a message for obama, part II

Dear Mr President,

That was in 2008.

Remember this? Yes, that was me, almost 4 years ago. Back then, you had just been elected into office, and the English newspaper The Guardian had asked its readers to contribute photos of their messages to you. I was thrilled, I participated, and my entry was selected for publication in the book they made.

We haven't talked a lot since then, you and I.
I rather watched you from a distance, didn't want to disturb you, trusting that, ultimately, you would do the right things and take the right decisions.

Circumstances have changed for me since 2008, the biggest one being me marrying one of your citizens, a female one at that. This would have been reason enough to write you; after all, we considered living together in America but couldn't, because your federal laws would not acknowledge our marriage, even though we married on American ground. Instead, my wife gave up her job, her home, and most of her belongings in order to live with me in the Netherlands. But I didn't get in touch, even though we sometimes felt really desperate, when Joey lost her house, when she struggled with the Dutch language, and when she tried to get a job in a foreign country. All's well that ends well, things have turned for the better, and we're living happily ever after, so don't worry about us (even though we still think that you should extend marriage to same-sex partners, once and for all, nationwide). This letter is about something different.

It's again The Guardian which prompted me to write you today. This time, it's about a looming crisis which has been predicted by both the UN and Oxfam to hit the world next year. No, not the next financial crisis, and there's no imminent terrorism threat either: It's a food crisis. Due to climate change - to which the US, let's not forget this, has contributed the second-biggest share per capita worldwide so far, right behind Australia - and the resulting droughts of 2012 which hit your country harder than many others, both agencies predict a food shortage and massively rising prices for crops in 2013. They say that food prices will about double. Now, this may not be such a big problem for most of your citizens, who, on average, only spend 9% of their household income on food, but it is a massive problem for developing countries, where people already have to spend a whopping 70% of their income on food - and that is on average. Many people don't even have enough money to buy the food they would need to get enough calories and nutrients. Which makes them malnourished or even kills them. If this prediction becomes reality, and all indicators point in this direction, we will have to deal with increasing famines, unrest, and civil wars.

So, you ask, what can I, the president of the US, do about this? It's simple: Considering the fact that 75-80% of all agricultural space worldwide is used for crops which are fed to livestock you could make a huge impact if you would end subsidies for livestock farming and instead introduce a hefty tax on meat. Granted, this tax would make your carnivorous citizens bitch and moan and your meat farming and processing lobby run amok, but it would also immediately lead to less meat being consumed. Which would lead to less livestock being grown. Which would have a number of really advantageous effects:

• Less crops would be required to feed livestock and more would be available to feed people - in your country, and abroad. To produce one calorie from meat, you need to grow between 7 and 10 calories in crops. Which means, you could feed 7-10 people with the grain that is now used to feed one person. How's that for an efficiency gain?
• You would immediately reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I am sure you are aware that, according to figures from your EPA, methane, a greenhouse gas emitted by livestock, is more than 20 times as effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere as CO2. 
• You would reduce top soil erosion, the use of fertilizers, the loss of biodiversity, and the contamination of the environment with hormones and antibiotics fed to livestock.
• You would support Michelle's efforts to advance healthy eating, and as a result, have less cancer, less heart attacks, less diabetes, less obesity, less arthritis, and thus not only a healthier population, but also significantly reduced health care (or rather: health repair) costs. Too good to be true? Read The China Study. It's a scientific fact. Or ask Bill. He has read it.

What would you do with the income created from this tax? In order to make the system work, you need to first and foremost use it to educate your people. Start nationwide campaigns which tell the truth about animal products: That cow's milk is neither necessary nor healthy for a human being (not even for human children), but instead contributes to osteoporosis more than it prevents it, and in addition is scientifically linked to food allergies, cardiovascular diseases, and a wide range of cancers (you can always say you had bad consultants when you were running all the Got Milk? campaigns, and that science has advanced). That the human body, while it might be able to survive on an omnivorous diet, thrives best on a diet consisting of large amounts of fresh vegetables and fruits, a moderate amount of whole grains and proteins derived from legumes, and a low amount of plant-based fats, such as nuts. Offer free classes on how to compose a healthy, nutritious meal without animal products. Change the food pyramid. Show your people what really happens in the factory farms and slaughterhouses of the country, and ask them if that is how they would like their fellow-creatures to be treated. Subsidize operations which transition to animal-free menus, like vegan restaurants, canteens, school cafeterias and the like. Offer incentives for livestock farmers to transform their operation into a plant-only agriculture. Re-train people who are currently employed in the dysfunctional and unethical meat industry in organic farming or in producing meat replacements from soy beans, wheat, and other high-protein plants. Make sure that fresh vegetables and fruit are available and affordable in all parts of the country, also in inner urban areas, where, as I hear, people have to struggle to get fresh produce at an affordable price.

