Meat production should be taxed to save the environment and prevent global warming, a United Nations report is recommending.
Professor Maarten Hajer of Utrecht University in the Netherlands authored the report, released by the UN’s International Research Panel (IRP), which is comprised of 34 scientists and 30 governments
“All of the harmful effects on the environment and on health needs to be priced into food products,” Hajer told The Washington Post. “I think it is extremely urgent.”
Meat, he argued, should be taxed at the wholesale level to raise the price and deter consumption. He and other members of the IRP assert that livestock creates 14.5 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions that the panel says contribute to climate change.
Taxes are needed to deter increases in meat consumption in nations like China, he said.
“We think it’s better to price meats earlier in the chain,” Hajer told The Guardian. “It’s sexier to tax it at the consumer level, but not as effective.”
“If we were all to copycat the way in which we feed ourselves in North America or Europe [with meat], the planet would be in deep trouble,” Hajer added.
Nations should discourage their citizens from eating meat, the report says.
“This report shows our current food system has to change because it’s not sustainable,” Hajer said.
Chicken and dairy consumption is expected to increase by 20 percent in the next decade, and beef and pork consumption by 14 percent over that time span, according to the report.
“Dealing with consumer choices is an extremely touchy issue, but you have to deal with it, because there will consequences,” former European Union environment commissioner Janez Potocnik told The Guardian. Potocnik is co-chairman of the IRP. “The time is coming when we will not be able to sweep it any more under the carpet.”
Rachel Premack, a columnist for The Washington Post’s Wongblog, said the UN’s report deserves serious consideration in the United States.
“It may be delicious, but the evidence is accumulating that meat, particularly red meat, is just a disaster for the environment — and not so great for human beings, either,” she wrote, asserting that agriculture consumes 80 percent of water in the US – most of that being for meat. “… For a kilogram of red meat, you need considerably more water than for plant products.”
Premack added, “Along with a tax, a meat cutback could be achieved by making plant-based diets more appealing and less expensive.”
What is your reaction? Share your thoughts in the section below:
One of the most frightening scenarios that anyone in the modern world could face, is a global food shortage. It’s one thing when just the country you live in faces a food shortage. That situation can have horrific consequences, as the citizens of Venezuela have learned recently. However, a global food crisis means that there is nowhere to run to. You can’t flee your home and become a refugee in a foreign land, and you can’t expect any other nation to send you aid.
All that’s left to do is endure for as long as you can, with whatever food you have stocked up and whatever rations the government can provide. Your absolute best case scenario involves living on a self-sufficient property, and very few people have that. And the people who are living self-sufficiently would have to live with the fear of being raided by hungry looters or an opportunistic government.
And that government by the way, may be your biggest concern during a crisis, because governments are typically only interested in their own self-preservation. The safety and prosperity of their citizens is a secondary concern. How your government reacts to the crisis could mean life or death for your family.
Unfortunately, our government is ill prepared for this kind of situation, as are most governments around the world. We know this now thanks to a study that was recently published by a FEMA contractor known as the CNA Corporation.
The study was a simulation that was conducted last November. It involved the participation of 65 government officials from countries all over the world, and was commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund, the Center for American Progress, and the Cargill corporation. It was set up like a game, with each participant leading their respective nations through a hypothetical global food crisis. The game was designed to see how these nations would interact with each other, and what kinds of solutions could be produced to solve the crisis.
The food crisis in this game lasted between the years 2020 and 2030, and was caused by a combination “of food price and supply swings amidst burgeoning population growth, rapid urbanization, severe weather events, and social unrest.” In the scenario, crop failures in key regions caused by climate change, higher fuel prices, and poor responses by the international community, eventually led to food prices rising 395%. Not surprisingly, the game found that civil unrest would be widespread during this period.
What is surprising however, is how this scenario concluded with such a happy ending, against all odds and all logic. The high food prices stimulated more food production, and as weather conditions improved, the world’s food stocks were replenished. Worldwide donations to the UN’s World Food Programme managed keep the lid on the situation until the crisis passed. This however, is probably the most outlandish case of wishful thinking on the part of government officials. There is no way such a crisis would be resolved so peacefully.
