Speaking recently at the Seeds & Chips conference, an
annual gathering of policy wonks, investors, and technology entrepreneurs
centered on innovative ways to improve the food chain, former President Barack
Obama devoted his remarks to agriculture’s role in causing climate change. Obama stated that agriculture is the
second-largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions after energy. He claimed
that these emissions are starting to adversely affect food production itself,
stating: “Our changing climate is already making it more difficult to produce
food. We’ve already seen shrinking yields and rising food prices.” Of course,
he also averred that the costs would be borne mostly by the poor, accidentally
making it clear he wasn’t talking about the billions upon billions of dollars
that Western nations have committed to spending in a futile attempt to make the
planet behave in a more reasonable manner.
And
by-the-way, global crop yields and food production have generally been
increasing, not decreasing. To the extent that there is any warming, many
believe this will be a boon to plant life. What is a greenhouse for, again?
Oddly,
Obama spent much of his time conversing with Sam Kass, who now mentors and
invests in food entrepreneurs, and who was Obama’s own senior policy adviser
for nutrition while the now ex-president was in office. Kass served up a couple
of softball questions to his former boss, engendering dialogue about topics
such as the Paris Climate Accord, and affording an opportunity for Obama to
talk about rising ocean levels and the concern the rest of the world has about
the United States’ current commitment to the agreement.
Acknowledging
that the current administration has differences with his energy policies, he
gloated, “…I think the good news is that, in part because of what we did over
the last eight years, the private sector has already made a decision that the
future is in clean energy.”
No it
hasn’t. Your policies gave them no alternative. By banning drilling, refusing
to allow pipelines to be completed or coal plants to be produced, and giving
ridiculous subsidies to “green” energy,
your administration caused dramatic change to the market’s climate.
Obama
also noted that the aforementioned Paris agreement focused almost entirely on
damage to the environment from the energy sector, leaving the role of food
production sadly unaddressed. He cited the powerful agricultural lobby in
Washington as a potential barrier to needed changes, remarking that the one
area where Democrats and Republicans have historically been in agreement is on
the agricultural committees, “because the members usually come from
agricultural states and they’re very good at joining across party lines to
protect the interests of food producers.”
Those
damn food producers!
Obama
added, “It makes for a difficult political dynamic for us being able to shape
rational policy.”
In
summation, Obama believes we have to limit our food production so that our
ability to produce food won’t be limited.
That is
“alternative rationality,” to put it kindly.
******************************************
You
know demographics are changing rapidly when the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party,
or DFL, that has already pissed off labor, is apparently willing to cast off
farmers, as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment