THE DON JONES
INDEX… |
GAINS
POSTED in GREEN LOSSES
POSTED in RED |
|
11/13/15… 15,623.45 11/6/15… 15,583.34 |
|
6/27/13… 15,000.00 |
(THE DOW JONES INDEX: 11/13… 17,448.87; 11/6…
17,910.22; 6/27/13… 15,000.00)
LESSON
for NOVEMBER 13, 2015 – The Politics of Hunger
In last week’s Lesson, we noted that
humans can live five minutes without breathable air, five days without
water. What more do we need?
Well… how about food?
As a species goes, we rank about in the
middle of the pack as far as what we consume to stay alive and what we can eat
if we have to. Better than the panda
bears, certainly, who would die off if their supply of bamboo were to be cut off. Better than the
polar bears, lions and tigers and, even, dogs… carnivores as need a constant
and consistent supply of fresh meat to eat… better off than the herbivores, too. You could try feeding a horse or antelope the
choicest filet mignon and it would starve to death. We, fortunately, have adapted so as to be
able to survive on animal or
vegetable foodstuffs – our capacities limited only by faith (no bacon for the
Jews and Muslims, no steak for devout Hindus, no coffee for the Mormons and the
Seventh-Day-Adventists… which explains why the good Dr. Carson always seems so
sleepy) and squeamishness (some people can and do eat bugs, finding them tasty
and nourishing, but most find the prospect repulsive, to say nothing of
consuming other taboo treats like baby seals and puppy dogs or, for the most
part, each other).
Some other species, on the other hand,
would get along fine on a meal of the other hand, or pretty much anything that
is at hand. Baby cockroaches grow up on
diets of their parents’ excrement before moving on to the usual comestibles
found in dirty households plus substances like glue and paper; termites will
eat your households and, as for rats… enough said.
Even so, many human beings find it
difficult to find enough to eat.
When an abundance of people… over six billion on a
planet that would reasonably sustain about a billion… pursue a disabundance of food, the consequence is a famine.
The ubiquitous Wikivolk describe famine as “a widespread
scarcity of food, caused by several factors
including crop failure, population unbalance, or government policies,” and
observes that “nearly every continent in the world has experienced a period of
famine throughout history.” According to the Wiks,
China has experienced 1,828 famines since the second century BC while, during
the Middle Ages, Britain
endured 95.
To tally up the
worst of the worst… from the first recorded famine, 441 BC in Rome up to this
year’s great hungers in Yemen and South Sudan and including the Skull Famine of
India (11 million dead in 1790 on the heels of the Chalisa
and Great Bengal Famines, each of which killed ten million a few years
earlier), the mid-19th century Taipeng,
China (60 million dead) and Irish Potato (less than two million, but millions
more emigrated to America) Famines and the Russian/Ukrainian famines of 1932-3
(from ten to possibly twenty million dead)… check out the mortality report here.
We’ve included plenty of charts and
graphs following the week’s Index, one of which contains incidents of famine
and its stepchildren – malnutrition, hunger and food-related diseases – assembled
and ranked by nation courtesy of the FAO… not the toy store (which has
trademarked the initials) but the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Said U.N.
Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that about 805 million people of
the 7.3 billion people in the world, or one in nine, were suffering from
chronic undernourishment in 2012-2014. Almost all the hungry people, 791
million, live in developing countries, representing 13.5 percent, or one in
eight, of the population of developing counties. There are 11 million people
undernourished in developed countries.
Poverty
is considered the principal cause of hunger, according to the World Hunger
Organization. Other factors named include
“Conflict” (aka wars… notably in Pakistan, Nigeria, Libya, Somalia and,
although after issuance of their 2015 report, Iraq and Syria), “Harmful (aka
unequal) Economic Systems” (not the least of which is in the United States,
almost alone among the developed nations) and a corollary, “Food and
Agricultural Policy”, population growth and, as below, climate change.
WHO,
for its part cited an article by Scientific American’s Lester Brown entitled “Could food shortages bring down
civilization?” and answered, effectively, by a belief that this planet does
have a limit to the population of humans it can support and, when we reach that
limit, Mother Nature will abruptly step in and make a major correction through
famine, disease and resulting conflict.
But we seem to be creatures of crisis, noted a commentator, “better at
being reactive - proactive is not our strong suit.”
Incidentally,
the New Age belief that Mother Nature (aka Gaia) is alive and pissed off draws
some stark revelations and extreme conclusions from the faculty at Fort Lewis
College in Colorado, who postulate that “the
biosphere will respond to human activities by homeostatic actions that modulate
or dampen the environmental changes that are occurring,” and… in what they
acknowledge as an extreme view; “if it’s necessary for preservation of a
living planet, the perpetrators of damage (i.e. humans) could be eliminated or
their influence curtailed.” (They suggest
AIDS as a Gaian remedy!)
Among their less extreme suggestions is
“regulating the amount of consumption worldwide” (in other words, dispatching
U.N. bureaucrats to monitor the dinner table at every American household to be
sure that no meats, eggs, gluten, milk or sugar or anything tasty is consumed.
Some might prefer government-created
epidemics!
