'You're' welcome to do so, I don't know who this 'we' is, but it certainly isn't me.
Had Britain not imported food, the population would be less than 6 million mostly starving Britishers (let's not forget that imports are far from only food products). What would happen to the people who exported the food in order to import other things such as pharmaceuticals, tractors, fertiliser, power plants and water treatment systems ?
Trade is a necessity, the free market in goods and services is the most effective way of allocating scarce resources and the greatest benefit to human flourishing. To force people not to import and export, is essentially to declare war on humanity. I suggest you think harder, or get an education in basic economics -read Thomas Sowell or Heny Haslitt on economics in one lesson.
Averages over what time span?spacial/temporal averages
I never recommended forcing anyone to do anything, you added that yourself. This would be up to communities to decide who to trade with and how they want to do it.
I'm not against trade, that's the basis for modern society. (believe it or not I have a bachelor's in finance so I know a tiny bit about economics...fan of Bestiat but haven't read much Sowell) what I'm wondering is whether or not trying to supply every region in the first world with every piece of produce year around is ultimately sustainable. If you can sustain your community locally then trade becomes a luxury, not a necessity. I think it's something we could strive for and may be achievable with modern technology like hydroponics. You don't need the right climate if you can supplement by growing stuff in artificial environments.
Maybe I should have been more specific. I think a focus on local , sustainable production is important, not that we'd eliminate all trade.
Anyone who is legitimately interested in this subject needs to be aware of the work done by Alan Savory: here is his TedTalk:
Allan Savory: How to fight desertification and reverse climate change | TED Talk
Basically, he is educating us on how grazing animals can restore fertility, forests and moisture to dry lands. Grazing animals on uncultivatable land, it seems, is both good and necessary.
How long will it before one of these commie bastard presidential candidates starts extolling the virtues of China's 1 child policy to solve the climate crisis and avert the impending doom? Or maybe the Children of the Corn policy?
Who decides for these communities ? Isn't it up to the individual who they trade with ?
Just because strawberries can be grown on Everest doesn't mean it's a good use of scarce resources. If the market decided that local hydroponics was prefererable, then that's what would happen-as it hasn't, then that's a good indication it isn't currently a viable market.
I seem to recall some of them already are discovering some rural populism and weeping crocodile tears for their hitherto deplorables and bitter clingers because of the trade war with the Chinese. It's unlikely to succeed though. Between first Obama and then Lady Clinton dissing them in two election cycles, dems have lost traction in flyover country for some time to come.