Watch this on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v6jsidm-food-insecurity.html
Play video
NASA warns chances of ‘city-destroying’ asteroid hitting Earth in 2032 have INCREASED yet again. Scientists currently predict that the probability of 2024 YR4 hitting Earth should collapse towards zero as more data is collected.
Now this came from the Daily Mail which is a tabloid. But CNN just released Newly discovered asteroid now has a slightly higher risk of hitting Earth. Just playing this to you as I told you before when the boogieman in caves (terrorists) don’t work on the public anymore, they will release the astroids as the next global threat.
We learned this from Carol Rosin, Wernher Von Braun’s assistant during his deathbed confession. It’s all manufactured and made up. It’s all lie. Just like Food Insecurity.
Food Insecurity
Poverty and food insecurity, exacerbated by COVID and the soaring cost of living, plague both the US and Canada. At the height of the pandemic, school closures in the US deprived many children of their vital food source: free school lunches. This, coupled with job losses and inflation, plunged many into food insecurity. The economic outlook has still not improved for these families, thanks to the high rate of inflation, which is keeping grocery and gas prices elevated.
In Canada, a cost-of-living crisis has seen demand for food banks surge, with the 2023 Hunger Count by Food Banks Canada revealing a 32% rise in year-on-year visits in 2022. Parents made up the largest share of food bank users. Like in the US, they are grappling with exorbitant housing, food, and fuel costs, compounded by childcare expenses. A record 1.9 million Canadians sought assistance from food banks in just March 2023 alone.
How has US food insecurity increased, but not poverty? The poverty line, defined by Lyndon B. Johnson in 1963, hasn’t been reassessed since. Back then, poverty was defined as anyone spending a third of their income on a “bare essentials diet.” But thanks to globalization and agricultural advances, an average American now spends only one-eighth of their income on food.
Instead, housing and childcare are the biggest budget busters. An American renter making $30,000 likely allocates over half their income to housing and may struggle with food insecurity. But, given the 1960s “poverty” guidelines, they need to earn nearly three times less, or $12,880, to be considered poor.
Myth: Hunger is not a problem in the United States Truth: Nearly one in eight people across the nation experience food insecurity, and the number continues to grow during the coronavirus pandemic. Feeding America, the largest domestic hunger-relief organization, estimates more than 42 million people may experience food insecurity this year, including 13 million children.
Food insecurity refers to the lack of access to enough food and the limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate foods for a healthy, active lifestyle, as defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. “A lot of people don’t like to think that people actually do go hungry … The misconception that it doesn’t exist in America is incorrect,” said Lance Whitney, director of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program outreach for the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance.
Myth: Food insecurity only impacts certain groups, like people experiencing homelessness. Truth: Food insecurity does not discriminate. One common misconception Tami Kuhns, executive director of the Community Services Clearinghouse in Fort Smith, hears is food insecurity only impacts those who are experiencing homelessness or unemployment. “There’s a lot of people that work every day to make ends meet. They have to choose between paying their electric bill or buying their medicine, especially the elderly and the disabled,” Kuhns said.
According to the Economic Research Service (ERS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), food insecurity is defined as “the limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods, or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways.”[1] This may include “reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet,” but does not necessarily include reduced food intake.[2] Food insecurity considers circumstances over the past year (or sometimes the past month). In contrast, food secure households are said to have “consistent access to enough food for active, healthy lives for all household members at all times during the year.”[3]
Very low food security—a more severe category of food insecurity—is represented by “multiple indications of disrupted eating patterns and reduced intake.”[4]
Food insufficiency is a simpler measure of whether or not there was enough to eat. Of course, there is overlap between the two measures, and individuals who suffer from food insufficiency are likely to also be considered to have very low food security.