Steven Smith of
SHAPINGTOMORROWSWORLD.ORG notes that the increases in food production that have
enabled the planet to keep up with population growth and actually improve the
diets of some peoples (the Chinese are importing more of the world’s soybeans
and eating more meat) may not be maintained through the 21st century
due to the usual suspects, particularly a scarcity of natural gas-based
fertilizers and phosphates. “Business as
usual is not an option for future food production,” Smith concludes. “Science
and technology can help but does not have all the answers. Improved crop
varieties will be created but improvements are likely to be incremental rather
than transforming. We will need to adjust to different food supplies and
expectations. Seasonal food should be appreciated. We will need to make better
use of the food we produce. The cost of food will increase with energy costs
and people in the West should expect to spend an increasing proportion of their
income on food.”
“At some point in the early years of the 21st century,
there will be a clash of two giant forces: overpopulation and oil depletion,”
concurs Peter Goodchild of countercurrents.org.
While not predicting (or promoting) the total eradication of people,
Goodchild believes that there will come a culling of the human herd – probably
by about half. “(I)t will be impossible
to get those two giant forces into equilibrium in any gentle fashion, because
of a matter that is rarely considered: that in every year that has gone by —
and every year that will arrive — the population of the earth is automatically
adjusted so that it is almost exactly equal to its carrying capacity. We are
always barely surviving. Population growth is soaring, whereas oil production
is plunging. If, at the start of any year, the world’s population is greater
than its carrying capacity, only simple arithmetic is needed to see that the
difference between the two numbers means that mortality will be above the
normal by the end of that year. In fact, over the course of the 21st century
there will be about 4 billion deaths (probably about 3.6, to be more precise)
above normal.
Let
us refer to those 4 billion above-normal deaths as "famine deaths,"
for lack of a better term, since "peak oil" in terms of daily life is
really "peak food." There will, of course, also be famines for other
reasons. It is also true that warfare and plague will take their toll to a
large extent before famine claims those same humans as its victims.
letsthinkabout.us unravels the next thirty years, as he/she/it views
them contested between generations… the boomers, Gen. X, millennials and what
h/s/I calls the “Homeland Generation”. The 2020’s will be seen “as an absolute low-point of all
humanity up to this point” as a “ true global crisis will have exploded onto the world
scene, not seen since 1939” and then, after a decade of “disease, famine,
natural disaster, war and any combination” Millennials will take over and
impose a stagnant, insect-like dictatorship until 2040, when they are
overthrown by the HG, who will bring stability, a sustained and growing economy
and human/computer “integration”. In
brief, we will ascend, or descend, from our heritage as killer apes to insects,
finally to machines.
While the most immediate predictions we
discussed here are dark and gloomy, please remember this: the last 3
generational cycles (14 generations ago) starting with the founding of America
have achieved technology, an economy, a standard of living, and a level of
human freedom never before seen at any other time in history. As the world
descends into barbarism during this era, it is merely the winter to the
glorious spring that will emerge.
But perhaps the most august and
reputable analysis of food policies, perils and persnickities
comes from a handful of government, transgovernment,
international and private sector think tanks such as the World Health and World
Hunger Organizations (operated by the United Nations), various private-sector
groups (usually with a political agenda… overt or covert) and American
federally-funded agencies such as the CIA and the National Climate
Assessment and Development Advisory Committee (NCADAC) often shortened to the
NCA.
The NCADAC was
established under the Department of Commerce in December 2010 and is supported
through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A Federal advisory
committee established as per the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, it oversees
the development of voluminous reports, the third of which was published in May,
2014.. NCA describes its members as “diverse in background,
expertise, geography, and sector” as well as, for better or worse, just about
as heavily cross-pollinated with agencies of a similar intent and slant as
would be any major corporate board… NOAA’s Deputy Assistant Administrator Ko Barrett is also Vice-Chair of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The Third Report included a detailed
description of American agriculture – past, present and future – and perhaps
represents the most orthodox explication of the prospects of American farmers
to increase crop yields at a time when arable land is shrinking and population…
our own, and also that of other nations which we may be expected to support via
trade or charity… is increasing.
“The United States produces nearly $330 billion per
year in agricultural commodities, with contributions from livestock accounting
for roughly half of that value,” the Assessment begins. “Production of all commodities will be
vulnerable to direct impacts (from changes in crop and livestock development
and yield due to changing climate conditions and extreme weather events) and
indirect impacts (through increasing pressures from pests and pathogens that
will benefit from a changing climate). The agricultural sector continually
adapts to climate change through changes in crop rotations, planting times,
genetic selection, fertilizer management, pest management, water management,
and shifts in areas of crop production. These have proven to be effective
strategies to allow previous agricultural production to increase, as evidenced
by the continued growth in production and efficiency across the United States.”
Increases in consecutive dry days and hot nights
will have negative impacts on crop and animal production, said the
scientists. “High nighttime temperatures
during the grain-filling period (the period between the fertilization of the
ovule and the production of a mature seed in a plant) increase the rate of
grain-filling and decrease the length of the grain-filling period, resulting in
reduced grain yields. Exposure to multiple hot nights increases the degree of
stress imposed on animals resulting in reduced rates of meat, milk, and egg
production.”
