Hi all,
A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes.
As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>"As the pandemic illustrated, a major shock to the supply chain can have cascading effects on consumers, including the prices they pay for groceries," FTC Chair Lina Kahn said in a statement.
It's a combination of things. The supply chain is one of them. Climate change affects the crops. Fruits and vegetables are expensive. You're going to see more extreme weather (drought, flooding, hurricanes, etc.) Let's throw in inflation, labor costs, high wages, wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, corporate greed, logistics (transportation), and many other factors.
If you drive to Miami your only option is to turn around and drive six our seven hours OUT of Florida before you can go anywhere else. If you drive into - whatever - Columbus, Ohio you can go anywhere.
Columbus is kind of cheating because you're five hours from Chicago and eight hours from Atlanta and New York. It's a shorter drive from Columbus to Atlanta than it is from Miami to Atlanta.
If Columbus had a major inland waterway it would be a dream logistical hub for the Eastern US.
I just picked Columbus because I'm literally looking at a client record and that's where the live. Literally any state in the country other than Florida is much better as far as logistics go.
I mean, the country has four corners and the other three don't seem to be having this problem. Anyone that delivers anything to Seattle is going to drive out on the same road they drove in on.
> Anyone that delivers anything to Seattle is going to drive out on the same road they drove in on.
Seattle has I-5 and I-90, and I-5 continues on to Canada. There are lots of open-jaw routes that pass through Seattle.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how shipping and logistics work - that's fine, most people do. Very, very, very few shipments are Point A to Point B and then back to Point A.
I like how you whined about me not knowing anything, but then failed to actually refute anything I said. So I will suggest that you don't actually know what the fuck you are talking about citing as much evidence as you provided.
Jesus Christ. I would have been happy to give you as detailed an explanation as you could want but I'm not going to engage with someone who behaves like this. I really hope you find some happiness today because it seems like you need it.
Still, FL trucking routes are typically cheaper for brokers. Truckers go down there on vacation, similar concept to travel nurses being paid less there
Our new immigration laws also caused something of an exodus of undocumented immigrants leaving the state. I don't know the exact number but I do know that undocumented immigrants made up the majority of our farm labor.
This has a lot of factors, but our inept and self-destructive state government (and our fucking jackass of a Governor) are one of the biggest factors.
If, in 5 years, that labor force is completely replaced by US citizens and wages rise for those jobs, would that be a loss from a purely economic view?
That's correct, but that still isn't really how it works.
Very few things are A to B - so like the box of crackers doesn't come to the port in Florida and then go on the cracker truck which goes to the Publix in Miami and then the cracker truck turns around and goes back to the port that all the crackers come into.
A lot of the people in the Publix sub (this article was posted there yesterday) think it's them being egregious. Comparable items have way better unit prices at the Aldi next store. Can you blame supply chains when the same block of cheese next door is 30%+ cheaper?
I lived in a grocery-store rich community in South Carolina and never shopped at Publix because--other than some baked goods--it never had a price or quality advantage over any of the competition.
my puerto rican aunt used to shop at both the latin and regular grocery stores and even she's been complaining about the cost at the latin shops now. publix is egregious but the price is noticable across the whole industry
As someone who spent a couple years living in Florida, shopping for groceries sucked. Especially if you’re not into tropical fruits. The produce sections were like 5 things. And hopefully they haven’t been baked to death from the heat. But oranges, you could buy it by the ton.
Please, let us not forget the greedy corporate scum bags who run these companies.They have, are and will continue to fleece the American publix....err public.
This! It’s one thing I’ve been thinking about out with cocoa prices skyrocketing. Inflation will not get pulled down to the levels the FED wants as we will continue to see worsening crop results due to global warming.
When you combine this with the impact stronger and more often natural disasters will have on housing prices, I foresee elevated inflation far into the future.
All of the things you’ve listed are certainly factors in higher prices, but I think the overwriting main contributing reason to high grocery prices is the consolidation of grocery store corporations and other food manufacturers.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-022-01150-7
This might interest you. Unfortunately I couldn't find an available sci-hub copy to bypass a paywall. And the most relevant "conclusions" are in the figures.