While the study admits that a food crisis of this magnitude would result in widespread civil unrest, I think they’re underestimating how bad it would be. As previous research has shown, whenever the global Food Price Index rises above 210 points, pockets of civil unrest rise up all over the world. This happened recently in 2008, and again when food prices peaked in 2011, which fueled the Arab Spring. Keep in mind that we’re still dealing with the aftermath of the Arab spring in places like Libya and Syria, where thousands have been killed in bloody revolutions and millions have been turned into refugees.
In those cases the food crisis lasted only a single year, and had ramifications that we’re still dealing. This scenario however, would likely leave the Food Price Index above 210 points for years, a situation which has never occurred in the modern world. We would be seeing civil unrest, violent revolutions, and wars on every continent for a decade.
In fact, it could even lead to World War Three. If there were worldwide crop failures, a breadbasket nation like Ukraine would become even more hotly contested between the West and Russia than it is now. That could be just the spark needed to embroil the world in a global conflict.
And let’s not forget the vast number of people who would simply starve to death in this situation. Right now there are dozens of nations where the average person has to spend 25% or more of their income on food. In China and India alone, the average person spends about a third of their income on food. So do the math. If food prices spiked 395%, or roughly four times higher than pre-crisis prices, then hundreds of millions of people around the world would not be able to feed themselves, even if they could forego every other expense including fuel, utilities, shelter, and clothing. Millions would die. Somehow I doubt that the UN’s World Food Programme will put a dent in those numbers.
Amazingly, this study made no such conclusion. The nations that participated in this game are foolish at best for thinking that they would have a handle on a global food crisis. At worst, this whole game was an exercise designed to placate the public, who are increasingly concerned with the global economy and food supply. Either way, it does not inspire much confidence in our government’s ability to deal with this apocalyptic scenario.
Joshua Krause was born and raised in the Bay Area. He is a writer and researcher focused on principles of self-sufficiency and liberty at Ready Nutrition. You can follow Joshua’s work at our Facebook page or on his personal Twitter.
Joshua’s website is Strange Danger
This information has been made available by Ready Nutrition
Well I guess all you gun owners better go out & purchase a bow, because if we can not be bothered to support each other in fighting gun control then we ARE GOING TO LOSE OUR GUNS!
I posted this petition about a month or so ago, & last time I looked, all I had was 262 signatures!!! 262; how many gun owners are there in Australia?
I advertised this petition on gun forums on Facebook, & on popular media outlets on the net, & 262 signatures is all I got. If this is any indication of how much we care about keeping our guns, then we are already lost. Oh but I forgot, SHE’LL BE RIGHT MATE!
Excerpt below come courtesy Breitbart.com.
On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.
This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.
The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Concerning? I think so.
Although the article is written with a bit of exaggeration the premise for concern is accurate. An international law enforcement presence in the United States involved the United Nations is unacceptable. We here in the US have a certain perspective on things. Let’s take FREEDOM for example. I suspect that the United Nations may look at freedom a little different from us. We certainly believe in the freedom to bear arms while they believe in gun confiscation.
And there lies the danger. They will assist in targeting violent extremism. Who determines that? Who determines what is “extreme” and what isn’t? Will the United Nations consider members of the Tea Party as extreme? How about members of the NRA? What about people that stockpile food, weapons, and medical supplies?
I don’t believe that anytime soon we are going to have UN troops or sponsored law enforcement rounding people up. It is a piece of the puzzle that will eventually lead to the disintegration of this Republic.
By the way – special thanks to JohnP for alerting me about this initiative.
You’ve no doubt heard about U.N. Peace Keeping forces…
Usually they’re deployed in third world, civil war torn regions.
Not any more…
Now, Obama has invited a “global police force” into select American cities:
Attorney General Loretta Lynch recently made an announcement at the UN that the Obama administration will be inviting a “global police force” into several American cities in order to fight “violent extremism.”
The program called the Strong Cities Network (SCN) constitutes a law enforcement initiative that is set to be implemented across the globe that claims to want to “strengthen community resilience against violent extremism.”
As Obama stated in a recent speech he delivered at the UN, “violent extremism” is not something that is exclusive to Islam, so who exactly does the president want to use this global police force against?
With the serious concerns we already have about the over reach of domestic police forces, now we need a global police force to battle “violent extremism”.