The NCA predicts that the world will seek to feed
nine billion people by 2050. “U.S.
agriculture exists as part of the global economy and agricultural exports have
outpaced imports as part of the overall balance of trade,” claimed the NCA, but
also listed several factors as potentially impacting this scenario…
1. CLIMATE CHANGE
“Climate disruptions to agricultural production have
increased in the past 40 years and are projected to increase over the next 25
years. By mid-century and beyond, these impacts will be increasingly negative
on most crops and livestock.”
Beginning on Sunday, the Tri-Societies (American
Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America and Soil Science Society
of America) will hold its annual meeting in Minneapolis joined, for the first
time, by the Entomological Society of America (ESA) to connect more than 7,000
scientists, professionals, educators, and students.
At the close of its October, 2011 conference
conducted in San Antonio (October, 2011) their report team concluded that…
“Evidence that climate change has had and will have impacts on crops and
livestock is based on numerous studies and is incontrovertible.” This report has become fundamental to the
mission and findings of the NCA.
By mid-century, when temperature increases are
projected to be between 1.8°F and 5.4°F and precipitation extremes are further
intensified, yields of major U.S. crops and farm profits are expected to
decline. Citing recent volatility in
corn pricing and production, the Societies warned that :
“Overall implications for production are for increased uncertainty in
production totals, which affects both domestic and international markets and
food prices.”
The scientists observed that rising temperatures
will cause the production areas of various crops to shift (usually northwards)
and a shortage of water (see last week’s Lesson
) will particularly impact some of the crops grown in drought areas such as
California’s Central Valley. There,
crops like alfalfa, safflowers and corn will be minimally impacted, tomato,
rice and wheat growers will face more difficulty and, by the year 2090, effects
on cotton and sunflowers will be only little short of catastrophic.
Many crops depend on insect pollination and the
number of frost days. Apples, for
example, have a “winter chilling requirement” (hours when temperatures are
between 32°F and 50°F) which, in the Northeast, amounts to 400 hours and will
be more easily met, over time, than chilling requirements for plums, cherries,
peaches and some nut trees.
California grape vines have a low chilling
requirement of about 90 hours per year, but increasing temperatures on the
warmer, drier Pacific Coast will first affect the quality of wines before, late
in the century or into the 2100s, curtailing production entirely.
2. CARBON DIOXIDE
Carbon dioxide emissions, irregardless of
temperature, have what the NCA researchers call a “mixed effect”. Higher atmospheric concentrations can
actually increase plant growth and increase water use efficiency. Unfortunately, those plants most enhanced by
the CO2 are weeds, which compete with the cultivated crops for light, air and
nutrients. The gas also reduces the
nitrogen and protein content of crops such as soybeans and alfalfa as well as
“reducing the ability of pasture and rangeland to support grazing livestock.” (see below)
3. LIVESTOCK
The NCA reported that changing climatic conditions
affect animal agriculture in four primary ways:
a) feed-grain production, availability, and price; b) pastures and
forage crop production and quality; c) animal health, growth, and reproduction;
and d) disease and pest distributions.
The optimum animal core body temperature exists
within a narrow 4°F to 5°F range – deviations, reported the scientists, can
cause animals to become stressed. “This
can disrupt performance, production, and fertility, limiting the animals’
ability to produce meat, milk, or eggs. In many species, deviations in core
body temperature in excess of 4°F to 5°F cause significant reductions in
productive performance, while deviations of 9°F to 12.6°F often result in
death. For cattle that breed during
spring and summer, exposure to high temperatures reduces conception rates.
Livestock and dairy production are more affected by the number of days of
extreme heat than by increases in average temperature. Elevated humidity also exacerbates the impact
of high temperatures on animal health and performance.”
4. WEEDS, DISEASES and PESTS
As above, exotic weeds, diseases, and pests… in
addition to extant species already in the U.S….
have particular significance in that: a) they can often be invasive
(that is, arrive without normal biological/ecological controls) and highly
damaging; b) with increasing international trade, there are numerous
high-threat, high-impact species that will arrive on commodities from areas
where some species even now are barely known to modern science, but which have
the potential to emerge under a changed climate regime to pose significant risk
of establishment in the U.S. and economic loss; and c) can take advantage of
“disturbances,” where climate variability acts as an additional ecological disturbance.
“Improved models and observational data related to
how many agricultural regions will experience declines in animal and plant
production from increased stress due to weeds, diseases, insect pests, and
other climate change induced stresses will need to be developed,” the NCA
advised.
The scientific literature is beginning to emerge,
concluded the NCA, but “there are still some unknowns about the effects of
biotic stresses, and there may well be emergent “surprises” resulting from
departures from past ecological equilibria. Confidence is therefore judged to
be medium (the NCA assesses predictions as very high, high, medium… “a few
sources, limited consistency, models incomplete, methods emerging, etc.”
... or low) that many agricultural
regions will experience declines in animal and plant production from increased
stress due to weeds, diseases, insect pests, and other climate change induced
stresses.”