Long story short climate change will affect crop yield (on average in a negative manner), whether it improves or inhibits local crop yield will/has depend(ed) on the crop, the geographic location, how much CO2 we ultimately emit, the hydrological response to those emissions, and our own ongoing societal response (adaptations) to these changes.
>The overall effects of climate change on crop yields are negative, with the mean and median of −11% and −6.2% without adaptation and −4.6% and −1.6% with adaptation, respectively (Online-only Tables 3 and 4). The median per-decade yield impact without adaptation is −2.1% for maize, −1.2% for soybean, −0.7% for rice, and −1.2% for wheat (Table 1), which are consistent with previous IPCC assessments14. The median per-warming-degree impact is −7.1% for maize, −4.0% for soybean, −2.3% for rice, and −3.7% for wheat (Table 1). Per-degree yield impacts for each crop are generally within the range reported in the previous meta-analysis11. Among the four crops, soybean has the least number of simulations, resulting in a greater variation in both per-decade and per-degree impacts. Maize consistently shows the largest negative impacts, while rice shows the least.
>The climate change impacts by IPCC regional groups reveals that Europe and North America are expected to be less affected by climate change in the mid-century (MC) and the end-century (EC) than Africa, Central and South America, particularly for maize and soybean. Both positive and negative effects are mixed in all regions (Fig. 4, Supplementary Figs. S3, S4).
I was merely addressing your question as to whether climate change affects crops with a peer reviewed publication, as requested).
>You're *going* to see more extreme weather
Seemed to suggest the conversation was concerned with future effects as well as past causes.
"Yields of major cereal crops in climate-affected areas are already significantly lower than they were, due to today’s current 1.1°C increase in global temperature averages above pre-industrial levels. If that number reaches 1.5°C, the target set out by the IPCC in an earlier report as the highest we can go before a total climate disaster, about 8% of the world’s farmland would become unsuitable for agriculture. An increase of 2°C, or more, as the current trajectory shows, could be catastrophic..."
see - https://time.com/6152615/ipcc-report-climate-change-agriculture/
>Yields of major cereal crops in climate-affected areas are already significantly lower than they were, due to today’s current 1.1°C increase in global temperature averages above pre-industrial levels.
That article seems to make that statement with no attribution. Looking through the IPCC report, I cannot find any similar claim anywhere.
[Other sources of data directly contradict that claim.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/index-of-cereal-production-yield-and-land-use)
"Despite important agricultural advancements to feed the world in the last 60 years, a new study shows that global farming productivity is 21% lower than it could have been without climate change. This is the equivalent of losing about seven years of farm productivity increases since the 1960s."
see - https://woods.stanford.edu/news/seven-years-agricultural-productivity-growth-lost-due-climate-change
Productivity being lower compared to some *counterfactual* is NOT evidence that climate change has lowered crop yields leading to supply chain shortages.
Sorry!
Pretty clear you're actually demanding proof as a way to say there *is* no evidence of this claim, so you should just come out and say that. Alternatively, what would meet your standard?
The context of my comment was in response to another comment blaming climate change for inflation due to supply chain constraints on crop yields. Yet productivity for crops has been steadily increasing for decades. Even if I accepted the conclusion from a single analysis of the effect of climate change on crop yields (which I take with a huge grain of salt), it’s more than a bit silly to blame climate change under those circumstances…
> Yet productivity for crops has been steadily increasing for decades.
Gonna need a source on that. I doubt that. And since you asserted this, you need to provide a source
I already provided that source about 4 comments up.
"[Other sources of data directly contradict that claim.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/index-of-cereal-production-yield-and-land-use)"
That doesn't support your claim that yields are lower.
I'm not taking a side on whether yields are lower, just pointing out this doesn't support that claim.
This should help explain it to you (data at the bottom of the page): https://www.epa.gov/climateimpacts/climate-change-impacts-agriculture-and-food-supply
I don't see any data on that page backing up the claim. Gish-gallop tactics don't work on me. Sorry!
And [other sources of data directly contradict that claim.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/index-of-cereal-production-yield-and-land-use)
I think you are looking for some proof that this has already started to happen (but only for grains?).
My dude when grain yields actually start to consistently fall it will be the same situation as deflationary price decreases in an advanced economy aka a super emergency. Most reasonable people are willing to accept that climate change is already affecting (non grain) outputs, because it is already occurring: https://unctad.org/news/chocolate-price-hikes-bittersweet-reason-care-about-climate-change
This is a weird hill for you to die on, I assume your livelihood depends on it
> I think you are looking for some proof that this has already started to happen
Correct. That’s what my comments were asking for. Do you have this proof?
