Wednesday, March 26, 2008

US Government's Humanitarian Relief Agency Cutting Back

TweetThis
Another in a series of articles about the real impact of agflation and the coming (arrived?) food crisis globally- the dollar amounts in this article are a pittance compared to how much a few warships, or jets cost but remember, war first - food second. (Entire budget here is $1.2 Billion) This is from earlier this month and I missed it...

Lennon: All We are Saying... is Give Food a Chance....

Now, I do wonder when does the government begin helping poor Americans? Oh yes that's right - thats an entitlement (darn food stamps, only for lazy people) and a Democratic initiative - so there is no way we can pass that because the Democrats would get credit it. Not a problem. More Humvees please!
  • The U.S. government's humanitarian relief agency will significantly scale back emergency food aid to some of the world's poorest countries this year because of soaring global food prices, and the U.S. Agency for International Development is drafting plans to reduce the number of recipient nations, the amount of food provided to them, or both, officials at the agency said.
  • USAID officials said that a 41 percent surge in prices for wheat, corn, rice and other cereals over the past six months (remember inflation even included food and energy is somehow only 4% by OFFICIAL government statistics) has generated a $120 million budget shortfall that will force the agency to reduce emergency operations. That deficit is projected to rise to $200 million by year's end.
  • "We're in the process now of going country by country and analyzing the commodity price increase on each country," said Jeff Borns, director of USAID's Food for Peace, the organization's food aid arm. "Then we're going to have to prioritize."
  • The reductions, international relief agencies say, will seriously complicate already strained efforts to combat global hunger, particularly in Africa, Central Asia and Latin America. Poor countries in those regions are struggling to cope with record food price surges, which have made it difficult for aid groups to sustain their operations in some countries.
  • The U.N. program is confronting similar price pressures. It announced this month that it was facing a $505 million shortfall due to soaring food and fuel costs, and would cut distribution if it did not receive new funds.
  • Meanwhile, need is increasing. Afghanistan, for instance, recently put in an emergency request for $77 million to cope with skyrocketing prices that have put key staples out of reach for more and more Afghans.
  • "Look at what's happened to wheat prices alone -- they shot up 25 percent in one day last week," said Josette Sheeran, executive director of the World Food Program. "This is really the first emergency we've faced without a drought, war, natural disaster. We will have to cut the amount of people being served or the amount of food being served if we do not get more funds."
  • Groups that work with USAID, several of which have been informed of the shortfall over the past two weeks, are alarmed. Emergency aid is earmarked only for countries in desperate need as a result of natural disasters, civil strife or other humanitarian crises. Although the United States has proportionally provided less of the world's food aid in recent years, it still provides about half the global total in efforts to relieve hunger among more than 800 million people.
  • Frank Orzechowski, an adviser for Catholic Relief Services, said his organization has calculated that U.S. food aid would drop from 2.6 million tons last year to about 2.2 million this year. "That is going to be a pretty big hit for the people who can afford it the least," he said.
  • The biggest concern is that there are going to be more people being pushed into food insecurity in poor countries because they don't have the purchasing power to cover higher costs, and we will be less rather than more prepared to cope with that. Higher commodity prices is not a situation that the U.S. is to blame for, but we are going to need to see it step up now and decide to make a greater contribution anyway."
More liquidity injections please, Ben. We need them - hedge fund managers need the cash infusions, after all we can't have deleveraging from 30:1 level to 20:1 - please send more paper money into the system so hedge fund managers can feed their families. We're now hearing the first signs of anguish in the financial community - bankers wives forced to cut back on spending $50K on window valences. The horror - hell hath no fury like an apartment decorated for under $300K - I don't know how they will be able to show their face at the next cocktail party. Please cut to help these poor wives out. More... more... more. Print. Print. Print. Inflation is only 4% in one government agency while 41% (in half a year) in another - keep the obfuscation going... the sheep remain confused and won't understand what happened for maybe 10+ years from now. Oops, I remember now - by lower rates by 75 basis points instead of 100 points and inserting some "strong language" about inflation in your last statement you ARE fighting inflation. CNBC told me that so it must be. My bad! Carry on the "fight". And please tell us how hard you are fighting it on the next liquidity injection as well, sometimes I forget in my lather....

8 comments:

shaxmatist said...

$$More... more... more. Print. Print. Print.$$

You make it sound like the Fed is somehow responsible for food shortages. The Fed can do nothing about it.