Will the participation of the bug scientist in next
week’s Tri-Societies forum reinforce, refute or expand upon the problem? We’ll find out – or you
can.
5. SOIL EROSION
Soil is a critical component of agricultural
systems, and the changing climate affects the amount, distribution, and intensity
of precipitation. Soil erosion occurs when the rate of precipitation exceeds
the ability of the soil to maintain an adequate infiltration rate. When this
occurs, runoff from fields moves water and soil from the field into nearby
water bodies.
Soil erosion is affected by rainfall intensity and
there is evidence of increasing intensity in rainfall events even where the
annual mean is reduced. “Unprotected
soil surfaces will have increased erosion and require more intense conservation
practices,” the NCA acknowledged, “…shifts in seasonality and type of
precipitation will affect both timing and impact of water availability for both
rainfed and irrigated agriculture.” Even before the commencement of an El Nino
year, they prognosticated that: “Evidence is strong that in the future there
will be more precipitation globally, and that rain events will be more intense,
even if separated by longer periods without rain.”
As an example, the Assessment noted that, while
there has not been an increase in total annual precipitation in the state of
Iowa, “there has been a large increase in the number of days with heavy
rainfall”. ((2001 through 2011) They did not consider the effect of
wildfires (either as affecting agriculture or human habitats) on runoff and
soil erosion but it is hoped that the devastations of the past year will be
included in their 2015 report.
6. ADAPTATION
“Agriculture has been able to adapt to recent
changes in climate; however, increased innovation will be needed to ensure the
rate of adaptation of agriculture and the associated socioeconomic system can
keep pace with climate change over the next 25 years.”
Even in the worst-case scenarios, human adaptability
might rescue us from the dangers of runaway temperatures and either too much or
too little water. Or
not.
Nonetheless, the NCA reported that certain measures
could be taken outside of the intent of reducing global pollutants.
Warmer-season crops, such as melons, would grow
better in warmer areas, while other crops, such as cereals, would grow more
quickly, meaning less time for the grain itself to mature, reducing
productivity. Taking advantage of the
increasing length of the growing season and changing planting dates could allow
planting of more diverse crop rotations, which can be an effective adaptation
strategy.
Livestock production systems that provide partial or
total shelter to reduce thermal environmental challenges can reduce the risk
and vulnerability associated with extreme heat. In general, livestock such as
poultry and swine are managed in housed systems where airflow can be controlled
and housing temperature modified to minimize or buffer against adverse
environmental conditions. However, management and energy costs associated with
increased temperature regulation will increase for confined production
enterprises and may require modification of shelter and increased water use for
cooling.
The NCA, contrary to opponents who have castigated
it as a liberal, Socialist or (certainly) Obahamian power-grab,
offered an olive branch to those they consider “responsible” representatives of
Big Agra. “Limits to public investment
and constraints on private investment could slow the speed of adaptation, yet
potential constraints and limits are not well-understood or integrated into
economic impact assessments. The economic implications of changing biotic
pressures on crops and livestock, and on the agricultural system as a whole,
are not well-understood, either in the short or long term. Adaptation may also be limited by
availability of inputs (such as land or water), changing prices of other inputs
with climate change (such as energy and fertilizer), and by the environmental
implications of intensifying or expanding agricultural production.”
Although agriculture has a long history of
successful adaptation to climate variability, the Assessment noted, “the accelerating
pace of climate change and the intensity of projected climate change represent
new and unprecedented challenges to the sustainability of U.S. agriculture. In
the short term, existing and evolving adaptation strategies will provide
substantial adaptive capacity, protecting domestic producers and consumers from
many of the impacts of climate change, except possibly the occurrence of protracted
extreme events. In the longer term, adaptation will be more difficult and
costly because the physiological limits of plant and animal species will be
exceeded more frequently, and the productivity of crop and livestock systems
will become more variable.”
7. FOOD SECURITY
So, is it advisable to move to a remote
location, buy Meals Ready to Eat, guns (and lots of sunscreen) and await the Killoff?
Maybe.
“Climate change effects on agriculture will have
consequences for food security, both in the U.S. and globally, through changes
in crop yields and food prices and effects on food processing, storage,
transportation, and retailing,” concludes the 2013 Assessment. But be of good
cheer… “Adaptation measures can help delay and reduce some of these impacts.”
On the other hand, the NCA also concluded that:
“Given the evidence base and remaining uncertainty, there is high confidence
that climate change impacts will have consequences for food security both in
the U.S. and globally through changes in crop yields and food prices, and very
high confidence that other related factors, including food processing, storage,
transportation, and retailing will also be affected by climate change. There is
high confidence that adaptation measures will help delay and reduce some of
these impacts.”
Venturing outside of the parameters of the
producers, NCA offered this tentative gesture of bowing to political and
economic reality. “Food security
includes four components: availability, stability, access, and utilization of
food. Following this definition, in
2011, 14.9% of U.S. households did not have secure food supplies at some point
during the year, with 5.7% of U.S. households experiencing very low food
security. Food security is affected by
a variety of supply and demand-side pressures, including economic conditions,
globalization of markets, safety and quality of food, land-use change,
demographic change, and disease and poverty.”
