Feeding a Nation the kcal story

17 posts / 0 new
Last post
pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Feeding a Nation the kcal story

Arable Land and Food Production Study
United States
Total Area Acres
2,430,000,000
Poor Soil Unsuitable 350,000,000
Insufficient Rain 600,000,000
Forest Land 737,000,000
Roads 33,400,000
Houses Note 1 125,000,000
Airports Note 2 5,000,000
Vehicle Parking Note 3 2,000,000
Buildings Note 4 negligible

Available Arable Land 579,600,000
Notes:
1. According to the American Housing Authority there are
125 million houses in the United States. Estimated average size
is 1250 sq. ft. on 1/2 acre lot
2. There are 15,100 unpaved airports and 5,200 paved airports
in the United States. Estimates are 680 acres for paved, such
as LaGuardia and 100 acres for the unpaved.
3. Each registered auto occupies162 sq. ft. and the average truck
240 sq. ft. There are260 million registered autos and 133 million
trucks.
4. The number of office buildings warehouses, etc. that are occupied
only part time or not at all is impossible to estimate accurately and
the figure chosen is a conservative 40 Sq. ft. per person and the total
then less than 1 million and insignificant for this study.

Arable Land and Future Prognosis

The foregoing chart lays out the current situation regarding the U. S. ability to feed its population from indigenous sources. We may disagree about the current population but both the inability of the government to actually count it the fact is that the consumption of current food stocks inclusive of waste indicates a population closer to 450 million as opposed to the census figures of about 325 million.

Irrespective of the differences the fact is our population continues to grow at an increasing rate while land converted to food production has been in decline for nearly two decades. We have also, despite irrigation reached a limit on how much can be produced on each acre and that includes chemical enhancement, loath to those who eschew “organic foods”.
A conservative estimate of the acreage need to produce a balanced diet is approximately one acre for each additional person added to the population. That doesn’t include changes in rainfall such as the drought that hit the Midwest in the 1930s or the persistent frosts that hit Florida and Texas early in the growing season.

It is easy to say we can convert forests to arable land but if it were profitable, farmers would do it, but no, they are selling their land to developers for housing, shopping centers or giving it away to the government such as the forests recently sold by Roxanne Quimby when the state would not allow development on it.

The arable land figure is conservative because it is difficult to obtain the facts as regards usage of the land for purposes other than agriculture. Nonetheless, the figure of approximately 580 million acres would equate to the ability to feed 580 million people which by a growth rate of 0.5% would be achieved in 35 years if the population were actually 450 million now or 120 years if it is 325 million. We have never achieved a growth rate of 0.5 %, the current rate being 0.7%. That is only the availability of sufficient food to feed an individual. Their ability to purchase if they do not work and must rely on government largess is yet another issue.
Before this point is reached those only on EBT cards for food must purchaset clothing and shelter. That number is now 45 million and growing. Males and females without dependents are excluded, which is why we have so many unwed mothers who support not only their children, but the non-resident or unmarried males who father their children. Housing allowances, food banks and organizations such as Good Will and the Salvation Army provide low cost clothing and some organizations provide shelter. The growing numbers will, if not already, out-pace this private charity.

There are currently approximately 2 million people who will reach 65 next year. There are just over 4 million reaching 20 and ready to enter the workforce. Even if all the 2 million were employed, retired and needed to be replaced that would leave 2 million jobs that would have to be created. That is 166,000 jobs every month and will have to be repeated each year. No economy, can cope with such numbers, even if every machine currently in use is scrapped in exchange for manual labor. India tried it in the 1960s but its limits are quickly reached as the numbers of individuals continues to increase as the population exceeds replacement. I know, because I was working there on a project in the early 1960s where even the gravel used for the roads and in making concrete was crushed by hand. Nearby, a dam was being built with stones and mortar and employed over 140,000 workers. There were pictures of it in Engineering News Record at the time. Obviously, the work was temporary. The Pharaohs employed the same technique in building the pyramids and we are now employing it with shovel ready infrastructure.

Current events in the Middle East and much of Africa are harbingers of what is beginning to occur already in the U. S.. They are malnutrition, migration to where there is work or civil war between the haves and the have-nots. An economic system where the means of exchange accumulates is ultimately doomed to fail, particularly where government, be it dictatorship or democracy, gets to determine who gets how much of it.

Tom C
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 16 min ago
Joined: 01/03/2006 - 6:00pm
Why not? You've been feeding

Why not? You've been feeding it to AMG for years.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Tom: I fail to understand

Tom: I fail to understand your comment. Do you doubt my figures and/or do you dispute my conclusion? I agree I have been trying to get this message across on AMG for years but to date I have never gotten rebuttals, only diatribes.