Why are we spending trillions on Homeland Security and ongoing engagement in the Middle East to fight terrorism?
Scary stuff, isn’t it?
How many of you have heard of the “Strong Cities Network”? Have any idea what it might be? It sounds like something rather benign, doesn’t it — like a supportive group of interconnected towns for the greater benefit of all? Well, let’s step away from our normalcy bias and take a look at this program and how it might possibly lead to further loss of our God-given freedoms.
As an excellent article on World Net Daily discloses, this signature program of the Obama administrative was unveiled at the United Nations at the end of last month. The implied target of the Strong Cities Network is “violent extremism”.
Just one day before the mass murder in Roseburg, Oregon, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced to world leaders at the UN that the time has come for a more globalized and comprehensive effort to combat violent extremism. She said: “Until now, we have lacked that mechanism. We haven’t had the benefit of sustained or coordinated cooperation among the growing number of cities and municipalities that are confronting this ongoing challenge. Communities have too often been left isolated and alone. But through the Strong Cities Network that we have unveiled today, we are making the first systematic effort in history to bring together cities around the world to share experiences, to pool resources and to forge partnerships in order to build local cohesion and resilience on a global scale. Today we tell every city, every town and every community that has lost the flower of its youth to a sea of hatred – you are not alone. We stand together and we stand with you.”
With New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio by Lynch’s side, the pair were careful to stress that such “a global coalition of cities seeking to combat extremism and terrorism in all of its many forms would not profile Muslims.” But as the WND article pointed out, then who do they have in mind? Shadram Hadian, a former Muslim and now a Christian Pastor, says it’s no coincidence that the project was launched at the United Nations. “So who are they going to target when they talk about violent extremism?” asked Hadian, who grew up in Iran and now travels nationwide teaching churches and law enforcement about the dangers of Shariah law. “Well, if you look at their track record, it always seems to be that your violent extremists are your Christians, your veterans and your Second Amendment advocates.” Wow! That’s a bold and courageous statement!
Yet, the lack of media coverage in the U.S., and the obvious choice of the UN to unveil this program, certainly calls into question the explicit and precise motives of this global policing initiative. As Paul McGuire, (a minister, author, and World News & End Times events expert) pointedly asks, “The question is Why? This is massive because it’s such a contradiction to the Constitution, and there was no consultation with Congress, and they did a complete end-run around everything that our Constitution stands for.”
So we have to ask ourselves… are we seeing any signs of an agenda that seeks to identify other groups (besides Islamic jihadists) as extremists? Both Hadian and McGuire suggest that the use of the term “violent extremism” is intended to “draw a moral equivalency among all religions, even though 99 percent of all religious-based violence in the world today involves Muslims killing non-Muslims.”
What concerns them (and should concern everyone of us) is the apparent attempt to 1) negate Muslim radicals with violence in the U.S. and world; 2) paint conservative, religious people as perpetrators of discriminatory violence, and 3) at the same time ignore (or at least whitewash) the fact that Christians are increasingly becoming the targets of such violence. We see any or all of these efforts in the “official” narratives of Roseburg, Oregon; Garland, Texas; Chattanooga, Tennessee; Oklahoma City; Fort Hood, Texas; and the Boston Marathon. In each of those attacks, Muslims or Muslim sympathizers were identified as the attackers, with their targets being innocent Christians, civilians or the military. And we mustn’t forget that it was black Christians who were the targets of the racist, anti-Christian Dylan Roof in Charleston, South Carolina.
So, why push the narrative that “violent extremism” covers a broad spectrum of people? According to John Whitehead, a constitutional lawyer, it serves a purpose …. global government. Now, with the Strong Cities Network, U.S. cities will be cooperating and “sharing resources” with foreign governments around the world. Local police are already training with FBI, DHS and even the military. This administration’s new program lays the groundwork for them to train with foreign police units under the banner of the U.N.
Among the first steps taken will be to merge some of the law-enforcement capacities within regions, with U.S. cops cooperating more closely with those of Mexico and Canada, Whitehead said. He warns, “They’re working to fuse them together, so local autonomy, local authority, will be diluted and eventually eliminated. They’re already globalizing; technology demands it.”
