In the first question of his first presidential debate, Senator Fred Thompson was asked why a majority of Americans feel we are headed toward a recession. His response?
“I think there is no reason to believe we that are headed to a recession.”
Really? I guess 2/3 of Americans have an active imagination. Perhaps the senator should read news headlines a little closer:

The battered housing sector took another blow Tuesday, with an industry group reporting that a gauge of pending home sales tumbled to its lowest level ever as the credit crunch restrains purchases.

Closer to home:

The price of a loaf of bread has gone up nearly 50 percent in the past few months.
The Second Harvest Food Bank has just about everything, except bread.
“We haven’t seen a loaf of bread in a really long time,” says Executive Director Elaine Machiela.
The rising costs of bread have forced food pantries to cut out bread. And due to the drought, networks of donations have also dried up.

Something is clearly wrong with the picture when food pantries can’t stock bread.
I don’t know if we will dip into a recession or not–recent odds are at just under 50%. But there is plenty of evidence about that we might be experiencing an economic downturn. Senator Thompson would be well advised not to ignore it.

How can we get the biggest food bang per acre? The question becomes increasingly important because the number of humans is increasing and the amount of arable land isn’t. Moreover, as on-going food inflation indicates, the kinds of foods people eat impact global food prices. People in China and other developing countries have been adopting a more “westernized” diet, thus driving up demand for more agriculturally-intensive products.
Researchers at Cornell compared 42 diets with varied meat composition in terms of how much land it took to produce the food. Unsurprisingly, it takes a lot less land to grow the food feed a vegetarian than to feed a heavy meat eater:

“A person following a low-fat vegetarian diet, for example, will need less than half (0.44) an acre per person per year to produce their food,” said Christian Peters, M.S. ’02, Ph.D. ’07, a Cornell postdoctoral associate in crop and soil sciences and lead author of the research. “A high-fat diet with a lot of meat, on the other hand, needs 2.11 acres.”

However, a strict vegetarian diet is not necessarily the most efficient in terms of land use because it takes higher-quality farmland to raise crops than it does to raise animals:

Thus, although vegetarian diets in New York state may require less land per person, they use more high-valued land. “It appears that while meat increases land-use requirements, diets including modest amounts of meat can feed more people than some higher fat vegetarian diets,” said Peters.
. . .
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the average American ate approximately 5.8 ounces of meat and eggs a day in 2005.
“In order to reach the efficiency in land use of moderate-fat, vegetarian diets, our study suggests that New Yorkers would need to limit their annual meat and egg intake to about 2 cooked ounces a day,” Peters said.

Not only is such a diet more economical, but it’s healthier, too.

Via Crooks and Liars, here’s a familiar-sounding argument:

“I made my arguments and went down in flames. History will prove me right.” — Texas Rangers owner George W. Bush after voting against realignment and a new wild-card system during a Major League Baseball owners meeting in September 1993. Bush was the lone dissenter in a 27-1 vote.

As Jerry Crasnick notes, the post-season success of wild-card teams, coupled with Major League Baseball’s growth in attendance and revenue, strongly suggest that Mr. Bush was wrong.
But what do we know? I’m sure that years after we have all died, people will suddenly awaken to Mr. Bush’s wisdom in opposing baseball’s reconfiguration. And in invading Iraq.

I know this isn’t as juicy an item as who has custody of Britney Spears’ kids, but one would think this developing story might be getting more attention:

Soaring food prices will hurt the world’s poor and increase the risks of political upheaval, a senior United Nations food agency official said on Thursday.
“We are squeezed between increasing oil prices and food price hikes,” said Alexander Sarris, director, commodities and trade, of the Rome-based Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
He said the world’s poorest people were the most vulnerable to the impact of surging grain prices, driven by falling stocks, rising production costs due to higher energy prices, adverse weather, faster economic growth and increasing biofuels demand.

Two observations:
(1) I believe we will see increasing political instability in several countries due to this food/oil “shortage”–even if that is not always labeled as the cause.
(2) Rising food costs aren’t just a problem in Africa or Asia; it’s affecting poor Americans, too.
Perhaps it will soon dawn on political leaders that using food to make fuel might not be the smartest of policies after all.
UPDATE: MSNBC has more.

. . . or, put differently, cycling at high elevations.
The last two weekends I’ve certainly met my climbing quota on the bicycle. I made two trips to the mountains of Western North Carolina for three rides. The weather all three days was spectacular: blue skies, comfortable temperatures, and incredible views–I couldn’t have ordered better conditions.
On September 22, I went to Sylva, North Carolina, and participated in the second annual Tour de Tuck. The ride is a 104 mile loop which features 11,000 feet of elevation gain and a 45 mile leg on the Blue Ridge Parkway.
This past Saturday I returned to the Blue Ridge Parkway and joined 12 other Bike Forum members on a 39-mile social ride. {Pictures available at the link; I got there late so I’m not in the group pictures at the start.] We did an out-and-back ride, climbing for several miles to Richland Balsam overlook, the highest point on the parkway, then riding along the crest of the mountains until just beyond the Devil’s Courthouse overlook. A good time was had by all.
Saturday afternoon I drove down the parkway to Asheville, where I rendezvoused with my sister, brother-in-law, and one-year-old niece. Little Seth is quite a handful. And I’m certainly not a natural at childcare.
Sunday afternoon I parked at the Asheville Folk Art Center and rode to the top of Mount Mitchell. It was the first time I’d been to Mount Mitchell, and I didn’t know exactly what to expect. In general, the climbing on the parkway wasn’t too bad (steep), but it was a longer trip than I expected.
I got a little bonus riding in along the way. Someone had told me that there was water available at “Craggy Gardens.” When you’re doing an multi-hour unsupported ride, you definitely don’t want to run out of water. So I turned off the parkway when I saw a sign for Craggy Gardens picnic area. Only I didn’t see a picnic area there; I saw a windy steep road that headed up into the woods. I assumed the picnic area must be right around the corner, so I kept going to the next turn, then the next . . . and next . . . and next. Finally, about a mile later, I reached the picnic area. On the way out, I debated whether or not water had been worth the climb. That question was answered three miles later when I saw the Craggy Gardens visitor’s center, with water fountains, right on the side of the parkway. Alas.
The parkway tops out at Craggy Gardens and rolls up and down along the ridge until you reach Mount Mitchell State Park. There’s an 11 mile stretch which offers some fantastic views. I stopped several times to soak it all in.
The climbing wasn’t over when I reached the state park. To the contrary, there was 1,400 more feet to go. The first couple miles past the entrance are steeper than the parkway, and I was feeling my legs by that point. Fortunately, the grade eased up the last couple miles as I motored to the finish.
At last I reached the summit. The observation deck area was closed for construction, so I had to settle for the parking lot view. It was still pretty good. I’m not skilled at identifying landmarks, but I could clearly see what I assume is the Smoky Mountain ranges, 70 miles away.
After basking for 20 minutes at the top, I headed back down the mountain. There were a couple notable climbs to toil through, but otherwise the return trip was much faster than the ascent. The only two challenges I had going down were: (1) dodging the potholes and uneven pavement, and (2) navigating a tunnel in the evening daylight [it gets dark in there without lights!].
I got back to the car just before sunset. I returned to Knoxville tired, but satisfied from another successful cycling weekend.