Star Trek and the Farm Bill

Posted October 16, 2007 | 02:34 PM (EST)



stumbleupon :<em>Star Trek</em> and the Farm Bill   digg: <em>Star Trek</em> and the Farm Bill   reddit: <em>Star Trek</em> and the Farm Bill   del.icio.us: <em>Star Trek</em> and the Farm Bill

On Star Trek: The Next Generation, crew members get their food from microwave-like dispensers in their bedrooms called "Replicators." They walk up and mumble something and a lovely beef Wellington sparkles into existence. It's the ultimate vending machine, and nothing ever costs a dime.

Here in the 21st century, a fistful of change can buy you several thousand calories in whatever shape you like: a cylinder of cookies, a box of frozen hamburger patties or a canister of grape soda. Cheap and abundant food isn't magic to the average consumer; it seems natural, and is usually as dependable as the flow of gasoline from the pump.

As the 2007 Farm Bill wanders toward the Senate floor, however, America watches food prices continue to rise. Food and beverage prices have increased an average of four percent over the past year, and show few signs of going back down. Rising fuel costs are undoubtedly making plastic packaging and transportation more expensive, but a more popular scapegoat is new ethanol production. With corn in high demand, 25 cents no longer buys you a Little Debbie brownie.

What's a country to do when its food is made out of the same stuff that drives our cars?

Ricardo Salvador, formerly an agronomist at Iowa State University, points out that the creators of Star Trek did their homework; at the bottom of The Enterprise, the story goes, is an enormous tank filled with goo -- the raw material for every food that pops out of the Replicator. For the American food system, Salvador says, that goo is corn.

Since the early 1970s, when former Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz's Farm Bill encouraged farmers to plant crops "fence row to fence row," a thickening stream of corn has flowed from the Midwest. For food processors, this stream of cheap corn comes mainly in the form of the ultimate food ingredient: high fructose corn syrup. Shipped by rail and unloaded by hose, it has become a government-subsidized intravenous tube for America's sweet tooth.

Cheap corn gave us the cheap hamburger, as well. Corn, a high-starch feed, fast-fattens cattle; it's now the main ingredient in the bovine feedlot diet. Americans have a weak-spot for corn-fed beef, which has as much as five times saturated fat as grass-fed beef. In fact, if you were born in the last thirty years in America, chances are you've only ever eaten corn-fed beef. So it goes: the seemingly diverse foods in the supermarket -- can of soda, disc of beef -- have common ancestors in the Corn Belt.

Star Trek
's Replicator is an understandably appealing idea. As a kid I would have traded my little sister for a machine that would make hamburgers appear from thin air in my bedroom. But are consumers benefiting from the corn kingdom? Obesity rates are obscenely high, and one in three kids born in 2000 is expected to develop Type-II diabetes. It would be absurd to lay the blame solely with corn, but the nation's waistline problems are undoubtedly linked to what we're gulping down at the local fast food joint. And most of that stuff, despite all the shapes and colors it comes in, is made out of the same varietal of goo -- yellow dent #2 corn.

Corn will be a big player in this year's Farm Bill, because everybody wants it -- the food industry for syrups and meats, and the ethanol industry for fuel. Is either a great use of our tax dollars? In the past decade, over $50 billion in government subsidies has been shelled out to promote corn production. Corn-based ethanol has its problems, but corn-based fast food is not exactly a healthful alternative. With food prices on the rise, now is the time to wonder what we're paying for -- at the cash register and with our tax dollars.

As author Michael Pollan points out, the Farm Bill should really be called the Food Bill. What do we as taxpayers want to order for dinner? Commodity corn isn't going away any time soon, but it's time to imagine a more diversified food supply. Measures that support new farmers and ranchers, promote diversified family farms, and bolster research for sustainable agriculture are potential harbingers of true diversity.

It's time, in other words, to think outside the goo.

Comments for this post are now closed

 
 

Comments
17
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- Biofuelsimon See Profile I'm a Fan of Biofuelsimon permalink

Why should US farmers be fed government handouts and be protected by tariff barriers when the policy clearly acts against the interests of the mass of the US population who could use cheap ethanol from more efficient producers (Brazil for example)? The same question can be asked in Europe.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:55 AM on 10/17/2007
- Doofus See Profile I'm a Fan of Doofus permalink

So, it turns out that Soylent Green is NOT
'People' after all. Rather, it's corn. That is
SUCH a relief!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 AM on 10/17/2007
- cognate See Profile I'm a Fan of cognate permalink

It takes one gallon of ethanol to produce three quarts. The shortfall is made up by the taxpayer. And food costs more.

Thank you, Uncle Sam!

Can't wait for government-run health care. It'll be like Iraq, FEMA and the Patriot Act.

Ron Paul understands. Do you?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:31 PM on 10/16/2007
- anfractuous See Profile I'm a Fan of anfractuous permalink

By pure coincidence, today I was googling Jujyfruits and found the Wikipedia entry. Three of the first four ingredients are corn based! I wonder if I can use them to power my car?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:15 PM on 10/16/2007
- jpopphan See Profile I'm a Fan of jpopphan permalink

There's more to the 'Star Trek' replicator goo than just the raw materials. There is an entire infrastructure that sits behind the concept. Many, many things have to be in place in order for something like a replicator to exist. The 'Star Trek' vision presupposes that war, poverty and hunger have been eliminated and that humanity is united. This will not happen under a capitalist system like the one we know today.