The noted that a “globalized food system” might buffer the impact of
climate, but could also “increase the global vulnerability
of food security by transmitting price shocks globally.”
Without noting the political complications that a potential famine
would cause, the NCA advised that “…(s)upplies
can be maintained through adaptations such as reducing waste in the food
system, making food distribution systems more resilient to climate risks,
protecting food quality and safety in higher temperatures, and policies to
ensure food access for disadvantaged populations and during extreme events.”
Whether the production and distribution systems
presently in place could accommodate such “extreme events” (either sudden –
like wars, volcanoes, hurricanes) or longer-term (like an extended drought or
global warming… or as a critic below posits… global cooling)… that the
scientists have left to the politicians.
Tracking
other sources, the World Hunger Organization has noted that ‘the vast majority
of hungry people live in developing regions, which saw a 42 percent reduction
in the prevalence of undernourished people between 1990–92 and 2012–14. Despite
this progress, about one in eight people, or 13.5 percent of the overall
population, remain chronically undernourished in these regions, down from 23.4
percent in 1990–92. As the most populous region in the world, Asia is home to
two out of three of the world’s undernourished people.” The estimate of 276 million chronically
undernourished people in Southern Asia (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) for the
period 2012–14 is only marginally lower than the number in 1990– 92.
Eastern Asia (where China is by far the largest country) and South-eastern Asia
(including Indonesia, Philippines, Mynamar, Vietnam
and others) have reduced undernutriton substantially
as has Latin America. The least progress
was reported in the sub-Saharan region, where more than one in four people
remain undernourished – the highest prevalence of any region in the world.
Nevertheless, the prevalence of undernourishment in sub-Saharan Africa has
declined from 33.3 percent in 1990– 92 to 23.8 percent in 2012–14, although the
number of undernourished people has actually increased.
Of course,
there are doubters, dissenters and deniers.
One of the more rational of these is the Cato Institute, a
Republican-trending-towards-Libertarian think tank with a haughty scoffing of
any mention of damaging consequences of the burning of fossil fuels and the
resultant superprofits to Big Petro.
Calling the Assessment “pseudoscience”,
the Catographers damned it as overly focusing “on the supposed
negative impacts from climate change while largely dismissing or ignoring the
positives from climate change.
The bias in the
National Climate Assessment (NCA) towards pessimism (which we have previously
detailed here) has implications throughout the
federal regulatory process because the NCA is cited (either directly or
indirectly) as a primary source for the science of climate change for
justifying federal regulation aimed towards mitigating greenhouse gas
emissions. Since the NCA gets it wrong, so does everyone else.
“This National Assessment is
much closer to pseudoscience than it is to science. It is as explanatory as
Sigmund Freud. It clearly believes that virtually everything in our society is
tremendously dependent the surface temperature, and, because of that, we are
headed towards certain and inescapable destruction, unless we take its advice
and decarbonize our economy, pronto. Unfortunately, the Assessment can’t quite tell us how to accomplish that, because
no one knows how.
“In the Assessment’s
1200 horror-studded pages, almost everything that happens in our complex world —
sex, birth, disease, death, hunger, and wars, to name a few — is somehow made
worse by pernicious emissions of carbon dioxide and the joggling of surface
average temperature by a mere two degrees.”
Another right-wing negative assessment
of the NCA’s negative assessment of climate change (although on a different
scientific premise) comes from John L. Casey, a former NASA engineer now President of the climate research company,
the Space and Science Research Corporation (SSRC), in Orlando, Florida. Mr. Casey calls himself “the leading advocate
in the US for a national and international plan to prepare for the next climate
change to one of a dangerous cold climate era. This new cold era is caused by a
historic decline in the Sun’s energy output,” which he calls a “solar
hibernation” in his magnum opus “Cold Sun”.
Unlike the Big Petro apologists, Casey does not deny global warming, he hails it as a counter-measure to what might
otherwise be a coming Ice Age.
On
the left, FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting) … which calls itself
“progressive” and which “believes that structural reform is ultimately needed
to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public
broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information,” While not specifically
condemning the NCA’s Assessment as corporate doublespeak, it and others have
questioned the legitimacy and bias of the IPCC, which has come under fire from
climatechange.org. “Across two decades and thousands of
pages of reports, the world's most authoritative voice on climate science has
consistently understated the rate and intensity of climate change and the
danger those impacts represent, say a growing number of studies on the
topic.
“This conservative bias, say some scientists, could have significant
political implications, as reports from the group – the U.N.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – influence policy
and planning decisions worldwide, from national governments down to local town
councils.”
“When it comes to U.S. media coverage of global warming ,”
scolds FAIR, “superficial balance—telling “both” sides of the story—can actually
be a form of informational bias.”
And finally, there is the age-old argument that
whether the Earth is growing hotter or colder and whether the sun is expanding,
contracting or just loafing around is all irrelevant because the end of not
only the world, but the Universe is at hand and Jesus is coming back to gather
up the believers, cast the climate change advocates into a pit more fiery than
the fiery planet they envision within a few years or centuries and recycle the
whole into Paradise. Newsweek, at the
dawn of Y2K, reported that: “Forty percent
of all Americans and 45
percent of Christians believe that the world will end, as the
Bible predicts, in a battle at Armageddon between Jesus and the
Antichrist.” So… why worry? Why conserve?
