Like the illusion of Wall Street, with its vast and powerful investment banks, now shuttered, China too is an illusion perpetuated by the Globalists that gave us the 15,000 mile Caesar salad, poisoned cat food and lead based paint on babies' pacifiers. Like the illusion that money would come from thin air to always push housing prices higher, China has spent a generation pursuing its illusion. Pursuing an unattainable dream to be like the West, while 6000 years of its carefully shepherded top soil blows into the sea.
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:45 am Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
Well there's the obvious, that 3 Chinaman of 1901 = 1 big fat American of 2009. Really. Figure 90-110 pounds a Chinaman and 300 for Joe Six Pack.
On a more serious note, China "fed itself" a very poor nutritional diet, with an average adult human weight of, maybe 100 pounds, and China has about 3 thousand years of prep to ensure that the agricultural infrastructure was in place prior to 1901.
Us?
Zip. We got a few thousand Amish. That's it.
Chinese also had 90% of their population in place in the farm country and already doing farming.
Us? Bunch of urban/suburbanites.
We couldn't even have the horse populations where we needed them in 10 years, forget about the equipment.
Then, of course, there's the issue that the amount and type of food produced by China in 1901 was able to support a bare-bones subsistence society only.
Throw in that there was probably regular, widespread starvation/hunger depending on the weather.
But, sure, theoretically, we could live without oil at a population of 300 million if 260 million or so people became farmers. _________________ Massive Human Dieoff must occur as a result of Peak Oil. Many more than half will die. It will occur everywhere, including where you live. If you fail to recognize this, then your odds of living move toward the "going to die" group.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 13177 Location: naive idiot fantasy world
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 4:42 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
As Cashmere points out, not enough farmers. 2% of the population can't feed the rest without oil. _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow." - jboogy
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
Perhaps that 2% of the population that are farmers, who will have one hundred times more land than they can plant and harvest without oil, will take on one hundred share croppers each to get the labor they now need.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 13177 Location: naive idiot fantasy world
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
vtsnowedin wrote:
Perhaps that 2% of the population that are farmers, who will have one hundred times more land than they can plant and harvest without oil, will take on one hundred share croppers each to get the labor they now need.
Where will those "sharecroppers" come from? Are the farmers who don't know how to farm without oil going to take on 100 sharecroppers who don't know how to farm without oil?
Oh, right, it doesn't take any knowledge or skill to farm, it just comes naturally.
Yep. _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow." - jboogy
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:12 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
The 2% know what to plant and when to plant it. The doomers say there will be millions in the citys starving. The smartest of them will walk to the farm land and strike a deal with the land owners. Fertilizer with out oil will be a problem and yelds will be low but much more than leaving the land fallow.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 13177 Location: naive idiot fantasy world
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:16 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
vtsnowedin wrote:
The 2% know what to plant and when to plant it. The doomers say there will be millions in the citys starving. The smartest of them will walk to the farm land and strike a deal with the land owners. Fertilizer with out oil will be a problem and yelds will be low but much more than leaving the land fallow.
So you're saying millions of starving people will learn to farm by hand from people who don't know how to farm by hand.
?
While starving.
Okey dokey. _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow." - jboogy
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:37 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
No ones going to teach millions. But each farmer can and will direct enough people to get his land fully utilized. The laborers do not have to know anything they just need to be sufficently hungry to do what they are told. Ther crunch comes in if the crisis suddenly comes in winter and the farmers havent kept enough food on hand to feed the help. Like not filling the horse barn loft with hay.
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:57 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
So the overweight chain smoking hair salon girls are going to set down their cell phones long enough to head for a monocropping corporation farm, negotiate room and board which the farm does not have in place, learn all about farming without oil from a spanish speaking combine driver, ignore the bugs, heat, rain, exposure, sunburn, hard work, do it with hand tools that are not in place, and replace a fraction of the output of these farms without skipping a beat.
Sounds simple enough, when do we start?
The idea of the "farmer" has long since been replaced with administrators, lawyers, heavy equipment operators, and truckers. As with just about every industry out there, specialization has removed a wide skillset. The farm is a set of offices, some equipment storage shed, maybe a break room. The workers go home at night, often traveling many miles before they get out of the endless fields of a single plant. The food grown was processed and sold/delivered as soon as it was harvested to a central elevator to be loaded on trains.
The industrial agriculture of today is a completely different world from the traditional farmer of yesteryear. There is no housing to support the number of people who would be needed to tend hundreds of acres of grain. Even if they had kitchen facilities in place to serve meals to all these people and stored some of the crop on site, the crop would consist of a single item. Gonna feed dozens of people on only sugar cane? How about nothing but avacados for a month?
There is no hay loft.
The small farmsteads with a diversity of crops are limited in what they can do, although they may have more ability to bring in sharecroppers. Cabins, outbuildings, spare bedrooms can offer the housing. Systems are in place to support the daily living needs of several people. The idea that Farmer John with 10 acres of mixed vegetables and a couple of pigs is going to be willing to bring in a dozen people is unrealistic. Rather than growing for market, he'd be growing to support the crew. His income shrinks to nothing, without incentive, he'd be better off letting the crops go to rot instead of bringing in a bunch of people to disrupt his lifestyle, consume his resources and talk trash to his daughter. I can see this happening on an extremely limited scale, family and friends, but a mass influx of metrosexuals and yuppies is a fantasy. _________________ If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--for ever."