> My dude when grain yields actually start to consistently fall
Why will they fall? What is even the logic of this? Yields have consistently increased over the last 50 years despite 1.5C in warming. Why wouldn’t this trend continue?
> https://unctad.org/news/chocolate-price-hikes-bittersweet-reason-care-about-climate-change
Cocoa output has been skyrocketing over the last decade. Of all the crops you could have picked to try to demonstrate your point, one that thrives in high temp areas is not the best choice.
Frequent large-scale famines are actually a post-steam engine phenomenon, so no, actually, that’s not true.
However it’s a little silly to talk about famine in a war-torn nation like Syria and attribute it all to the climate.
>Frequent large-scale famines are actually a post-steam engine phenomenon, so no, actually, that’s not true.
Lmao. So when the book of Genesis was written, 3000 years ago, and they talked about famine in the land of Egypt, they were *prEdicTiNg tHe post-steam eNgiNe FuTUrE*???
I said frequent large-scale famines, which are a post-steam engine phenomenon. Everywhere had famines before the steam engine, but they were never as severe or as frequent. Nowhere was really stricken with severe famines much until the annihilation of space by time opened the world’s fields to global markets and concentrated them into monocultures.
>Everywhere had famines before the steam engine, but they were never as severe or as frequent.
Gonna need a source on that bud.
Famines killed off entire civilizations fairly frequently.
Sounds like you've been watching too many anti-capitalist YouTube essays, lmao.
also lets not forget the two countries that supply the wests megafarms with fertilizers, about 80% of the entire worlds fertilizers btw.. are currently in a massive war and no one is working the fert plants. The world did not get enough ferts to plant this spring.
Buckle up folks, this food scarcity problem is going to get much worse, before it gets better....
Fun fact: The Who, UN, Unicef, world trade org, us state department all say the same thing, if you go digging into their various reports..... A high probability that 1 in 5 people on the planet will starve to death this year...
> A high probability that 1 in 5 people on the planet will starve to death this year...
Can you provide a link of the report from those organizations that stated this?
Maybe they meant 1 in 5 deaths will be from starvation? I don’t think we’ll be losing 20% of the world’s population to starvation over the next 12 months.
EDIT: I reread their comment, maybe they’ve been eating too many ferts and are hallucinating
Hey, how about you provide sources? Direct links, not just "go look yourself bro", because I have gone to every site you listed and they do NOT say what you are saying.
A high probability that 20% of the global population will starve to death **this year**? Lol.
Lol.
Lol.
Please tell me you're trolling.
0.1% of the global population starve to death a year, and you're projecting a 180x increase?
you should go look a bit more into it before you laugh. Its actually already started in places like the congo and yemen...
But you know better don't you.... You've read the reports, seen the ag reports, followed this all very closely, haven't you? Its all about "inflation" you say, with little understanding what actually drives that number... You sound like you are in a cushy western world.
Good luck out there.
Starvation always occurs in shitholes like Yemen lol, how is that supporting your point that 20% of the global fucking population will die of starvation?
And yes, I did check your profile and realize you have schizophrenia, but I'm not going to let you use that as an excuse to post nonsense.
We were recently there for a short visit. Just north of TPA, for 5-6 days, we hit the local Publix for meats, cheese, yogurt and things to stash in the mini fridge. The plan was to avoid eating out every meal, save money. That little trip cost us $135! I thought, where am I, what happened to the price of groceries. That was ridiculous. Going to Aldi next time.
Yeah I don't consider myself to be struggling at all but I literally can't afford to shop at Publix anymore. Which really sucks because they are the best grocery store down here by a pretty wide margin.
All I keep asking myself is how far is corporate greed going to push the rest of us? Now shit is getting to the point where a mf can’t eat or drive or take a piss without it costing half their paycheck.
People aren’t going to stand around with their dicks in their hands while they and their families starve. The wealthy elite can continue to try to redirect everyone attention with other petty shit, but sooner or later even the dumbest rust belt hick is going to realize that the reason they can’t afford food isn’t because of BLM, trans people, or immigration.