“The earth we inhabit is not a permanent
planet, nor was it ever intended to be,” contends gotquestions.org, a Christian
website. “The environmental movement is consumed with trying to preserve the
planet forever, and we know this is not God's plan. He tells us in 2 Peter 3:10 that at the end of the age,
the earth and all He has created will be destroyed: "But the day of the
Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud
noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the
works that are upon it will be burned up" (NKJV).”
In “America's Providential History”, a
popular reconstructionist high-school history textbook, authors Mark Beliles and Stephen McDowell tell us that: "The
secular or socialist has a limited resource mentality and views the world as a
pie ... that needs to be cut up so everyone can get a piece." However,
"the Christian knows that the potential in God is unlimited and that there
is no shortage of resources in God's Earth. The resources are waiting to be
tapped."
Much of what may be termed an end-times
version of the “wise use” environmental policies derive fromJames
Watt, Ronald Reagan’s Interior Secretary from 1981 to 1983, who famously
derided environmentalists for their carping against Big Oil and other
extractive corporations inasmuch as the world was going to end shortly and God,
like your mother, would be offended if His children left anything (food,
energy, clean air, water, etc.) on their plates before they were raptured away.
Ten years ago, he both backtracked and
doubled down on his beliefs in an op-ed piece for the Washington Post,
complaining that some of his more flamboyant statements had been
misinterpreted…
“Now
political activists of the religious left are refreshing those two-decades-old
lies and applying them with a broad brush to whole segments of the Christian
community: "people who believe the Bible," members of Congress and
"Rapture proponents." If these merging groups -- the extreme
environmentalists and the religious left -- are successful in their campaign,
the Christian community will be marginalized, its conservative values maligned
and its electoral clout diminished.
“The
National Council of Churches issued a statement "in an effort to
refute" what NCC theologians "call a 'false gospel' . . . and to
reject teachings that suggest humans are 'called' to exploit the Earth without
care for how our behavior impacts the rest of God's creation. . . . This false
gospel still finds its proud preachers and continues to capture its adherents
among emboldened political leaders and policymakers."
But, he
added, citing the “conservationist” tendencies within conservatism…
“If such a body of belief exists, I would totally reject it,
as would all of my friends.” He now
denies having made statements like: "God
gave us these things to use. After the last tree is felled, Christ will come
back."
And Accuracy in Media’s Mark Musser draws
a line connecting environmentalism with the Third Reich. “Historians have either overlooked or
forgotten that sweeping Nazi environmental laws, all signed by Hitler and
considered to be his pet projects, preceded the racially charged Nuremberg
Laws, reflecting the fact that Nazi racism was rooted in ecology. By the
summer of 1935, right before the Nuremberg laws were set up, Nazi Germany was
by far the greenest regime on the planet.”
The liberal and some moderate
religionists have turned the argument on its head, retorting that God commanded
humans to be “stewards” of the earth and Revelations even commands that those
who destroy God’s earth be themselves destroyed.
“All of the
problems the world is facing stem from overpopulation,” states Galaxy Man in
response to Brown’s Scientific American article. “However, religious groups put
intense pressure on followers to procreate like mad because it is 'glorifying
God'.” (It is also because the Abrahamanic religions… Judaism, Islam and Christianity…
still follow the principles of Deuteronomy 20 and require population grown to
breed soldiers to kill those
“The Bible says
that we are to be fruitful and multiply,” responds another poster, Bill R.,
“but it limits that by saying we are to fill the earth. I think we all need to
admit that we have finished filling the earth and it is time to get into a
sustaining mode.”
The economy was particularly fruitful
for Don Jones, with employment, wages and exports rising, leading to a
much-improved balance of payments. Of
course, the good news prompted the bean-counters at the Fed to count their
beans and hint at a rise in the interest rates, which set the Dow tumbling…
leading to its overwhelming humiliation by the Don. But there was more good news for all as
American military forces celebrated Veterans’ Day by retaking the key Iraqi
town of Sinjar (with a little help from the Kurds) and blowing up arrogant
little Jihad Johnny, who has beheaded his last infidel.
And now, some charts and graphs…
Undernourishment around the world, 1990-2 to 2012-4
Number of undernourished and prevalence (%) of undernourishment
|
1990-2
No. |
1990-2
% |
2012-4
No. |
2012-4
% |
World |
1,014.5 |
18.7 |
805.3 |
11.3 |
Developed regions |
20.4 |
<5 |
14.6 |
<5 |
Developing regions |
994.1 |
23.4 |
790.7 |
14.5 |
Africa |
182.1 |
27.7 |
226.7 |
20.5 |
Sub-Saharan Africa |
176.0 |
33.3 |
214.1 |
23.8 |
Asia |
742.6 |
23.7 |
525.6 |
12.7 |
Eastern Asia |
295.2 |
23.2 |
161.2 |
10.8 |
South-Eastern Asia |
138.0 |
30.7 |
63.5 |
10.3 |
Southern Asia |
291.7 |
24.0 |
276.4 |
15.8 |
Latin America & Carib. |
68.5 |
15.3 |
37.0 |
6.1 |
Oceana |
1.0 |
15.7 |
1.4 |
14.0 |
Source:
FAO The State of
THE DON JONES
INDEX
CHART of CATEGORIES w/
VALUE ADDED to EQUAL BASELINE of 15,000.00
(REFLECTING… approximately… DOW JONES INDEX of June
27, 2013)
See
a further explanation of categories here…
Simply
recording gains or losses is deceptive, because some of the indices here
represent GOOD
things (like incomes and life expectancy) while others represent BAD
things (unemployment, terror). So, increases
in good things and decreases in bad things are considered GOOD (and are
depicted in GREEN)
– decreases in good things and increases in the bad are considered BAD (and are
depicted in RED).
