1. The Topic of the Month for October is "Make this the Perfect Bugout Location". Please join the discussion in the TOTM forum.

This Is How They Will Get The FEMA CAMP'S Up And Running!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Gopherman, Jun 28, 2016.

  1. Gopherman

    Gopherman Sometimes I Wish I Could Go Back to Sleep Site Supporter++

    Everyone looks at us like we have 3 heads, but it is coming and then it'll be too late to say "I told you so!" and too sad!
    FEMA Contractor Predicts 'Social Unrest' Caused by 395% Food Price Spikes
    FEMA Contractor Predicts 'Social Unrest' Caused by 395% Food Price Spikes


    Written by
    June 26, 2016 // 10:00 AM EST


    The US national security industry is planning for the impact of an unprecedented global food crisis lasting as long as a decade, according to reports by a government contractor.

    The studies published by CNA Corporation in December 2015, unreported until now, describe a detailed simulation of a protracted global food crisis from 2020 to 2030.

    The simulation, titled ‘Food Chain Reaction’, was a desktop gaming exercise involving the participation of 65 officials from the US, Europe, Africa, India, Brazil, and key multilateral and intergovernmental institutions.

    The scenario for the ‘Food Chain Reaction’ simulation was created by experts brought in from the State Department, the World Bank, and agribusiness giant Cargill, along with independent specialists. CNA Corp’s Institute for Public Research, which ran the simulation, primarily provides scientific research services for the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

    Held from November 9-10 in 2015, the “game” attempted to simulate a plausible global food crisis triggered by “food price and supply swings amidst burgeoning population growth, rapid urbanization, severe weather events, and social unrest.”


    Image: Wikimedia Commons/Bill Koplitz.

    By 2024, the scenario saw global food prices spike by as much as 395 percent due to prolonged crop failures in key food basket regions, driven largely by climate change, oil price spikes, and confused responses from the international community.

    “Disruptions affected developed and developing countries alike, creating political and economic instability, and contributing to social unrest in certain areas,” the project’stechnical report states.

    The report notes that at the end of the simulation, the teams highlighted the important role of “extreme weather events” and “food insecurity” in exacerbating “instances of significant internal and external migration and social unrest.” These, in turn, greatly “contribute to conflict.”

    Although the scenario was not produced as a forecast, it was designed to provide a plausible framework to test the resilience of the national security system from the perspective of the US government, private industry, and civil society.

    CNA Corporation is a government contractor established in 1942 to provide scientific research for the US Navy and Marine Corps. Its CEO, Dr. Katherine A. W. McGrady, is a scientific analyst to the US military’s Chief of Naval Operations and the Vice Chief of Naval Operations.

    Four different organisations commissioned CNA Corp to conduct the exercise: the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Center for American Progress, giant food corporation Cargill, which controls a quarter of US grain exports, and Mars Inc., the global sweet manufacturer.

    One outcome was a panel hosted on Tuesday by the Center for American Progress on ‘The National Security implications of Climate Change and Food Security’, featuring Nancy Stetson, the US State Department’s Special Representative for Global Food Security.

    The game begins in 2020 with a reasonably healthy global economy and oil prices that have now rebounded to $75 a barrel. Food prices climb steadily due to “weather-related disruptions to agricultural production,” affecting South and Southeast Asia, Australia, and North America. Global crop production falls 1 percent short of expectations leading to decreases in stock and further modest price increases.

    Part of that optimistic scenario involves fortuitously massive Band Aid-style worldwide donations to the UN’s World Food Programme
    Things get really rough after 2023 due to serious droughts and heatwaves in China, India, Russia, and Ukraine, coinciding with oil prices that rapidly increase to above $100 a barrel.

    By 2024, heat and drought hit the European Union, Russia, and Ukraine, while subsiding elsewhere, triggering a food price spike “reaching 395 percent of long-term averages,” and a global economic slowdown.

    By 2027, these conditions begin to calm only because an economic slump has diminished demand, while high prices stimulate food production. A respite from weather-related disruptions allows food stocks to be re-built, and prices then come down gradually.

    The game closes with an optimistic scenario of food prices dropping from 395 to 141 percent of long-term averages and a recovering global economy.


    Image: Flickr/Alex Morse.

    Part of that optimistic scenario involves fortuitously massive Band Aid-style worldwide donations to the UN’s World Food Programme, which thankfully “leave the world well prepared to handle the catastrophe in areas humanitarian groups can reach.”

    Stranger things have certainly happened. This is not, though, the kind of thing one expects a crack team of handpicked food crisis planners to be hinging their hopes on.