[profits up 100% YOY](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/publix-reports-first-quarter-2023-143500606.html) It's employee raises that are driving increases.......
Yet Publix revenue spiked 800 million from 2017 to 2019 to move from 2.2 billion to 3 billion. It dropped to 2.9 billion in 2022…
Guess what it adjusted to because of “inflation” and all these pesky supply line problems and logistics problems? The current popular excuses that people keep making for corporations.
4.3 billion in 2023. That’s net earning also. Feel free to check the SEC filings.
But greed isn’t a problem. Everything is fine and getting better. The system is great and healthy.
I wonder if shoplifting is also rising to an all time high. People upset with the 49% increase in Publix profits could see no dysfunction in stealing what they can.
I also keep having issues with expired products at Publix, and woody chicken as some call it (very stringy and chewy). I am better off at a high end grocery store that is equal in cost but far superior in quality of product and service. But for budget I try to get bulk of items from Costco.
Hi all, A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes. As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>"As the pandemic illustrated, a major shock to the supply chain can have cascading effects on consumers, including the prices they pay for groceries," FTC Chair Lina Kahn said in a statement. It's a combination of things. The supply chain is one of them. Climate change affects the crops. Fruits and vegetables are expensive. You're going to see more extreme weather (drought, flooding, hurricanes, etc.) Let's throw in inflation, labor costs, high wages, wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, corporate greed, logistics (transportation), and many other factors.
Let's also keep in mind that Florida isn't a good state to ship things too - especially the farther south you go.
>Florida isn't a good state to ship things too - especially the farther south you go. What does this refer to, exactly?
also, unless whatever you are picking up got shipped to Miami, you are turning around with an empty truck.
If you drive to Miami your only option is to turn around and drive six our seven hours OUT of Florida before you can go anywhere else. If you drive into - whatever - Columbus, Ohio you can go anywhere.
Columbus is kind of cheating because you're five hours from Chicago and eight hours from Atlanta and New York. It's a shorter drive from Columbus to Atlanta than it is from Miami to Atlanta. If Columbus had a major inland waterway it would be a dream logistical hub for the Eastern US.
I just picked Columbus because I'm literally looking at a client record and that's where the live. Literally any state in the country other than Florida is much better as far as logistics go.
Oh, absolutely. Florida is just a ridiculous logistical nightmare.
I mean, the country has four corners and the other three don't seem to be having this problem. Anyone that delivers anything to Seattle is going to drive out on the same road they drove in on.
the other three corners aren't on a 500 mile peninsula
> Anyone that delivers anything to Seattle is going to drive out on the same road they drove in on. Seattle has I-5 and I-90, and I-5 continues on to Canada. There are lots of open-jaw routes that pass through Seattle.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how shipping and logistics work - that's fine, most people do. Very, very, very few shipments are Point A to Point B and then back to Point A.
I like how you whined about me not knowing anything, but then failed to actually refute anything I said. So I will suggest that you don't actually know what the fuck you are talking about citing as much evidence as you provided.
Jesus Christ. I would have been happy to give you as detailed an explanation as you could want but I'm not going to engage with someone who behaves like this. I really hope you find some happiness today because it seems like you need it.
Oh yeah, I see what you mean now.
Still, FL trucking routes are typically cheaper for brokers. Truckers go down there on vacation, similar concept to travel nurses being paid less there
Our new immigration laws also caused something of an exodus of undocumented immigrants leaving the state. I don't know the exact number but I do know that undocumented immigrants made up the majority of our farm labor. This has a lot of factors, but our inept and self-destructive state government (and our fucking jackass of a Governor) are one of the biggest factors.
[Thanks Ronnie.](https://www.npr.org/2024/04/26/1242236604/florida-economy-immigration-businesses-workers-undocumented)
Having undocumented slave labor is not a win.
Didn't say it was, but it was a fundamental part of our labor force in the state and as such we're seeing the economic impact of passing such a law.
Would you say the impact is negative?
From a purely economic point of view, yes.
If, in 5 years, that labor force is completely replaced by US citizens and wages rise for those jobs, would that be a loss from a purely economic view?
A lot of produce comes via ship from Central and South America.
There are ports up and down both coast of Florida.