The sum of good things, less the sum of bad things, equals the week’s gain (or loss) to Don Jones.
ECONOMIC FACTORS
(60%)
DON JONES’
PERSONAL ECONOMIC INDEX
(45% of TOTAL INDEX POINTS)
|
INCOME |
(24%) |
BASE 6/27/13 |
RECKONINGS LAST CHANGE NEXT |
DON 11/6/15 |
DON 11/13/15 |
OUR SOURCE(S) and COMMENTS |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Wages (hourly, p/c.)* |
10% |
1500 points |
11/13/15 |
+0.47% |
Nov. |
1549.68 |
1557.03 |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Median Income (dc) |
4% |
600 |
11/13/15 |
+0.04% |
11/20/15 |
615.57 |
615.80 |
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 29,013 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Unemployment |
4% |
600 |
11/13/15 |
+2.00% |
Nov. |
916.63 |
934.96 |
|
||||||||||||
|
Official #mil. |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
-1.09%
|
11/20/15 |
442.24 |
437.41 |
|
||||||||||||
|
Unofficial #mil. |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
-0.79% |
11/20/15 |
445.35 |
448.84 |
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 15.300 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Workforce Participation Number Percentage |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
+0.11%
+10.46% |
11/20/15 |
293.02 |
299.37 |
Americans in/not in workforce (mil.) In: 149.184 Out: 94.585
Total: 243.769 http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 61.20% |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://ycharts.com/indicators/labor_force_participation_rate 62.40% nd |
|
|||||||||||
|
OUTGO |
15% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Total Inflation |
9% |
1350 |
10/16/15 |
-0.2 |
11/20/15 |
1321.97 |
1321.97 |
|
||||||||||||
|
Food |
2% |
300 |
10/16/15 |
+0.4 |
11/20/15 |
285.77 |
285.77 |
|
||||||||||||
|
Gas |
2% |
300 |
10/16/15 |
-9.0 |
11/20/15 |
386.33 |
386.33 |
|
||||||||||||
|
Medical Costs |
2% |
300 |
10/16/15 |
+0.3 |
11/20/15 |
285.34 |
285.34 |
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
WEALTH |
6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Dow Jones |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
-2.58%
|
11/20/15 |
322.56 |
314.23 |
Dow Jones Index 17,493.10 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Home Sales Home Valuations |
1% 1% |
150 150 |
10/23/15 10/23/15 |
sales
+ 4.52% price - 2.97%
|
11/20/15
11/20/15 |
198.33 206.30 |
198.33 206.30 |
http://www.realtor.org/research-and-statistics Sales (M): 5.55 Valuations (K): 221.9 nd |
|
|||||||||||
|
Debt (Personal) |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
+0.22%
|
11/20/15 |
278.34 |
277.27 |
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
53,629 |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
UNITED STATES
ECONOMIC INDEX (15% of TOTAL INDEX
POINTS) |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
NATIONAL |
10% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Revenues (trillions.) |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
+0.18% |
11/20/15 |
363.87 |
364.54 |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Expenditures (tl.) |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
+0.13%
|
11/20/15 |
283.60 |
283.22 |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
U.S. Natl. Debt (tl.) |
3% |
450 |
11/13/15 |
+0.73%
|
11/20/15 |
403.22 |
400.27 |
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 18.604 |
|
|
||||||||||
|
Total Debt* (tl.) |
3% |
450 |
11/13/15 |
+0.16%
|
11/20/15 |
403.76 |
403.12 |
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 65.824 |
|
|||||||||||
|
* U.S.