To measure food insecurity, the USDA has conducted an annual survey since 1995 in partnership with the Census Bureau (the Current Population Survey Food Security Supplement, CPS-FSS) of 40,000 nationally representative households. This survey assesses households’ abilities to meet their food needs, including how often they may not have had enough food or any food for some period of time in the prior year. The survey on food insecurity asks 10 questions of all households plus an additional 8 questions for households with children. The questions assess the severity and frequency of any lack of access to food or decrease in the quality or variety of foods eaten. Respondents are also asked about behaviors that might be affected by food insecurity, such as reducing portion size, feeling worried or hungry, or losing weight. Respondents are found to be food insecure or have very low food security if enough of their answers are affirmative, with varying thresholds for households with and without children.[5]
Food insufficiency, along with insecurity, over the past year or in a 30-day period is also assessed by the questions asked in the CPS-FSS. To more closely monitor food insufficiency, since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic the Census has conducted a bi-weekly Household Pulse Survey, which includes a single, straightforward question regarding whether and how often households did not have enough to eat over the past week, or in later months, the past two weeks. This shorter look-back period is intended to assess more rapid changes. Respondents are asked to choose between the following categories to describe their current household food situation over the past week (or, in later months, past two weeks): “Enough of the types of food wanted,” “Enough food, but not always the types wanted,” “Sometimes not enough to eat,” or “Often not enough to eat.” Individuals selecting sometimes or often not enough to eat are typically considered to not have sufficient food and may closely align with those considered to have very low food security. Those who respond that they have “enough food, but not always the types wanted” would more closely align with the broader definition of food insecurity.
Both surveys also collect some information regarding household demographics and socio-economic conditions, such as race, age, employment status, income, education, housing, and health status. The demographic and socio-economic household data collected by the CPS-FSS are more robust because they are collected along with the more in-depth census survey and ask more detailed questions, particularly with regard to the respondents’ employment status.
There are, since 2006, no longer official metrics on hunger specifically (in contrast to food insecurity or insufficiency), primarily because it is an “individual-level physiological condition” that may or may not be related to food insecurity; further, because it is a subjective feeling, interpreted differently by different people, it is much more difficult to measure in a meaningful way.[6]
Food insecurity is also gauged, unofficially, by various organizations working every day to provide food to fellow Americans. One of the largest such organizations is Feeding America, a nationwide network of food banks. Feeding America has been publishing data on food insecurity by county for the past decade, estimated by surveying households about their access to and consumption of food and using correlated factors, including poverty, unemployment, homeownership, and disability prevalence at the state level. The organization also analyzes responses to the Current Population Survey from food insecure households regarding their food budget shortfall. Last, their analysis estimates the cost of food in each county by category and the cost of an average meal by food-secure families to estimate the likelihood that a typical family in a given county can afford a healthy meal. In short, Feeding America compiles a comprehensive set of data regarding factors known to be highly correlated with food insecurity in order to estimate food insecurity in each county.
Official metrics estimate 10.5 percent of Americans (35.2 million) were food insecure in 2019, including 4.1 percent (9 million) who were considered to have very low food security and 3.7 percent who were estimated to be food insufficient. While the overall number of food-insecure Americans decreased by a statistically significant degree from 11.1 percent in 2018, the share of very low food security households remained virtually unchanged (from 4.3 percent in 2018), suggesting that whatever factors benefitted those with less severe food insecurity did not reach those struggling the most.
Households with children are more likely to be food insecure than those without, although in more than half of these households, only the adults were food insecure, because adults typically choose to ensure their children eat even if it means they go hungry.[9] Nevertheless, 5.3 million children faced food insecurity themselves, and 361,000 children suffered from very low food security in 2019.
Households with children headed by a single woman are nearly twice as likely as those headed by a single man to be food insecure, though women living alone are at virtually equal risk as men living alone. Black and Hispanic Americans are much more likely to be food insecure than White Americans.