    On the other hand, some simulations that have explored business-as-usual scenarios for a global food crisis—such as a complex model created by Anglia Ruskin University’s Global Sustainability Institute with funding from the British Foreign Office—forecast that current trends could result in a wholesale collapse of industrial civilization.

    The role of Cargill and Mars Inc. in sponsoring the exercise could explain why the project failed to address the deep-seated problems of the prevailing industrial food system. Let’s just hope that CNA Corporation’s main backer—the US government—doesn’t simply wait for a climate-driven food crisis to kick in. That would leave FEMA little choice but to invoke draconian emergency measures to maintain national order amidst hunger and anger.
    GOG, Mindgrinder, Ganado and 2 others like this.
  2. marlas1too

    marlas1too Monkey++

    our own government pays farmers NOT to grow food just think if there was truly a free market
  3. techsar

    techsar Monkey++

    It's an easy way to maintain artificially high food prices, which in turn keeps other prices elevated. Corporations gotta keep those profit margins up there!
    Gopherman and Salted Weapon like this.
  4. Ganado

    Ganado Monkey+++

    Paying farmers to not grow is about soil erosion in marginal grazing areas not about production. The whole dairy buy out 30 years ago was about over production and they found it did not work.

    It's a good idea to know what federal payments are for before making blanket statements.

    It's like saying social security is the same as welfare. both live off of government payments but the source and recipients are very different
    kellory and Gopherman like this.
  5. Salted Weapon

    Salted Weapon West Coast Monkey

    That is true, but part of these payments/payoffs also pay for destruction of already harvested fruits and vegetables.
    Each year 100's of tons of foods are destroyed because the markets can not absorb them without huge loses.
    Gopherman likes this.
  6. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    No matter if it is payment for not growing, or to destroy the fat year's crops, it's an interference with the economy in the professed name of stabilization of farm income. The arguments have gone on for far longer than I've been on the face of the earth. In any case, once the foot is in the door, it will continue, there just ain't no way to go back to a complete supply/demand agricultural economy without significant harm to someone.
    Gopherman and Salted Weapon like this.
  7. Salted Weapon

    Salted Weapon West Coast Monkey

    That actually is too bad as other then civil unrest allot of what is wrong won't be fixed.
    It falls along the lines of technology that would better the world is bought and never manufactured.
    I have seen first hand some of this stuff before it was corporate bought if only people knew what was really out there that we are
    lied about . More then most could believe !
  8. Ganado

    Ganado Monkey+++

    @Gopherman this is a really good post and it's interesting that they are running simulations food shortages using corporate farming techniques. The predictions included drought and pests.

    It really showed how vulnerable our food supply really is.
    Gopherman likes this.
  9. Gopherman

    Gopherman Sometimes I Wish I Could Go Back to Sleep Site Supporter++

    SS is something they take out of our check involuntarily and then we are supposed to get it back when we are too old to work.
    Welfare is something that they take out of our checks involuntarily and then give it to others who are too lazy to work! (with certain exceptions),
    The reason I posted this link is to show, That we are not conspiracy theorists, we are simply AWAKE!! We knew this was coming. This is how they will control the masses! With Food.
    Here let me put this mark on your hand so we know who you are and step right up into the bus!
    No matter how well they try to hide the truth, they are banking on the stupidity of the majority, they are simply hoping that they can deal with the minority of us that are aware of their BS!!
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2016
    techsar likes this.
  10. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    There are inherit problems with a true free market, as well.
    Tobacco was a much higher prices crop, than say wheat. So every farmer wanted to plant only tobacco for the most money from the land he could get.
    Problem was, you ended up with a glut of tobacco, and no wheat. Prices for tobacco fell, due to supply and demand, and farmer got less and less for the same crop, and wheat or corn were scarce and high dollar.
    So lower priced crops would get subsidized so the price was similar to what the farmer would get with tobacco, so the was no real loss from growing a crop that was also needed.
    By keeping the supply crops more balanced, the end prices were more stable as well as the supply to consumers.
    The biggest reason for subsidizes was to ensure the availability of crops for consumption, not for highest profit.
    Gopherman likes this.
  11. VisuTrac

    VisuTrac Ваша мать носит военные ботинки Site Supporter+++

    Governments, industrial conglomerates, trade associations and even you and me are making choices based on what-if scenarios we run either in our heads, on paper, or in stuffy conference rooms with experts in the fields with lots of power point presentations.

    Food, water, energy, illness, floods, droughts, tornadoes and hurricanes. Heck even the weather guys and gals play the what if game .. but they suck at it more than most. :)
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary