"The fact that per capita food production had been increasing even before the green revolution is relevant to discussions on the amount of food available per person"
Only if it can be transported, Tim. There were lots of problem with that, considering that the countries with the largest problems also didn't, and still don't, have much in the way of infrastructure. This is so typical of most of your arguments. You take one statistic, in this case per capita food consumption, ignore all of the relevant factors, in this case distribution, and pronounce it not a problem.
"Remember he was predicting such famine in just a few years, not a couple of decades later."
Tim, at the time, most of the third world had a doubling time approaching ten years. If food supplies are a problem, with numbers that like, it doesn't take much time before it is a really big problem.
You have funny attitudes. A rational person would take such information and say "hmm, this could be a problem. How do we make sure it doesn't become one?". Which is what happened. You seem to take the stance that it isn't absolutely certain, we should wait until it is a crisis. And then wait until the market takes care of it... |