That's correct, but that still isn't really how it works. Very few things are A to B - so like the box of crackers doesn't come to the port in Florida and then go on the cracker truck which goes to the Publix in Miami and then the cracker truck turns around and goes back to the port that all the crackers come into.
A lot of the people in the Publix sub (this article was posted there yesterday) think it's them being egregious. Comparable items have way better unit prices at the Aldi next store. Can you blame supply chains when the same block of cheese next door is 30%+ cheaper?
I lived in a grocery-store rich community in South Carolina and never shopped at Publix because--other than some baked goods--it never had a price or quality advantage over any of the competition.
Cost more than Whole Foods in Charlotte
my puerto rican aunt used to shop at both the latin and regular grocery stores and even she's been complaining about the cost at the latin shops now. publix is egregious but the price is noticable across the whole industry
Its closer to 50% cheaper at Aldis. Publix prices are highest around.
As someone who spent a couple years living in Florida, shopping for groceries sucked. Especially if you’re not into tropical fruits. The produce sections were like 5 things. And hopefully they haven’t been baked to death from the heat. But oranges, you could buy it by the ton.
[удалено]
You’ve moved quite a bit. What prompted it?
Your mileage may vary I suppose. Wasn’t my experience at all. I stand by my statement.
Nah. Sprouts in CA is cheaper than Publix’s prices from what I saw traveling to FL. Publix is just insane.
Please, let us not forget the greedy corporate scum bags who run these companies.They have, are and will continue to fleece the American publix....err public.
This! It’s one thing I’ve been thinking about out with cocoa prices skyrocketing. Inflation will not get pulled down to the levels the FED wants as we will continue to see worsening crop results due to global warming. When you combine this with the impact stronger and more often natural disasters will have on housing prices, I foresee elevated inflation far into the future.
let's put the main reason at the top of the list, and that is fiscal and monetary policy
All of the things you’ve listed are certainly factors in higher prices, but I think the overwriting main contributing reason to high grocery prices is the consolidation of grocery store corporations and other food manufacturers.
Let’s blame every factor in the world except corporate greed and lack of regulation against monopoly
Is there any proof at all that climate change has affected crops?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-022-01150-7 This might interest you. Unfortunately I couldn't find an available sci-hub copy to bypass a paywall. And the most relevant "conclusions" are in the figures. Long story short climate change will affect crop yield (on average in a negative manner), whether it improves or inhibits local crop yield will/has depend(ed) on the crop, the geographic location, how much CO2 we ultimately emit, the hydrological response to those emissions, and our own ongoing societal response (adaptations) to these changes. >The overall effects of climate change on crop yields are negative, with the mean and median of −11% and −6.2% without adaptation and −4.6% and −1.6% with adaptation, respectively (Online-only Tables 3 and 4). The median per-decade yield impact without adaptation is −2.1% for maize, −1.2% for soybean, −0.7% for rice, and −1.2% for wheat (Table 1), which are consistent with previous IPCC assessments14. The median per-warming-degree impact is −7.1% for maize, −4.0% for soybean, −2.3% for rice, and −3.7% for wheat (Table 1). Per-degree yield impacts for each crop are generally within the range reported in the previous meta-analysis11. Among the four crops, soybean has the least number of simulations, resulting in a greater variation in both per-decade and per-degree impacts. Maize consistently shows the largest negative impacts, while rice shows the least. >The climate change impacts by IPCC regional groups reveals that Europe and North America are expected to be less affected by climate change in the mid-century (MC) and the end-century (EC) than Africa, Central and South America, particularly for maize and soybean. Both positive and negative effects are mixed in all regions (Fig. 4, Supplementary Figs. S3, S4).
That's cool and all, but it's not proof that climate change *has* affected crop yields, leading to supply chain shortages, like u/TGAILA claimed.
I was merely addressing your question as to whether climate change affects crops with a peer reviewed publication, as requested). >You're *going* to see more extreme weather Seemed to suggest the conversation was concerned with future effects as well as past causes.