As expected, those with lower income are more likely to be food insecure than those with higher income: More than a third of households at or below the federal poverty level (FPL) are food insecure, compared to 5.1 percent of those earning 185 percent or more of the FPL. Of course, there is nothing magical about reaching 185 percent FPL that suddenly makes food drastically more accessible; rather, this threshold is used for sorting the data because it is the eligibility threshold for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
Based on the methodology described above, Feeding America estimates 11.5 percent of Americans (37.2 million people) were food insecure in 2018 (roughly equal to the official metric that year). The average cost of a healthy meal in the United States was estimated at $3.09.
From 2020 to 2022, there have been 100 huge food processing plants in America have either caught fire or blown up. Millions and millions of chickens, ducks and turkeys were destroyed. Tucker Carlson when he was at Fox News had also briefly touched on this issue, insinuating that there might be deliberate attacks against these facilities to weaken the food systems. The actual real number of destroyed plants are 750 as the Gateway Pundit reported. But this isn’t the strangest thing about this story. No one has any data from 2023 to 2024. All of the independent researchers that were tracking this just stopped. I can’t find anything for 2023 to now. Did it all just stop? If you google food plant fire, you will see a bizarre search result of plants burned this year and in 2022, but nothing in 2023 or 2024 in the results.
Somehow, those that were independently tracking the fires have just stopped and disappeared. The fires never stopped. They continued and the numbers of plants since the year 2020 are in the thousands. It appears food insecurity is being manufactured and we don’t know by whom. And there are two years of missing information. I searched every AI and the results are minimum. It also follows a ton of fact checkers where it appears the AI is told to tell us that it’s just a conspiracy. And there are no stories about it anywhere anymore. It all just died in 2022.
Food insecurity leads to disease and ultimately communism. It’s happened before:
- The Russian Revolution (1917): World War I devastated Russia’s economy and agricultural system, leading to widespread food shortages and famine. This fueled popular discontent with the Tsarist regime, creating an opening for the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, to seize power. Their promise of “bread, land, and peace” resonated with a hungry and desperate population.
- China (20th Century): China experienced frequent famines and food shortages throughout the first half of the 20th century, exacerbated by war and internal conflict. This created fertile ground for the Chinese Communist Party, led by Mao Zedong, to gain support among the peasantry. Their promises of land reform and food security were crucial to their eventual victory in the Chinese Civil War.
- The Holodomor in Ukraine (1932-1933): While not leading to the initial rise of a communist regime (as the Soviets were already in power), this man-made famine was a direct result of Stalin’s collectivization policies. The deliberate starvation of millions of Ukrainians was used as a tool to crush resistance and consolidate communist control. It highlights how communist regimes can exploit food insecurity for political purposes.
- French Revolution (1789): While not leading to a communist regime, widespread famine and food shortages were major factors that fueled popular discontent against the French monarchy. The cry for “bread” was a central rallying point for the revolutionaries.
- Various Latin American Revolutions (20th Century): Many Latin American countries experienced significant food insecurity due to factors like land inequality, poverty, and political instability. This contributed to the rise of leftist movements and revolutions, such as in Cuba, Nicaragua, and El Salvador, where issues of food distribution and agrarian reform were central demands.
- Vietnam (20th Century): Food shortages and the disruption of agricultural production during the Vietnam War fueled social unrest and contributed to the communist victory. The Viet Cong gained support by promising land redistribution and food security to rural populations.
- Ethiopia (20th Century): Famine and drought in the 1970s, exacerbated by government policies, led to widespread suffering and contributed to the overthrow of the monarchy. A communist regime, the Derg, subsequently took power.
- North Korea (20th and 21st Centuries): Food shortages and famines have been a recurring feature of North Korea, often caused by government mismanagement and international sanctions. This has contributed to the regime’s isolation and its reliance on repressive measures to maintain control.
Political change always follows food insecurity. America is being setup for this change.
Short-Term Effects (Months to a Year):
- Increased food prices: Scarcity drives up prices, making food less affordable for many, particularly low-income households.