In my view, the Earth in 'Star Trek' is a non-capitalist and non-competitive society, at the very least socialist or post-socialist, and one in which excessive wealth and excessive poverty have been brought into balance in an egalitarian way.

The replicator would provide access to virtually any food item one could want, so who would be able to profit from the production, distribution, sales, preparation and consumption of food? The replicator can also produce non-food items (at least in the later versions of 'Star Trek') so there goes profit on clothing, toys, tools, etc. Capitalists would no longer have any reason to exist, since there would be nothing for them to accumulate and since they couldn't play upon class differences to turn us against one another. (Is it any wonder that it is usually the Ferengi and other species, not humans who are depicted as greedy profitmongers?)

Does anyone really think that private enterprise would produce a device like a replicator? My bet is a serious no.

We have a great need for leadership right now, both in terms of our political parties and our elected officials. We need for there to be true representation in order to have a true republican (small 'r') democracy. So long as corporations and wealthy donors exercise their influence the election process as well as the actual processes of government, our "republic" will be made up of officials who are not beholden to the views and interests of the people they are supposed to represent. One can't represent big business and the little guy at the same time. They're supposed to work for US, remember?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:51 PM on 10/16/2007
- pa104inf See Profile I'm a Fan of pa104inf permalink

So you advocate a system like the Chinese or the old Soviet Union do you? I am sure those protestors who were rolled over by those Chinese tanks would beg to differ with you!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:11 PM on 10/16/2007
- WBum See Profile I'm a Fan of WBum permalink


Quite a leap you mad there.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:50 AM on 10/17/2007
- andygaus See Profile I'm a Fan of andygaus permalink

Corn is not a bad food to feed to ourselves (preferably in the form of corn or cornmeal and not so much corn syrup). We shouldn't feed so much to the cows and pigs, and we should feed even less to the gas tank. Ethanol, besides driving up the cost of edible corn, is a giant boondoggle: when you figure in the energy required for its production, it turns out to be a fancy way of using three nickels to make a dime. We need to eat more of our corn more directly ourselves, and then we would be better able to pay for it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:37 PM on 10/16/2007
- Taan See Profile I'm a Fan of Taan permalink

Corn syrup is a synthetic anomaly which appears in hundreds of food items. It has no dietary function except to produce empty calories which contribute directly to our obesity problem. It might be a good thing to shift corn away from this sweetener to ethanol but the latter has its own problems which the government is not addressing. With our present consumption of oil at an all-time high, ethanol would never come close to an equitable substitution. You can pull oil out of the ground all year, but not corn.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:45 PM on 10/16/2007
- OckhamsElectricRazor See Profile I'm a Fan of OckhamsElectricRazor permalink

There should be a political commitment to have priorities for farm subsidies reflect the food pyrimid. If high fructose corn oil is bad for us, why is the government paying farmers to produce it???

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:27 PM on 10/16/2007
- Newfycrat See Profile I'm a Fan of Newfycrat permalink

The subsidies do reflect the food pyramid. The original pyramid was created by lobbyists for different industries, there was not one doctor consulted. (the new pyramid that came out a year ago doesn't even make sense, but most people think of the one with grains at the bottom, vegetables next, then milk and meat and then sugar. Now all of these groups, except the vegetable folks, have very strong lobbying groups).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:37 PM on 10/16/2007
- mimsnpips See Profile I'm a Fan of mimsnpips permalink

"Here in the 21st century, a fistful of change can buy you several thousand calories in whatever shape you like: a cylinder of cookies, a box of frozen hamburger patties or a canister of grape soda." Where do you shop, or do you use coupons??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 10/16/2007
- WBum See Profile I'm a Fan of WBum permalink

I was thinking the same thing. I decided to imagine an overflowing fistful of quarters and dollar coins.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:52 AM on 10/17/2007
- Danny See Profile I'm a Fan of Danny permalink

Syrup -- NO (obesity in everyone who eats American fast or prepared foods)

Ethanol -- NO (waste of good pasture when we have the SUN for energy generation, free!!)

Not sure about meats, but if I have to pick one out of three where corn might be good. Do cows like corn? Don't they prefer grass? ...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:39 PM on 10/16/2007
- Camel54 See Profile I'm a Fan of Camel54 permalink

Cows do not like corn. In fact, the corn has to be treated in order for the cows to be able to digest it (cows are ruminants). The result? Their waste is toxic. Michael Pollan, mentioned in the blog, authored a book titled The Omnivore's Dilemma. It's a wonderful book, but it will disgust you in more ways than one--policies created to benefit business at the expense of all our health as well as the details of what is actually in our food. The story of the chicken nugget made me swear off the things forever.

You can find grass fed beef fairly easily. It costs slightly more, but the health and environmental benefits outweigh it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:39 PM on 10/16/2007
- Diogenese40 See Profile I'm a Fan of Diogenese40 permalink

Corn isn't the real issue with the Farm Bill - the real issue, as with most of what our government does, is Federal subsidies to Big Business. That's always the bottom line in D.C., whether we're talking about the Haliburtons and Boeings and Chevrons getting richer off the mess in Iraq, or ADM and Cargill getting their turn at the public teat, it's always about making the rich richer in the Good Old U.S. of A. +*&% the public, what can we do to help the corporations that keep getting us re-elected?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:25 PM on 10/16/2007
- therealredstateblues See Profile I'm a Fan of therealredstateblues permalink

More socialism for the wealthy

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:39 PM on 10/16/2007
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in


Bloggers Index›
Read All Posts by
Ian Cheney›