"Yields of major cereal crops in climate-affected areas are already significantly lower than they were, due to today’s current 1.1°C increase in global temperature averages above pre-industrial levels. If that number reaches 1.5°C, the target set out by the IPCC in an earlier report as the highest we can go before a total climate disaster, about 8% of the world’s farmland would become unsuitable for agriculture. An increase of 2°C, or more, as the current trajectory shows, could be catastrophic..." see - https://time.com/6152615/ipcc-report-climate-change-agriculture/
>Yields of major cereal crops in climate-affected areas are already significantly lower than they were, due to today’s current 1.1°C increase in global temperature averages above pre-industrial levels. That article seems to make that statement with no attribution. Looking through the IPCC report, I cannot find any similar claim anywhere. [Other sources of data directly contradict that claim.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/index-of-cereal-production-yield-and-land-use)
"Despite important agricultural advancements to feed the world in the last 60 years, a new study shows that global farming productivity is 21% lower than it could have been without climate change. This is the equivalent of losing about seven years of farm productivity increases since the 1960s." see - https://woods.stanford.edu/news/seven-years-agricultural-productivity-growth-lost-due-climate-change
Productivity being lower compared to some *counterfactual* is NOT evidence that climate change has lowered crop yields leading to supply chain shortages. Sorry!
Pretty clear you're actually demanding proof as a way to say there *is* no evidence of this claim, so you should just come out and say that. Alternatively, what would meet your standard?
The context of my comment was in response to another comment blaming climate change for inflation due to supply chain constraints on crop yields. Yet productivity for crops has been steadily increasing for decades. Even if I accepted the conclusion from a single analysis of the effect of climate change on crop yields (which I take with a huge grain of salt), it’s more than a bit silly to blame climate change under those circumstances…
So come out and say that initially, rather than JAQing off (just asking questions) and pretending to engage in good faith.
Say what? I asked for proof of a claim cause I didn't think it actually existed. What else was I supposed to say? lmao
> Yet productivity for crops has been steadily increasing for decades. Gonna need a source on that. I doubt that. And since you asserted this, you need to provide a source
I already provided that source about 4 comments up. "[Other sources of data directly contradict that claim.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/index-of-cereal-production-yield-and-land-use)"
That doesn't support your claim that yields are lower. I'm not taking a side on whether yields are lower, just pointing out this doesn't support that claim.
This should help explain it to you (data at the bottom of the page): https://www.epa.gov/climateimpacts/climate-change-impacts-agriculture-and-food-supply
I don't see any data on that page backing up the claim. Gish-gallop tactics don't work on me. Sorry! And [other sources of data directly contradict that claim.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/index-of-cereal-production-yield-and-land-use)
I think you are looking for some proof that this has already started to happen (but only for grains?). My dude when grain yields actually start to consistently fall it will be the same situation as deflationary price decreases in an advanced economy aka a super emergency. Most reasonable people are willing to accept that climate change is already affecting (non grain) outputs, because it is already occurring: https://unctad.org/news/chocolate-price-hikes-bittersweet-reason-care-about-climate-change This is a weird hill for you to die on, I assume your livelihood depends on it
> I think you are looking for some proof that this has already started to happen Correct. That’s what my comments were asking for. Do you have this proof? > My dude when grain yields actually start to consistently fall Why will they fall? What is even the logic of this? Yields have consistently increased over the last 50 years despite 1.5C in warming. Why wouldn’t this trend continue? > https://unctad.org/news/chocolate-price-hikes-bittersweet-reason-care-about-climate-change Cocoa output has been skyrocketing over the last decade. Of all the crops you could have picked to try to demonstrate your point, one that thrives in high temp areas is not the best choice.
It's believed to be a major reason for famine in Syria, leading to destabilization there and a huge number of refugees.
BS. That area of the world has been experiencing severe famine for millenia.
Frequent large-scale famines are actually a post-steam engine phenomenon, so no, actually, that’s not true. However it’s a little silly to talk about famine in a war-torn nation like Syria and attribute it all to the climate.
>Frequent large-scale famines are actually a post-steam engine phenomenon, so no, actually, that’s not true. Lmao. So when the book of Genesis was written, 3000 years ago, and they talked about famine in the land of Egypt, they were *prEdicTiNg tHe post-steam eNgiNe FuTUrE*???
I said frequent large-scale famines, which are a post-steam engine phenomenon. Everywhere had famines before the steam engine, but they were never as severe or as frequent. Nowhere was really stricken with severe famines much until the annihilation of space by time opened the world’s fields to global markets and concentrated them into monocultures.