Tom C
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 16 min ago
Joined: 01/03/2006 - 6:00pm
And wisecracks.

And wisecracks.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Them too.

Them too.

Ugenetoo
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 43 min ago
Joined: 08/05/2011 - 12:32pm
If your interpretation of the

If your interpretation of the K-cal situation in the US isn't any better than your understanding of Roxanne Quimby's pursuit of a National Park in the Katahdin Region, I don't think there's much to worry about.

Bruce Libby
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 01/17/2006 - 7:08pm
As has been said to you

As has been said to you numerous times ,you do not want any debate etc. because every time any is offered the provider is stupid or wrong etc..

johnw
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 26 sec ago
Joined: 03/11/2009 - 10:06am
Pmconusa ..... all that, why

Pmconusa ..... all that, why don't you just say if you can't feed them don't breed them......?Unfortunately here in the USA we have a giverment that says "go ahead breed them we'll tax others to feed them."

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
What I have submitted is fact

What I have submitted is fact. We are rapidly out eating our food supply and we are selling or giving away our most efficient food (wheat and corn) in order to buy less efficient but more labor intensive food. It is because we are producing or importing (immigration) more consumers while at the same time reducing our production. If you have any alternate facts to refute them I would appreciate your producing them. No one is adding to the food supply. In fact, if the government did not support the price and hence growing of wheat and corn, farmers would shift to more profitable crops and hence produce less kcal per acre. The consequences are that in the foreseeable future there will have to be rationing and that rationing will take the form of rising prices due to shortages (supply and demand) and those with little or no income will not be able to afford the required kcal to sustain life.

As I have said many times, you can survive this life in three ways; you can earn it, you can share with others willing to share their surplus or you can steal it. As we frown on stealing, the government either steals from those with surplus through taxes, or prints currency and doles it out to those who have none. The saying is you can't have your cake and eat it too. This is not true until you run out of flour.

The only debate is not on the facts but the timing of the conclusion unless you offer an alternative economic system. I offer one in my book, but you didn't read it or won't, because you know you will have to agree with my conclusion.

Do you deny that there are people in this country who are suffering malnutrition or going hungry? Why is this so? It is because they have escaped the government charity net and must rely on private charity which will soon not be enough.

johnw
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 26 sec ago
Joined: 03/11/2009 - 10:06am
Pmconusa......the simple

Pmconusa......the simple solution.....less people....the simple solution to a whole bunch of issues....less people......How you convince people to stop creating more people is another thing.....In this country as long as the giverment continues to offer a free lunch and demand that the rest of us take responsibility for others irresponsible actions ...nothing will change.......You breed we'll just have to feed them......of course until the Kcals run out.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Johnw: The economic system

Johnw: The economic system is already taking care of excess reproduction as you will note those who have the wherewithal are having fewer children simply because they cannot afford the expense. Naturally, the government interferes with the process by essentially paying those who cannot afford children, the unemployed, by subsidizing them. As I have said, you can have your cake and eat it too until you run out of flour. We are less than 100 years from when that will happen and current policies of our government are hastening the event.

taxfoe
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 15 min ago
Joined: 03/22/2000 - 1:01am
pmconusa: What I have

pmconusa: What I have submitted is fact.

From your OP:

We may disagree about the current population but both the inability of the government to actually count it the fact is that the consumption of current food stocks inclusive of waste indicates a population closer to 450 million as opposed to the census figures of about 325 million.

xxxx

I happen to agree with that. I have been saying for years what 2nd and 3rd generation SoCals have been telling me for years: The 12 million referred to as 'national illegal population' is actually just the SoCal number. But that's only anecdotal, right?

Well, back in the days when honest reporting of illegals was still fashionable, a preeminent LA publication reported on a study that found that out migration by U.S. citizens from the LA basin was frightening but hard to understand. After all, vacancy rates weren't changing and rents continued to climb. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm . .

Anyway, you state that you post facts but you do so without citations. I'd love to see where you found your numbers.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Taxfoe: If you agree with my

Taxfoe: If you agree with my population estimate you will have to agree to the numbers of commodity production from the Department of Agriculture which tabulates them, basically from claims by producers for subsidies and the international marketplace where the trading of commodities occurs. Nearly all agriculture crops are under a system called parity, that is, the government guarantees the going world price and if a farmer's cost of production is more than the world price, the government pays him the difference so he will continue to produce that commodity. That government is of course you and me and we are taxed, or the government borrows (prints money) in order to make these payments.

taxfoe
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 15 min ago
Joined: 03/22/2000 - 1:01am
Still no citations but I'll

Still no citations but I'll try . .