And what should be a lightbulb moment for every American is the use of the terminology “U.S. and international standards”. McGuire points out that the U.N. will always pick a “politically correct” situation in which to intervene. It will not intervene to stop the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East, but it will intervene to protect transgenders, Islam or perceived racial bias by police, as when U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called for the protection of civil rights during the Ferguson uprising in August 2014 even as rioters were looting, turning over police cars and burning buildings.
But it is McGuire’s next words that should be the lightbulb moment for every Christian in America: “I believe we are now reaching a tipping point that is going to happen very soon,” he said. “It could happen overnight and most likely after a crisis event. The U.N. is already in control of a great deal, but we are going to see the U.N. come out of the shadows and openly exercise its authority over the United States. They will still have some kind of illusion of the United States for the masses, but I believe the elites are ready to bring global government out of the closet, and we’re going to see a very radical, aggressive change. They want to do this by 2030, and in Paris they’re going to announce another round of sweeping changes (in November) and then you look at all the trigger points, the Syrian war, the international debt crisis, etcetera.” To underscore this point, the WND article revealed that two dozen cities have signed up including Paris, London, Mumbai, Montreal, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Denver, Tunis, Oslo, Beirut and Palermo, among others.
So, is McGuire alluding to the opening of the beginning Seals in Revelation 6? It certainly seems as if he is describing a Conqueror, conflict on the earth, and crises that could cause massive famine and death. And all we have to do is look at the chaos in Europe from the mass immigration and refugee crisis. World leaders, along with the Pope, seem to be taking us to that tipping point that McGuire warns about.
Perhaps you think that my concern regarding the Strong Cities Network is overblown and mischaracterized. In response, I would like you to consider these words by global elitist Henry Kissinger in an address at a Bilderberg meeting in Evian, France, May 21, 1991, (as transcribed from a tape-recording made by one of the Swiss delegates): “Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will pledge with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.”
In my Biblical worldview, this statement certainly seems to suggest what we are told in Revelation Chapters 6-11 — that the disasters and wars and civil unrest described in this portentous Book of the Bible will be so devastating, and create such a monumental global crisis, that people will embrace anything and anyone who promises to give them relief. Once entrenched in power, the beast (Antichrist) and the power behind him (Satan) will move to establish absolute control over all peoples of the earth to accomplish their true end, the worship Satan has been seeking ever since being thrown out of heaven. And as national and world events are showing us, the devil knows his time is short.
But this is not the time for us to give in to fear and despair. We have a part to play in this End Times scenario … and that is to endure and spread the Word that there is power in the saving blood of Christ; and to use our Authority in His Name to cast down Satan’s evil plans. Our natural state is to live in the freedom that was bought by our Savior’s sacrifice. Let us reveal our true identity to the world and point the path to deliverance from this chaotic world… the path to Jesus!
Revelation 13:7 “And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.”
It took only a matter of hours after his speech at the United Nations for Russian President Vladimir Putin to act. It was a speech that argued that “certain” nations had circumvented the U.N. charter and acted selfishly, resulting in a power vacuum in the Middle East that has been filled by Islamic terrorists. It was a speech that charged “it is hypocritical and irresponsible to make loud declarations about the threat of international terrorism while turning a blind eye to the channels of financing and supporting terrorists, including the process of trafficking and illicit trade in oil and arms.” He went on to say, “It would be equally irresponsible to try to manipulate extremist groups and place them at one’s service in order to achieve one’s own political goals in the hope of later dealing with them or, in other words, liquidating them.”
To sum up his speech, it was one that seemed to indicate not only veiled accusations against the U.S., but also proposed that the UN had out-lived its original purpose, and nations must come together and build a coalition against global terrorism. But he also stressed that state sovereignty must be recognized, and seemed to indicate that where this sovereignty came into conflict with the UN charter, that a nation’s autonomy and dominion ruled.
So, as I said at the beginning of this blog post, it took a very short time for him to act on the latter proposition. On Wednesday, Russia, without U.N. authorization, began airstrikes in Syria, and have since conscripted a reported 150,000 troops to begin a ground offensive. Depending on whether you listen to U.S. spokesmen, or Russian, these attacks are designed to prolong the sectarian strife in the Middle East, or to begin a campaign for wiping out ISIS, which Russia says other world leaders have let go far too long.