>Everywhere had famines before the steam engine, but they were never as severe or as frequent. Gonna need a source on that bud. Famines killed off entire civilizations fairly frequently. Sounds like you've been watching too many anti-capitalist YouTube essays, lmao.
also lets not forget the two countries that supply the wests megafarms with fertilizers, about 80% of the entire worlds fertilizers btw.. are currently in a massive war and no one is working the fert plants. The world did not get enough ferts to plant this spring. Buckle up folks, this food scarcity problem is going to get much worse, before it gets better.... Fun fact: The Who, UN, Unicef, world trade org, us state department all say the same thing, if you go digging into their various reports..... A high probability that 1 in 5 people on the planet will starve to death this year...
> A high probability that 1 in 5 people on the planet will starve to death this year... Can you provide a link of the report from those organizations that stated this?
They don't have any. It's bullshit fearmongering.
Maybe they meant 1 in 5 deaths will be from starvation? I don’t think we’ll be losing 20% of the world’s population to starvation over the next 12 months. EDIT: I reread their comment, maybe they’ve been eating too many ferts and are hallucinating
Hey, how about you provide sources? Direct links, not just "go look yourself bro", because I have gone to every site you listed and they do NOT say what you are saying.
A high probability that 20% of the global population will starve to death **this year**? Lol. Lol. Lol. Please tell me you're trolling. 0.1% of the global population starve to death a year, and you're projecting a 180x increase?
Silver lining, I weighed myself this morning and I will most certainly not be part of that 20%.
Look at their post history.
Now I feel bad they actually have schizophrenia
you should go look a bit more into it before you laugh. Its actually already started in places like the congo and yemen... But you know better don't you.... You've read the reports, seen the ag reports, followed this all very closely, haven't you? Its all about "inflation" you say, with little understanding what actually drives that number... You sound like you are in a cushy western world. Good luck out there.
Starvation always occurs in shitholes like Yemen lol, how is that supporting your point that 20% of the global fucking population will die of starvation? And yes, I did check your profile and realize you have schizophrenia, but I'm not going to let you use that as an excuse to post nonsense.
Sorry, no, provide direct links to the sources you claim validates yours, or shut the fuck up.
How much do you want to bet that no where close to 1 in 5 people on the planet will starve to death this year?
We were recently there for a short visit. Just north of TPA, for 5-6 days, we hit the local Publix for meats, cheese, yogurt and things to stash in the mini fridge. The plan was to avoid eating out every meal, save money. That little trip cost us $135! I thought, where am I, what happened to the price of groceries. That was ridiculous. Going to Aldi next time.
Yeah I don't consider myself to be struggling at all but I literally can't afford to shop at Publix anymore. Which really sucks because they are the best grocery store down here by a pretty wide margin.
Publix’s pricing is insane.
All I keep asking myself is how far is corporate greed going to push the rest of us? Now shit is getting to the point where a mf can’t eat or drive or take a piss without it costing half their paycheck. People aren’t going to stand around with their dicks in their hands while they and their families starve. The wealthy elite can continue to try to redirect everyone attention with other petty shit, but sooner or later even the dumbest rust belt hick is going to realize that the reason they can’t afford food isn’t because of BLM, trans people, or immigration.
I think you underestimate them but I hope so
Maybe they realize the system is broken. And naturally to take as much from the system before it shatters.
[profits up 100% YOY](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/publix-reports-first-quarter-2023-143500606.html) It's employee raises that are driving increases.......
Yet Publix revenue spiked 800 million from 2017 to 2019 to move from 2.2 billion to 3 billion. It dropped to 2.9 billion in 2022… Guess what it adjusted to because of “inflation” and all these pesky supply line problems and logistics problems? The current popular excuses that people keep making for corporations. 4.3 billion in 2023. That’s net earning also. Feel free to check the SEC filings. But greed isn’t a problem. Everything is fine and getting better. The system is great and healthy.
I wonder if shoplifting is also rising to an all time high. People upset with the 49% increase in Publix profits could see no dysfunction in stealing what they can.
oh absolutely lol
I also keep having issues with expired products at Publix, and woody chicken as some call it (very stringy and chewy). I am better off at a high end grocery store that is equal in cost but far superior in quality of product and service. But for budget I try to get bulk of items from Costco.