it oil or climate or whatever.  Consider that it is NOT an economic problem.  Does it them warrant an economic solution?

Nope.  Land reform, political flexibility, and a GLOBAL alternative to oil = solution.  Throwing money at a problem just creates new ways of skimming off the top.  If the US had developed an energy policy during the 1973 oil crisis, we might not be in this mess.  But a solution to that enormous problem takes DECADES to concoct.  In the near term, sure, why not throw money at the conundrum?...

Next blog, I'll tell you why....