- Strain on food assistance programs: Demand for programs like SNAP and food banks would surge, potentially overwhelming resources and leading to rationing or reduced benefits.
- Social unrest: Protests, demonstrations, and even localized violence could erupt as people struggle to access basic necessities.
- Increased crime: Desperation may lead to a rise in theft, particularly of food and other essential goods.
- Health problems: Malnutrition and related health issues would become more prevalent, putting a strain on the healthcare system.
Mid- to Long-Term Effects (Years to Decades):
- Economic decline: Reduced productivity due to malnutrition and social unrest could lead to economic recession or depression.
- Political instability: Widespread discontent could erode trust in government, leading to political polarization, gridlock, or even regime change.
- Social fragmentation: Increased inequality and competition for resources could exacerbate social divisions and erode community cohesion.
- Migration and displacement: People may move in search of food and resources, leading to internal displacement or increased pressure on neighboring countries.
- Geopolitical implications: Food insecurity could weaken the US’s global standing and influence, potentially leading to increased international tensions.
Important Considerations:
- Severity and duration: The severity of these consequences would depend on the extent and duration of the food insecurity.
- Government response: Effective government intervention, such as providing emergency aid, stabilizing food supply chains, and addressing underlying economic issues, could mitigate some of the negative effects.
- Resilience of communities: Strong community networks and social support systems can help people cope with hardship and build resilience.
Here are some further examples of what could happen in the US, drawing parallels with countries that have faced significant food insecurity:
1. Increased Social and Political Instability:
- Egypt (2011): Rising food prices were a key trigger of the Egyptian revolution. People took to the streets demanding “bread, freedom, and social justice.” Similar protests and unrest could occur in the US if food becomes unaffordable or unavailable.
- Venezuela (2010s): Economic mismanagement and political instability led to severe food shortages, hyperinflation, and widespread social unrest. Looting, riots, and violence became commonplace. The US could see similar scenarios if food insecurity becomes severe and prolonged.
2. Rise in Crime and Social Disorder:
- Argentina (2001): During an economic crisis, food shortages and desperation led to widespread looting of supermarkets and food warehouses. Similar events could happen in the US if people are unable to access food through legal means.
- Zimbabwe (2000s): Hyperinflation and food shortages led to a breakdown of law and order, with increased crime rates and social unrest. The US could experience a similar deterioration of social order if food insecurity becomes widespread.
3. Mass Migration and Displacement:
- Syria (2011-present): Drought, conflict, and economic hardship have forced millions of Syrians to flee their homes, creating a massive refugee crisis. In the US, severe food insecurity could lead to internal migration as people seek areas with better access to food and resources.
- Irish Potato Famine (1840s): Widespread famine led to mass emigration from Ireland to other countries, including the US. Similarly, food insecurity in the US could lead to increased emigration as people seek better opportunities elsewhere.
4. Increased Government Control and Authoritarianism:
- Soviet Union (1930s): Stalin’s collectivization policies and forced famine in Ukraine were used to consolidate communist control. While unlikely to lead to outright communism in the US, severe food insecurity could lead to increased government intervention in the food system and potentially more authoritarian measures to maintain order.
- North Korea (present): The government uses food as a tool of control, with food shortages and famine used to suppress dissent. In the US, food insecurity could give the government more power to control food distribution and potentially limit individual freedoms.
5. Decline in Public Health and Well-being:
- Sub-Saharan Africa: Many countries in this region experience chronic food insecurity, leading to malnutrition, stunted growth, and increased susceptibility to disease. The US could see a similar decline in public health if food insecurity becomes widespread, with increased rates of malnutrition, chronic diseases, and mental health issues.
Important Notes:
- These are just potential examples: The specific consequences of food insecurity in the US would depend on various factors, including the severity and duration of the crisis, the government’s response, and the resilience of communities.
- The US has resources and infrastructure: The US has a more developed economy and infrastructure than many of the countries mentioned above, which could help mitigate some of the negative effects of food insecurity.