-George Orwell, 1984
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:15 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
Ludi wrote:
Oh, right, it doesn't take any knowledge or skill to farm, it just comes naturally.
You're laughing, but I have been told this several times by a few people "Oh, all it needs is to stick a seed in the ground and wait". And that was not only from some idealogue who think that there is always another source for oil (and fertilizer and pesticide) but from some people I would consider rather smart and well rounded.
As to the original question.
I think China poses an interesting question, was China in 1901 really at the height of it's achievement? The things I have read about Chinese history (and I really would like to be able to afford Needham's work on China) have me think that at this point it was long past it's prime.
Reading "The Omnivore's Dilemma" recently I think that the US (and even Europe) could feed itself quite handidly, it won't allow for getting Lobsters flown in from the other side of the country, but a full diet would be possible, that is if someone (and this would need to be the Government) puts people on the right path, moving people back to land, making farming of something else than Corn profitable again and go on a huge mass education drive to make it clear to people how the food makes it to their tables. Yeah, ain't gonna happen.
Meanwhile, looking at Europe I think there may be a shot at it. The Green Revolution didn't really start until the 50s and Europe only has 100 Million more people living there today than there were 60 years ago (guess the war had it's good side), we won't lose ALL the technology we have gained since then and so supporting those should be feasable. That the distances are relativly short compared to North America will help too.
Of course in all these cases it will require a change of attitude and eating habits, but this will eventually be forced, so I doubt most people have a choice. It comes down to how this is going to be guided by those in Power.
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:56 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
[quote="kpeavey"]So the overweight chain smoking hair salon girls are going to set down their cell phones long enough to head for a monocropping corporation farm, negotiate room and board which the farm does not have in place, learn all about farming without oil from a spanish speaking combine driver, ignore the bugs, heat, rain, exposure, sunburn, hard work, do it with hand tools that are not in place, and replace a fraction of the output of these farms without skipping a beat.[quote]
[vt snowedin] Of course not ,the welfare queens and Xbox playing couch potatoes will never get to the farm or get hired. But joe sixpack that has worked and paid his bills all his adult life that just lost his job and has a family to feed will and he will bring his work ethic with him.
[quote]
The idea of the "farmer" has long since been replaced with administrators, lawyers, heavy equipment operators, and truckers. As with just about every industry out there, specialization has removed a wide skillset. The farm is a set of offices, some equipment storage shed, maybe a break room. The workers go home at night, often traveling many miles before they get out of the endless fields of a single plant. The food grown was processed and sold/delivered as soon as it was harvested to a central elevator to be loaded on trains. [guote]
[Vt snowedin] The farmers I know do all the jobs you list except lawyering plus they do heavy equipment mechanic, veternary, horticulturist, silvaculture and hydraulic engineering. perhaps southern California is as specialized as you suggest but many use and retain all the skills they ever had. The monocultures and large farm size has been a product of cheap oil and low commodity prices. When conditions change farmers will change and adapt.
[quote]
The industrial agriculture of today is a completely different world from the traditional farmer of yesteryear. There is no housing to support the number of people who would be needed to tend hundreds of acres of grain. Even if they had kitchen facilities in place to serve meals to all these people and stored some of the crop on site, the crop would consist of a single item. Gonna feed dozens of people on only sugar cane? How about nothing but avacados for a month?
There is no hay loft.
The small farmsteads with a diversity of crops are limited in what they can do, although they may have more ability to bring in sharecroppers. Cabins, outbuildings, spare bedrooms can offer the housing. Systems are in place to support the daily living needs of several people. The idea that Farmer John with 10 acres of mixed vegetables and a couple of pigs is going to be willing to bring in a dozen people is unrealistic. Rather than growing for market, he'd be growing to support the crew. His income shrinks to nothing, without incentive, he'd be better off letting the crops go to rot instead of bringing in a bunch of people to disrupt his lifestyle, consume his resources and talk trash to his daughter. I can see this happening on an extremely limited scale, family and friends, but a mass influx of metrosexuals and yuppies is a fantasy.[/quote]
Metrosexuals and yuppies??? Get real. And I am not talking about farmers with ten acres. those are not farms. Try 1000 acres of Ohio or Indiana now thats a farm. Don't have to worry about letting it rot unless you have the fuel or labor to get it planted in the first place. your talking a do or die situation here and given that choice the American farmer will do it and do it a lot better than their critics imagine.
Joined: Aug 03, 2007 Posts: 4570 Location: Boston Suburbs
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:17 pm Post subject: Re: feeding the US without oil
Believe me, when people start starving, they will be more likely to become zombie hordes than sharecroppers. They are not going to be willing to work out in the fields for their daily bread. The only thing the farmers are going to be doing with them is picking them off with a shotgun while they are trying to steal their crops. _________________ http://doomsteaddiary.blogspot.com/
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Next
Page 1 of 5
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
