A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
A key piece of data missing from the title "eventually a possibility" - it's an interesting article but gosh is that title misleading.
I was about to ask if there really is a shortage. Not from UK but I worry for people.
There's not a shortage in stores, to my knowledge, but I directly know a large number of people struggling to make ends meet. Multiple people being made homeless due to gas and electric bills, or building their life schedules around opportunities to get a free or cheap meal because even people with jobs are feeling the pinch.
So mostly what many others elsewhere in the world are experiencing, it just feels extra grim because much of the problems can be directly attributed to the Tory government who are currently in power. They're almost certainly going to be voted out next year, but I wonder whether it'll be possible to repair the damage that's been done since 2010.
I'm not sure how it's possible seeing as food is too expensive for most people now
I mean... the title is pretty clear; it's a 'warning' of a 'risk', not an announcement of the current situation. A risk is a possibility, and a warning of a risk must come before it is unfolding.
The tile 'warns' of a 'risk' of civil unrest. It implies a food shortage is happening or imminent.
I disagree, "Experts warn of oil shortage due to Hamas-Isreali conflict" seems like a perfectly reasonable headline to see today and would certainly imply a timely concern.
“Currently just under 50% of the UK's food is imported including 80% of fruit, 50% of vegetables, and 20% of beef and poultry, while the UK is almost completely self-sufficient for wheat, barley, lamb, and potatoes.”
Bread and Lancashire Hotpot yeah alright
Do we really need Mangoes
Halving the food supply seems like it might be a problem regardless of what actual foods are available?
Have you see how fat we are tho
That's about quality, not quantity of food. Not sure we want to increase the proportion of carbs in the available foods.
I do not live in the UK, but I am sure that the UK needs vegetables.
I live in the UK, and we have enough vegetables in charge at the moment.
I did not want to imply that the UK doesn't have or is in any way incapable of aquiring vegetables, but I still think vegetables are more of concern than fruits like mangoes to the UK and people in general, because vegetables are important ( My head: Eat your vegetables, child... ).
Just eat half the Vegans
When I saw this headline yesterday, it included "in the next 50 years".
Sure enough:
Just over 40% of the food experts surveyed believe that civil unrest in the UK in the next 10 years was either possible (38%) or more likely than not (3%). Over the next 50 years, this increased to nearly 80% of experts believing civil unrest was either possible (45%), more likely than not (24%), or very likely (10%).
The participants were then asked, if disruption to the food system was to cause the unrest, was it likely to be due to not enough food being available overall, or problems with food distribution, preventing it getting to the right places and creating isolated pockets of hunger. They were asked to consider both questions over the two time frames, 10 and 50 years.
The results show that 80% of experts believe logistical distribution issues leading to shortages are the most likely food-related cause of civil unrest in the next 10 years. But, considered over a 50-year horizon, they said catastrophic failure resulting in insufficient food to feed the UK population, rather than distribution problems, would be the most likely cause.