I certainly cannot offer an informed analysis on what is really behind the actions of global powers. Since when has any government been truthful to its people during wartime? All I know is that my Biblical worldview is becoming clearer. In the battle of Ezekiel 38-39, the armies come primarily from the north and involve only a few nations of the earth. I am not ready to declare that this is what we are seeing at the moment, but it certainly feels like we are headed in that direction. Russia and Iran are definitely combining their efforts, supposedly to join forces to fight ISIS. But has anyone given any thought to how this might eventually effect Israel?
We must not forget the following statements from the leading military and religious leaders of Iran… the major general of Iran’s army proclaimed this, “We will annihilate Israel for sure. We are glad that we are in the forefront of executing the supreme leader’s order to destroy Israel.” And as for the Supreme Ayatollah, himself—a few days after the US/Iran nuclear deal was announced, he released his latest book. It is a 400-page creed planning to destroy the state of Israel. Last month, Khomeini once again made the genocidal intentions clear before Iran’s top clerical body, the Assembly of Experts. He spoke about Israel—home to over 6 million Jews. He pledged, “There will be no Israel in 25 years.”
Therefore, I submit to you the words of Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, as he spoke before the United Nations General Assembly. Netanyahu said, “Ladies and gentlemen, I have long said that the greatest danger facing our world is the coupling of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. I am gravely concerned that the nuclear deal with Iran will prove to be the marriage certificate of that holy union. I know that well-intentioned people sincerely believe that this is the best way to block Iran’s path to the bomb, but one of history’s most important, yet least learned lessons is this, the best intentions don’t prevent the worst outcomes. The vast majority of Israelis believe that this nuclear deal with Iran is a very bad deal. What makes matters even worse is that we see a world celebrating this bad deal … Seventy years after the murder of 6 million Jews, Iran’s rulers promised to destroy my country, murder my people, and the response from this body, the response from nearly every one of the governments represented here has been absolutely nothing. Utter silence. Deafening silence.”
Then Netanyahu made his point in a most dramatic way — he stood silent for almost a minute. And then he continued, “Ladies and gentlemen, it is not easy to oppose something that is embraced by the greatest powers in the world. Believe me, it would be far easier to remain silent. But throughout our history, the Jewish people have learned the heavy price of silence. And as the Prime Minister of the Jewish state—as someone who knows that history, I refuse to be silent. I’ll say it again—the days when the Jewish people remain passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over… For in every generation, there were those who rose up to destroy our people. In antiquity we faced destruction from the ancient empires of Babylon and Rome, and in the Middle Ages we faced inquisition and expulsion, and in modern times we faced the Holocaust, and yet the Jewish people have persevered, and now another regime has surfaced swearing to destroy Israel. That the regime would be wise to consider this, I stand here today representing Israel, a country 67 years young, but the nation state of the people nearly 4,000 years old. Yet, the empires of Babylon and Rome are not represented in this hall of nations, and neither is the thousand year Reich, those seemingly invisible empires are long gone, but Israel lives. The people of Israel live.”
So, I ask you, what is the significance of Russia and Iran uniting to fight in Syria? After all, these very nations are the ancient nations of Old Testament prophecies. Gog, Magog (Russia), Persia (Iran) and the city of Damascus in Syria all play important parts in End Times eschatology. And we must not ignore that Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, and China are players to be considered, too. So, has God begun to implement His judgment upon the earth? Are these the first stirrings of the Tribulation? No one can say. But this much I do know … if it is the beginning, it is all for God’s glory and to call His nation Israel back to Him. Just like America, the people of Israel [largely] do not recognize or worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The Talmud and Kabbalah are methods, Rabbinic teachings, and doctrines that originated in Judaism but often distort God’s original Word, just as the Emerging Church and New Age religion have twisted the Church.
We must not be surprised if war is a Divine factor in their awakening and redemption. Whether it happens tomorrow, next week, next month, or several years from now, He will save His remnant … He always has. May that day come soon.
Isaiah 37:29 “Because you rage against Me and because your insolence has reached My ears, I will put my hook in your nose and My bit in your mouth, and I will make you return by the way you came.”