Total Debt includes household, business, state and local government,
financial institutions and the Federal Government (source – Federal Reserve) |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GLOBAL |
5% |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Foreign Debt (tril.) |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
+0.02% |
11/20/15 |
324.59 |
324.53 |
|
||||||||||||
|
Exports (bl.) |
1% |
150 |
11/13/15 |
+1.51% |
11/20/15 |
146.97 |
149.19 |
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html 187.9 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Imports (bl.) |
1% |
150 |
11/13/15 |
-2.069% |
11/20/15 |
140.99 |
143.89 |
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html
228.7 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Trade Deficit (bl.) |
1% |
150 |
11/13/15 |
+18.38% |
11/20/15 |
106.94 |
126.60 |
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html 40.8 |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
SOCIAL
FACTORS (40%) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
LIBERTY and SECURITY
INDEX (15%) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
ACTS of MAN |
9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
World Peace |
3% |
450 |
11/13/15 |
nc |
11/20/15 |
414.16 |
414.16 |
US media caught in gaffe “hailing” a victory
by Syrian dictator Assad (with his Russian and Iranian allies) over
ISIS. Admittedly a tough call, but… |
|
||||||||||||
Terrorism |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
+2.2% |
11/20/15 |
272.08 |
278.07 |
American/Kurdish forces recapture town
of Sinjar, Iraq and despicable beheader Jihad
Johnny gets droned. |
|
||||||||||||
Freedom |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
-1.4% |
11/20/15 |
303.38 |
307.63 |
Human rights activist Aung San Suu Ky elected President of Myanmar (soon to be back to
Burma). “Goodfellas”
and Lufthansa robber gets sprung from the pokey. |
|
||||||||||||
Corruption |
1% |
150 |
11/13/15 |
+0.5% |
11/20/15 |
160.53 |
159.73 |
Sexting secret service agent found to
be mad about fourteen. Some varieties
of Italian virgin olive oil turn out to be not virginal. |
|
||||||||||||
Crime |
1% |
150 |
11/13/15 |
+0.3% |
11/20/15 |
131.59 |
131.98 |
Some
of the idiots who like to shine eye-destroying green lasers into airplane and
helicopter cockpits get busted in the Bronx.
Lock ‘em up! |
|
||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ACTS of GOD |
6% |
(with, in some
cases, a little… or lots of… help from men, and a few women) |
|
||||||||||||||||||
Environment/Weather |
3% |
450 |
11/13/15 |
+0.2% |
11/20/15 |
422.72 |
421.87 |
Tornadoes in Iowa this time. Presidential candidates flee. |
|
||||||||||||
Disasters |
3% |
450 |
11/13/15 |
-0.2% |
11/20/15 |
390.25 |
389.47 |
Small plane crashes into house, big
plane catches fire… pilot of the Allegiance Air plane smells smoke and safely
evacuates passengers. His reward? He’s fired… he cost the company money. Revoke their licenses NOW! |
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
LIFESTYLE and JUSTICE INDEX (13%)
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Education |
4% |
600 |
11/13/15 |
-0.5% |
As manifests |
587.66 |
584.72 |
Cowardly president of U. of Mizzou capitulates to loudmouth
protesters (because they are football players who could have cost the U.
money if they boycotted). Predictably,
this spreads to Claremont-McKenna college in California, even though they have
no football time. PC at its slimiest. |
|
||||||||||||
Equality |
4% |
600 |
11/13/15 |
nc |
As manifests |
729.51 |
729.51 |
The good?
Actress Jennifer Lawrence joins fight for Hollywood pay equity and
starts aiming her bow at execs. The
bad? Utah judge yanks baby away from
lesbian couple. |
|
||||||||||||
Health (Life Exp.) |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
-0.1% |
As manifests |
289.46 |
289.17 |
After calling for ban on bacon, docs pronounce
that the limits of healthy blood pressure should be reduced from 140 to
120. Everybody’s gonna
DIE! |
|
||||||||||||
Health (Other) |
2% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
-0.1% |
As
manifests |
287.80 |
287.51 |
Women sue birth control pillmaker
for faulty pills, demand to be compensated for the
cost of raising the consequences into adulthood. Just what the kids need – court documents
proving that their lives are a mistake. |
|
||||||||||||
Justice |
1% |
150 |
11/13/15 |
+0.1% |
As manifests |
159.90 |
160.06 |
New York calls fantasy football leagues
gambling and says “geddoutahere!” You want to gamble, play the state lottery.
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
MISCELLANEOUS and TRANSIENT INDEX (13%) |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
All transient incidents |
10% |
1000 |
11/13/15 |
nc |
11/20/15 |
1007.95 |
1007.95 |
Walmart moves Black Friday up a day. Who cares about Thanksgiving, let’s SHOP! |
|
||||||||||||
Misc. cultural foibles |
3% |
300 |
11/13/15 |
+0.2% |
11/20/15 |
309.45 |
310.07 |
Trump/Carson etc. continue to amaze and
amuse. Who needs fake reality TV as
long as these clowns are loose? |
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
SUMMARY:
The Don Jones Index for the week of November
6th through 12th was UP 39.89 points
The Don Jones Index is sponsored by
the Coalition for a New Consensus: retired Congressman and Independent
Presidential candidate Jack “Catfish” Parnell, Chairman; Brian Doohan, Administrator/Editor. The CNC denies, emphatically, allegations
that the organization, as well as any of its officers (including former
Congressman Parnell, environmentalist/America Firster Austin Tillerman and cosmetics CEO Rayna Finch) and references to
Parnell’s works, “Entropy and Renaissance” and “The Coming Kill-Off” are
fictitious or mere pawns in the web-serial “Black Helicopters” – and promise
swift, effective legal action against parties promulgating this and/or other such
slanders.
Comments, complaints, donations (especially
SUPERPAC donations) always welcome at: feedme@generisis.com or: speak@donjonesindex.com