bruce...of course, 1 & 3...thanks..

"It ain't so much the resources; it's the distribution of resources."

*weary sigh*...I'd like a nickel for every time someone has said that in a way that 'suggests' that it is an answer. Little kids tell their mother to send their share of the mashed turnips to starving kids in Asia. Right...wrapped in what and

It - just - won't - work.      Naturally, ANY increase in effeciency is useful, but there is not enough transportation to send needed resources FROM source TO the deserving...and no simple way to determine where to send it first....and no way to continue that aid indefinitely. (It's artifical propping up and it is all worse if it ends..) Fishing, all over the world, is down and in danger. Oil is limited, minerals are mined out, topsoil is going..(Brazil), forests are being cut and replaced, IF they get replaced, with monoculture that is an unbalanced ecosystem.

(And warming is doing nasty things to trees (Lodgepole Pines)right in YOUR area, Peace..little beetles thriving.)

In most categories, there needs to be a margin for error and stores to get by lean times...'better distribution' just means we trade safety for 'getting by' awhile.

   It is SO easy to say "it hasn't happened yet", but I assume the last dozen Dodos and Great Auks thought "gee, it's work finding a mate, but it'll all work out."

sheesh...I gotta quit...I'm depressing myself..