The last time a nation-wide programme of this magnitude was implemented was during WWII: The rationing programme, which regulated consumption of items such as sugar, fuel, preserves, penicillin, oils - and meat. This time, it's a different kind of war - but if you choose to enter it, there will be no losers. Everybody will win: Your people, the people in developing countries, the environment, the animals, and the reputation of America in the world. It's a war in which nobody will get attacked, but one that will help everybody to survive. It's a war which will contribute to the good not only at home, but also abroad. It's a war which can help you show that the US is still a benevolent force, one which has the intention and the power to turn things around for the better. And to serve as a shining example, a true world leader.

And, while we're at it: Do the same for plant-based fuel - which may have a green varnish, but is even worse in terms of sustainability than fossil fuel - it takes more water and more energy to produce, and it takes away agricultural space which could otherwise be used to grow food. These days, 40% of the US corn production is used to produce ethanol. Use the income generated by cutting subsidies and taxing fuel to massively invest in public transport and alternative infrastructures: Long-distance high-speed trains, but also urban mass transit, rural bus lines, and safe bike lanes. And green energy. Look at Europe, where these programmes have created a multitude of jobs in new, environmentally benign industries.

Oh, and one thing: Don't wait too long. The clock is ticking. Start now with the preparations, so that after the election is over, you can immediately put your plans into action. And show us that you care: not only about your own country, but also about the people abroad and the environment. Or, as Lester Brown, President of the Earth Policy Institute in Washington, said in yesterday's Guardian article:

"We must redefine security. We have inherited a definition from the last century that is almost exclusively military in focus. Armed aggression is no longer the principal threat to our future. The overriding threats are now climate change, population growth, water shortages and rising food prices. The challenge is to save civilisation itself."

Times are getting tougher. This is a big challenge, a huge and necessary shift, but it's one which will really make a difference. I count on you. You can do it. Be brave. And if you need me, just send an e-mail. My vegan cooking kicks ass.

Gabi

PS: While you're at it: Ask your fellow world leaders to do the same, particularly the other top per-capita polluters: Australia, China, Germany, Russia, UK, and India. You can multiply your impact and truly set an example for responsible leadership.

Dear Mr President,

That was in 2008.

Remember this? Yes, that was me, almost 4 years ago. Back then, you had just been elected into office, and the English newspaper The Guardian had asked its readers to contribute photos of their messages to you. I was thrilled, I participated, and my entry was selected for publication in the book they made.

We haven't talked a lot since then, you and I.
I rather watched you from a distance, didn't want to disturb you, trusting that, ultimately, you would do the right things and take the right decisions.

Circumstances have changed for me since 2008, the biggest one being me marrying one of your citizens, a female one at that. This would have been reason enough to write you; after all, we considered living together in America but couldn't, because your federal laws would not acknowledge our marriage, even though we married on American ground. Instead, my wife gave up her job, her home, and most of her belongings in order to live with me in the Netherlands. But I didn't get in touch, even though we sometimes felt really desperate, when Joey lost her house, when she struggled with the Dutch language, and when she tried to get a job in a foreign country. All's well that ends well, things have turned for the better, and we're living happily ever after, so don't worry about us (even though we still think that you should extend marriage to same-sex partners, once and for all, nationwide). This letter is about something different.

It's again The Guardian which prompted me to write you today. This time, it's about a looming crisis which has been predicted by both the UN and Oxfam to hit the world next year. No, not the next financial crisis, and there's no imminent terrorism threat either: It's a food crisis. Due to climate change - to which the US, let's not forget this, has contributed the second-biggest share per capita worldwide so far, right behind Australia - and the resulting droughts of 2012 which hit your country harder than many others, both agencies predict a food shortage and massively rising prices for crops in 2013. They say that food prices will about double. Now, this may not be such a big problem for most of your citizens, who, on average, only spend 9% of their household income on food, but it is a massive problem for developing countries, where people already have to spend a whopping 70% of their income on food - and that is on average. Many people don't even have enough money to buy the food they would need to get enough calories and nutrients. Which makes them malnourished or even kills them. If this prediction becomes reality, and all indicators point in this direction, we will have to deal with increasing famines, unrest, and civil wars.