- Early intervention is crucial: Addressing the root causes of food insecurity and taking proactive steps to strengthen the food system can help prevent these scenarios from occurring.
By learning from the experiences of other countries, the US can take steps to prevent and mitigate the potential consequences of food insecurity. It’s crucial to address this issue proactively to ensure a stable and prosperous future for all.
I do believe those fires at the food processing plants were deliberate. Just like al of the airplane crashes we see daily. A few things come to mind as to the reason behind the arson. It’s obvious to me someone or some organization wants America to suffer and have a regime change. And if it is not that, then we have been under attack by a country or terror group. How the media has played this off as random is definitely top notch reporting.
But no one has been questioning the US government paying farmers to destroy their crops. This same exact phenomenon was in full swing in 2020 and 2022 but seemed to have been covered up since. Just like the fires.
It would appear as though the plan all along was to quietly start throwing a few wrenches into the supply chain at that time in order to get the ball rolling. It was easy to blame the resulting problems on “COVID,” and this continued for years.
As the four anniversary of the plandemic approached, things got increasingly more chaotic. And now we have reached a point of no return, it seems, which is why the narrative shifted from COVID to Vladimir Putin.
The timing of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is suspect because it occurred just as the consequences of several years of planned and engineered famine were really starting to become apparent. This provided cover for the media to blame Putin for even higher gas and food prices and the coming prospect of global food shortages.
For the past month, we have been told that because of the invasion and associated sanctions, natural gas is now in short supply. Natural gas, it turns out, is used to produce the fertilizer for food crops.
It is almost as if somebody wants food to become scarce so that the people become easier to control. With Putin as the new fall guy (it was COVID prior to this), the next engineered phase of the global plandemic can simply be blamed on Russia.
You may recall that I’ve reported in the past about bad weather conditions that interfered with crop yields. I warned that in the future, these losses would catch up with the supply chain and cause problems.
What we did not know at the time is that a plandemic was going to be launched to create a perfect storm type of situation in which the dominoes would begin to fall more quickly and more severely, creating confusion as to the cause.
This is how the powers that be are keeping all eyes off of themselves. They launch chaos event after chaos event while quietly knocking over the dominoes on purpose in the background undetected.
Periodically I post updates here about how more and more government money thrown at so-called “anti-poverty” programs never seems to reduce measured poverty even by a little. I call this phenomenon the “poverty scam.” The persistent high rate of supposed “poverty” — in the face of well over a trillion dollars of annual spending supposedly intended to cure it — is then repeatedly used to sucker the voters and the Congress into another round of increases in the spending, none of which will ever reduce poverty as measured. My latest post on this subject was on September 16, occasioned by the issuance from the Census Bureau of its “poverty” statistics for 2022. (That latest issuance of poverty statistics showed a large uptick in measured poverty despite an approximately 8% increase in the spending supposed to cure it.). For dozens of more posts on this subject, go to the Poverty tag in the Archive section.
And yet, among the categories of federal statistics that are cynically crafted to deceive and manipulate the public to support advocacy for growth of programs, there is a category that is even worse than “poverty,” and that is the category of “food insecurity.” The “food insecurity” statistics do not come from the Census Bureau, but rather from another agency, the Department of Agriculture. Those are the people who administer the various federal food programs, like the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (“SNAP”, aka food stamps), the Women, Infants and Children Program (“WIC”), and others. At the DOA, they have taken the art of creating fake statistics that can never improve no matter how much is spent to a whole new level.
Just the News has the scoop in a story dated October 26: “Bidenomics Boomerang: Hunger explodes on Joe’s watch as 10 million more fall into food insecurity.” Excerpt:
The number of Americans suffering from hunger and food insecurity exploded by more than 10 million under President Joe Biden, according to a U.S. Agriculture Department report this week that provided fresh evidence of inflation‘s impact of a basic staple of life. The report found 44.2 million Americans were living in food-insecure households in 2022, compared to 33.8 million the year before. “From 2021 to 2022, there were statistically significant increases in food insecurity and very low food security for nearly all subgroups of households described in this report,” USDA [sic] reported Wednesday.