We have too many stomachs in the world, thats the real problem.

Every year population increases by 70 million people, thats like having a new country the size of France ever year eating food.

There is nothing Fed can do about this, the solution is to reduce population.

TraderMark said...

More paper money chasing fixed amount of assets is on 1 agency.

rampant speculation with said paper money, with easy credit, is on 1 agency.

The underlying supply/demand issue is a problem in and of itself. We are helping to exaggerate it with ethanol boondoggle (legislature) and easy money flooded into the systems (central banks)

Its not the only cause, nor do I imply that. But inflation is caused by what? more money supply. Generated by whom? Those with the printing presses.

TraderMark said...

check out M3 here

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data

I have an entry in the far right margin about M3, and how it conveniently disappeared about 2-3 years ago. Look at its action since...

Funny how our food inflation really started when we pushed into ethanol and M3 took off like a rocket. I dont recall having these problems in 2003/2004 - and I believe 70M new people were born every year in those years as well. Correct?

It's all connected.

shaxmatist said...

$$I dont recall having these problems in 2003/2004 - and I believe 70M new people were born every year in those years as well. Correct?$$

Grain stockpiles have been falling for 10 years. Acres of top soil farmland have been declining for decades. It's not a new problem. It was just under the radar of the general public.

The Fed can do nothing about it. It's a popular myth on Wall Street that Volcker made the commodity prices go down in 1980's by adopting 20% interest rates. Absolute nonsense. Commodity prices went down in the 80's because a flood of new oil supply was ready to come from OPEC, a flood of copper out of Chile, and agricultural nutrients were in abundance.

Today we have a flood of crap mortgage debt and crap government debt, but that's all. Shortages of resources are here to stay, regardless of what the Fed does.

geckojb said...

Do you follow RBN? Seems like a company you would follow. It's been on my radar for the past 6 months and have not owned it yet. Stock is down -20% this morning and all the poor company did was beat earnings and revenue estimates. Guidance was raised but maybe not as much as "they" were expecting.

ANy thoughts?

TraderMark said...

shax, we will agree to disagree

But let me say, I do not think if Fed increased rates to 6% inflation would go away. Thats not my point. You actually made my point quite well

We've had 70M new people every year for a decade
We've had grain stockpiles falling for a decade
The dollar has been falling for much of the past decade

All these things have been happening for a long time. Then suddenly out of the blue when did inflation ramp up? When M3 exploded. Coincidence? I don't believe so. Oil didn't explode higher in 2003. Despite all the same factors - we can't blame China or India blah blah - those companies had high growth rates in 2004 just as they did in 2006. So it is easy to simply say "all this is because of China". It's not.

So I agree there are structural imbalances - in fact I write about them daily and invest based on them. And unlike the past when the Fed raising rates worked much better because the globe was much more US centric. I've written about that since last summer - the Fed is in a rock and a hard place situation. But they are THROWING gasoline onto the fire. Making the problem even more exaggerated. I don't know how any reasonable person can look at M3, and say there is no connection with the large increases in inflation we have seen in the past 2-3 years. It is not all the dollar. It is not all Chindia. It is not all anything. IT is all these things. But to bail out NYC we are inflating at a mad pace. We are now approaching a pace where for every 5 dollars in circulation we are creating 1 new one... every year. That is madness.

TraderMark said...

Sorry, never heard of RBN.

shaxmatist said...

$$All these things have been happening for a long time. Then suddenly out of the blue when did inflation ramp up? When M3 exploded. Coincidence? I don't believe so.$$

M3 was growing at 10-14% between 1998-2002: http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/m3b_long_term.png

According to your theory, commodities should have gone parabolic. Yet Oil was at $20 in 2002, copper 50 cents, etc...

Grains went ballistic after the corn ethanol subsidies came in and we doubled the number of ethanol plants (late 2006).

Oil price went out of control when OPEC ran out of spare capacity (~2004). The real question is why was it so cheap to begin with... $20 a barrel is 4 cents per cup. Bottled spring water sells for what, $1/cup?

Post a Comment

Disclaimer: The opinions listed on this blog are for educational purpose only. You should do your own research before making any decisions.
This blog, its affiliates, partners or authors are not responsible or liable for any misstatements and/or losses you might sustain from the content provided.


Site by codeeo
Original WP Premium theme by WP Remix