[dotancohen]

Is shipping food there the correct solution? For war, an ostensibly temporary condition, by all means ship the population food. But if an area is already overcrowded beyond what the land can sustain (due to climate, soil quality, or population density) then is it productive to further bolster the population? Seems a human catastrophe in the making, supporting population growth in an area where the land can not supply enough food.

[malfist]

This is literally how cities exist. Or in your world view is food not shipped into cities?

[dotancohen]

My worldview is based on the cities I've lived in, in which the citizens of that city have the means to purchase the food themselves. Therefore the movement of food into that city is in the economic interest of those supplying the food. Furthermore, that food _is_ grown locally, within half a tank of gas from the city itself.

[dotancohen]

I should note that the cities I'm familiar with, and thus my worldview, have multiple thousands of independent suppliers bringing food into the cities as profitable businesses, not a single altruistic organisation functioning off donations. Therefore there are much fewer catastrophic points of failure - an event that would prevent food from getting into the city would be a large, wide geographical catastrophe. Not the whimsical changing of political positions or sudden misfortune of donors. And in this worldview, when natural pressures such as population overdensity occur, the feedback loop stabilises at a sustainable level - those for whom food becomes too expensive move to cheaper places. I've done it myself.