More than 10 million households, and a more than 30% increase in the number of households, represents quite a huge one-year jump in this measure of “food insecurity.” JTN mentions inflation as a contributing factor, and likely that has something to do with the increase. But what is this statistic actually measuring? JTN takes the opportunity to bash Biden about hunger supposedly exploding on his watch. But does “food insecurity” really have anything to do with hunger?
Probably your first instinct will be to infer that for “food insecurity” to increase so much there must at least have been some big decrease in the government benefits intended to address the issue. Boy would that be wrong. In fact, the first two years of Biden saw an incredible explosion of spending on the programs intended to cure this affliction. Here are the data from the Department of Agriculture for the SNAP program number of beneficiaries and spending from 2016 (last year of the Obama administration) through 2022 (most recent year of data):
See picture 1
As you can see, during the Trump years (2017-2020) both the number of participants and spending went down substantially up to 2019, before rebounding in the pandemic year of 2020. Then, during the two Biden years of 2021 and 2022, the number of beneficiaries further increased (by about 5%) despite the fading of the pandemic and the low unemployment rate; and meanwhile the spending skyrocketed, from about $79 billion in 2020 to almost $120 billion in 2022 — an increase of over 50%.
And here we have the true scandal of the federal food programs and the supposed “food insecurity” measurement. How is it even possible for programs supposedly designed to address a problem to fail so completely? During years when spending designed to reduce food insecurity increased by more than 50%, the number of people deemed to be in food insecurity not only did not decrease, but increased by over 30%.
I think that the answer to the question is that the “food insecurity” statistic was cynically created from the beginning to be impervious to decrease no matter how much gets spent on food assistance. Despite ubiquitous references and claims that the “food insecurity” statistic has something to do with hunger (and even JTN falls for this in the quote above), in fact “food insecurity” has nothing explicit to do with hunger, and the questions in the questionnaire mention nothing about hunger. Instead, the measure of food insecurity, devised during the Clinton Administration in the 1990s, basically comes from the answer on a survey to this question: “We worried whether our food would run out before we got money to buy more.” Was that often, sometimes, or never true for you in the last 12 months? Some of the people who respond affirmatively to that may well have been hungry at some time during the period in question, but you have no way to determine how many, if any.
Somehow the number of people who give an affirmative answer to that question (44.2 million in 2022 according to the latest report) bears a remarkable resemblance to the number of beneficiaries of the food stamp program (41.2 million in 2022 according to the DOA data in the chart). While there is no way to know that they are the exact same people, one might very reasonably look at the two numbers and infer that the large majority of the recipients of food stamps answer yes to the food insecurity survey question. After all, the design of the food stamp program is that the beneficiaries get a monthly allocation that they must make last to the end of the month. Of course many of them spend the allocation early and run low at the end of the month. The incredible thing is that even with a near 50% increase in the monthly benefit level during the Biden years, the percentage of people who spend the money early does not go down, but rather up.
You would think that the disaster of seeing “food insecurity” go up by 30% despite a $40 billion jump in spending would bring loud demands from the public, or at least the Congress, for firing of the responsible bureaucrats and restructuring of the program to something that is effective. But that’s not how this works. In the great bureaucratic tradition, the failure of the big spending increase to ameliorate the problem will be used by the agency to demand another round of increases in spending and staff. This time, they will argue, the increase in spending will work. The way to succeed in your main goal — which is growing your budget and staff — is to fail, and the more spectacularly the better.
What we can expect is more chaos. All of the food shortages will catch up to us. Our reserves are being used now. Trump’s tariffs on America for foreign goods will make things even worse.
Within a few short years or sooner, we will be desperate for food and other necessities and it sets Trump up perfect to do whatever it is he has planned.
source