[Russkie]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=NFJGr1qYiww&feature=channel

How did you manage to cover this up for so long.

[Noelnada]

How did you manage to cover this up for so long.

How did you manage to discover this 78 years later ?

[dilpill]

Lol. No shit we had a famine. The Dust Bowl got its name for a reason.

[Russkie]

Lol. No shit we had a famine. The Dust Bowl got its name for a reason.

I've read American history books, it never used the word 'famine'.

[Paradigm]

I've read American history books, it never used the word 'famine'.

They never used that specific word to describe it. Therefore it must be a CONSPIRACY!!!11

[QatzelOk]

They never used that specific word to describe it.

Words are very important when creating a national mythology.

Calling the US famine a "famine" would help American readers of history realize how venerable they are to starvation in their own country, inspite of all the magical wealth-making of the free market.

[pikachu]

I've read American history books, it never used the word 'famine'.

indeed. I've heard about the Dust Bowl at least to the extent that American high school graduates do, but never knew it had the characteristics of a famine.

[QatzelOk]

Words like "dust bowl" are invented to cover up atrocities.

It's just like "Expulsion" of the Acadians. No one likes to read that their own country engaged in ethnic cleansing of one of its founding ethnicities.

Or that the rich let the poor starve to death by the millions.

[Roland]

My freshman year (college) US History professor specifically referred to the Dust Bowl and related events as a famine. It looks like he's alone, though, because I don't remember hearing anything like that in any other class, and it doesn't seem anyone else does either.

Of course, he's also right...

[peter_co]

I guess the word famine is not used that frequently, because it's not the most descriptive term for the events in question. The number of people who actually were vulnerable to starvation was not that great. In the Midwest, the most immediate problem was poverty, since people who loaned from the banks and failed to repay their loans due to the bad harvest lost their homes. The actual "famine" was probably most widespread not in the Midwest, but rather in California and other states were migrants congregated in large concentrations.

[QatzelOk]

The number of people who actually were vulnerable to starvation was not that great

.
What does "not that great" mean, exactly?

Is it okay in a rich country like the US to let some of its people starve to death?

I would say it is NOT. This is a sign of really bad governance.

[Nattering Nabob]

I've read American history books, it never used the word 'famine'.

fam·ine
Pronunciation: \ˈfa-mən\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from feim, faim hunger, from Latin fames
Date: 14th century
1: an extreme scarcity of food
2archaic : starvation
3archaic : a ravenous appetite
4: a great shortage



There was no shortage of food in the 1930's...only a shortage of money to pay for the food which was widely available.

[Thunderhawk]

There was no shortage of food in the 1930's...only a shortage of money to pay for the food which was widely available.

The same be said of Irish potatoe famine, the situation in Eastern Ukraine in the 20s, Eritrea during the drought, etc..

During famines there is often food locally available and unaffordable. What of it?

[Nattering Nabob]

During famines there is often food locally available and unaffordable. What of it?

By that usage there is currently a worldwide famine...

[Thunderhawk]

By that usage there is currently a worldwide famine...

I am under the impression that most of the world can afford atleast subsistence levels of food.

[QatzelOk]

There was no shortage of food in the 1930's...only a shortage of money to pay for the food which was widely available.

The shortage of food pushed the price out of the range of starving mouths.

At least, that's what we learn in ECON 102.

Food was "widely available" only if "widely" refers to geography. "You can buy oatmeal in Santa Fe, and you can buy oatmeal in Bangor, Maine."

But when food becomes "too expensive" for people to get enough calories in their bodies to perform properly, your nation is NOT taking care its own. It is only enriching its elites.

In times of need, the rich - who prefer to sell to other rich people rather than "giving" what they inherit to the poor - are often loathed.

[Nattering Nabob]

The shortage of food pushed the price out of the range of starving mouths.

At least, that's what we learn in ECON 102.

In America during the depression?

There was so much food and prices were so low that farmers destroyed their produce in an attempt to raise the prices...even though the prices were very low, many still did not have the money to pay for these goods.

Roosevelt also encouraged the creation of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA) to assist America's farmers. The AAA temporarily reset prices for farm commodities, including corn, wheat, rice, milk, cotton, and livestock, and then began subsidizing farmers to reduce production. Before the depression, many debt-ridden farmers had increased crop production in order to earn more money. Ironically, this increased production had led to overproduction, which flooded the market and drove prices down, forcing farmers to plant even more the next year in a never-ending cycle. The AAA, however, began paying farmers extra to plant less or destroy their surplus crops in order to raise prices again. Congress also passed the Farm Credit Act to provide loans to farmers in danger of bankruptcy.