So, you ask, what can I, the president of the US, do about this? It's simple: Considering the fact that 75-80% of all agricultural space worldwide is used for crops which are fed to livestock you could make a huge impact if you would end subsidies for livestock farming and instead introduce a hefty tax on meat. Granted, this tax would make your carnivorous citizens bitch and moan and your meat farming and processing lobby run amok, but it would also immediately lead to less meat being consumed. Which would lead to less livestock being grown. Which would have a number of really advantageous effects:

• Less crops would be required to feed livestock and more would be available to feed people - in your country, and abroad. To produce one calorie from meat, you need to grow between 7 and 10 calories in crops. Which means, you could feed 7-10 people with the grain that is now used to feed one person. How's that for an efficiency gain?
• You would immediately reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I am sure you are aware that, according to figures from your EPA, methane, a greenhouse gas emitted by livestock, is more than 20 times as effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere as CO2. 
• You would reduce top soil erosion, the use of fertilizers, the loss of biodiversity, and the contamination of the environment with hormones and antibiotics fed to livestock.
• You would support Michelle's efforts to advance healthy eating, and as a result, have less cancer, less heart attacks, less diabetes, less obesity, less arthritis, and thus not only a healthier population, but also significantly reduced health care (or rather: health repair) costs. Too good to be true? Read The China Study. It's a scientific fact. Or ask Bill. He has read it.

What would you do with the income created from this tax? In order to make the system work, you need to first and foremost use it to educate your people. Start nationwide campaigns which tell the truth about animal products: That cow's milk is neither necessary nor healthy for a human being (not even for human children), but instead contributes to osteoporosis more than it prevents it, and in addition is scientifically linked to food allergies, cardiovascular diseases, and a wide range of cancers (you can always say you had bad consultants when you were running all the Got Milk? campaigns, and that science has advanced). That the human body, while it might be able to survive on an omnivorous diet, thrives best on a diet consisting of large amounts of fresh vegetables and fruits, a moderate amount of whole grains and proteins derived from legumes, and a low amount of plant-based fats, such as nuts. Offer free classes on how to compose a healthy, nutritious meal without animal products. Change the food pyramid. Show your people what really happens in the factory farms and slaughterhouses of the country, and ask them if that is how they would like their fellow-creatures to be treated. Subsidize operations which transition to animal-free menus, like vegan restaurants, canteens, school cafeterias and the like. Offer incentives for livestock farmers to transform their operation into a plant-only agriculture. Re-train people who are currently employed in the dysfunctional and unethical meat industry in organic farming or in producing meat replacements from soy beans, wheat, and other high-protein plants. Make sure that fresh vegetables and fruit are available and affordable in all parts of the country, also in inner urban areas, where, as I hear, people have to struggle to get fresh produce at an affordable price.

The last time a nation-wide programme of this magnitude was implemented was during WWII: The rationing programme, which regulated consumption of items such as sugar, fuel, preserves, penicillin, oils - and meat. This time, it's a different kind of war - but if you choose to enter it, there will be no losers. Everybody will win: Your people, the people in developing countries, the environment, the animals, and the reputation of America in the world. It's a war in which nobody will get attacked, but one that will help everybody to survive. It's a war which will contribute to the good not only at home, but also abroad. It's a war which can help you show that the US is still a benevolent force, one which has the intention and the power to turn things around for the better. And to serve as a shining example, a true world leader.

And, while we're at it: Do the same for plant-based fuel - which may have a green varnish, but is even worse in terms of sustainability than fossil fuel - it takes more water and more energy to produce, and it takes away agricultural space which could otherwise be used to grow food. These days, 40% of the US corn production is used to produce ethanol. Use the income generated by cutting subsidies and taxing fuel to massively invest in public transport and alternative infrastructures: Long-distance high-speed trains, but also urban mass transit, rural bus lines, and safe bike lanes. And green energy. Look at Europe, where these programmes have created a multitude of jobs in new, environmentally benign industries.

Oh, and one thing: Don't wait too long. The clock is ticking. Start now with the preparations, so that after the election is over, you can immediately put your plans into action. And show us that you care: not only about your own country, but also about the people abroad and the environment. Or, as Lester Brown, President of the Earth Policy Institute in Washington, said in yesterday's Guardian article:

"We must redefine security. We have inherited a definition from the last century that is almost exclusively military in focus. Armed aggression is no longer the principal threat to our future. The overriding threats are now climate change, population growth, water shortages and rising food prices. The challenge is to save civilisation itself."

Times are getting tougher. This is a big challenge, a huge and necessary shift, but it's one which will really make a difference. I count on you. You can do it. Be brave. And if you need me, just send an e-mail. My vegan cooking kicks ass.

Gabi

PS: While you're at it: Ask your fellow world leaders to do the same, particularly the other top per-capita polluters: Australia, China, Germany, Russia, UK, and India. You can multiply your impact and truly set an example for responsible leadership.

a message for obama, part II