<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>ChinaDialogue: Latest responses to The need to feed (part one)</title>
    <description>Latest comments posted about The need to feed (part one) on ChinaDialogue</description>
    <language>en-gb</language>
    <link>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/2414-The-need-to-feed-part-one-</link>
    
    <item>
      <title>[TRANSLATED] yep, there seems to be some problems with the translation</title>
      <description>It's fine to translate "adjust" into "&#35843;&#25972;" rather than &#8220;&#35745;&#20837;" which could lead to misinterpretation...Ant

Translated by Zhe Yang </description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7923</link>
      <guid>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7923</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[TRANSLATED] the translation is possibly wrong</title>
      <description>&#8220;&#25187;&#38500;&#36890;&#32960;&#22240;&#32032;&#8221;means adjusted for inflation, namely making adustments (to value) according to inflation factors, thus the logic of the original sentense is correct. lm

Translated by Zhe Yang</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:59:31 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7921</link>
      <guid>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7921</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[TRANSLATED] There's One Sentence that I don't Understand</title>
      <description>"In money terms, even adjusted for inflation, farm aid was more than halved -- to about US$3 billion in 2004 from US$8 billion in 1979.
" Regardless of inflation, the purchasing power of money in 1979 would be underestimated. In this way, when we compare directly the amount of assistance in 1979 with that in 2004, we magnify the de facto effect of the 2004 assistance. Thus, we should delete the "even" in this sentence, otherwise we could simply add a "not", in order to make the sentence logically correct. I have read the original text, and have found the "even" in the article. Does this mean that the original article itself has a logical flaw? - Ant

This comment is translated by Xiaomei Zou</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 06:08:32 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7914</link>
      <guid>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7914</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Amazing article</title>
      <description>I like how this article explains the history and describes the current problems we face.

But I have a question:  do we really need to turn to genetically modified crops to ease the crisis?  can we at least ease the problem by decreasing demand?

I know the world population is so big that trying to waste less food will not end the crisis.  But I still think it is important to waste less food, and to eat as little meat as possible.  Especially in the US I think we waste too much food.

-Crystal, US</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7880</link>
      <guid>http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2414#comment-7880</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