I think we once agreed on the numbers (guesses) but for two different reasons. Now I think you're saying that producers CLAIM that only an undercounted population can account for the greater production the producers CLAIM they produce in order to command bigger subsidies. If that's true, then it has to throw off the rest of your conclusions. Everything lasts longer (except maybe my money) if the food isn't actually being produced or consumed.

I was hoping you had stumbled upon some hard and fast speculative population numbers. The numbers you gave roughly approximate numbers I believe but cannot prove to be true.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Tax foe: When I lived in

Tax foe: When I lived in Iraq in the early 1960s. The government decided to take a census of the population. No one, except those required to perform essential services was allowed to leave their home and government census takers came around to each house and interviewed the occupants and counted heads. This went on for three days, during which time children were born and people died but it was probably the most accurate census ever taken.

You know how our census is taken and the people who are overlooked and uncounted totals in the millions. All we know about the population is that they need fuel to survive and fuel is provided by food. We know pretty accurately how much food is being produced because it is a saleable commodity and in its raw form easily measured from the quantities sold. From there on it gets fuzzy because not everyone consumes the same amount of calories, which can be calculated for each raw product. The Department of Agriculture compiles these statistics and has determined roughly the necessary amount of kcals each person needs to survive. I don't know how much food you waste but even if it was 25% in order to consume the remaining 75% and make allowances for the number of obese who consume more than others you will conclude there has to be far more than 325 million people in the United States.

The issue is not the exact number, and you can guess whatever you like. Each one needs so many kcals to survive and if a country cannot produce the amount necessary some people will be getting less than needed and begin suffering from malnutrition which leads to other illnesses or diseases that are life threatening and will die long before they actually starve to death. We no longer are expanding our agricultural production but we have not stopped producing mouths to feed and a lot we produce is exported and a goodly portion is used to feed livestock. We import enough kcal to feed 50 million.

In order to survive you must work to obtain the exchange in order to buy food. If you have none, the only alternative is charity from those who have more than they need. Millions of paying jobs were lost when the government removed the tariff protection on things we used to produce. If you look at the labels of your clothes and the stickers on every appliance, cell phone and any other commodity requiring human labor to produce you find it made in a foreign country. Taxes, the means by which the government is able to obtain the revenue necessary to continue the welfare state have not been keeping up with the demand for revenue because the government is loath to tax those who given them the power to unequally distribute wealth and so it resorts to borrowing, in essence printing more money each dollar of which contributes to the deflation of its value because the currency of exchange is not consumed but accumulates thereby decreasing the real value. Even our own government attests to this fact by publishing an inflation index that most recently had it costing $23.39 in todays dollars to buy what $1.00 did in 1910 which is about the time that gold began costing as much to produce as it imputed value. I describe the consequences of the this phenomenon in my book the Real Economy and posit that we should have been basing our currency on the kcal value of food and allowing its value to go to zero as it is being consumed.

It is difficult to convince people who have benefited from the economic system we employ because when it fails, those who overthrow their government keep employing the same system and have for hundreds of years. Overpopulation is and will be the ultimate cause for the human race to disappear as did the dinosaurs when they consumed all the food available and failed to leave any to reproduce the following year.

Mainelion
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 47 min ago
Joined: 08/11/2005 - 12:01am
Man I learn something new

Man I learn something new here all the time. Who knew the dinosaurs consumed all of the food and that was the reason for their demise. Things that make you go hmmmm.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
It is a theory not a proven

It is a theory not a proven fact but provides an explanation not yet challenged. The theory is based on the fact there we two types of prehistoric animals, omnivores and carnivores. Of this their cannot be any doubt because fossils of both have been identified. The omnivores fed off the land and the carnivores fed on the omnivors and were maintained in balance dependant on the food supply for both. The omnivores followed their food supply from summer to winter and multiplied beyond replacement because it is natures way to insure continuation of the species. I order for the omnivores food supply to reproduce a sufficient quantity must remain in order for it to grow to the same size or greater the following growing season. If they do not leave a certain amount behind and nature does not provide the wherewithal for it to grow, primarily water, the amount available the next time the omnivors return, some will starve. That leaves less food for the carnivors and so in addition to the reduction due to starvation, the carnivors consume the progeny required to maintain the species. After several repeat cycles there will be no more omnivors and the carnivors will have to begin eating each other. The most vulnerable are the young and hence fewer carnivors until they too eat each other to death.

The human race is on a path to repeat this process and it all stems from overpopulation. We are fast approaching that time when our appetites will no longer be sated because we have failed to increase the food supply while at the same time increasing its demand. If we had a drought, such as occurred in the 1930s when the grain crops dropped by 40%, the outcome will be catastrophic.

Log in to post comments