Some of the things I've learnt:
The giant grocery stores are squeezing everyone dry. Walmart and Tesco may offer low prices, but those low prices come at a very, very steep price.
The money in food comes at the value-added step. So, simply harvesting cash crops doesn't allow for much of an income. The real money is in the processing.
Famines can occur even when there is food IN THE VILLAGE if people can't pay for the food. There have even been situations in history where the food supply has been taken AWAY from a famine stricken village to a city because no one in the village could afford the food.
On the other hand, when you give food away for free, like the controversial US Food Aid program, you risk depressing local farmers' wages even further.
GM crops *might* have a place. But we need to be really careful in figuring out what that place is.
Rules governing worldwide trade forbid many third world countries from placing subsidies or tariffs on food crops, but the US is still allowed to subsidize their corn.
The food situation is extremely complex, there are no easy answers, but I do believe that the way that we're doing things now simply reinforces current power structures that keeps the first world dominant over the third world.
I don't know what we do about our damn food situation. But I do know this: we need a major change. And unfortunately our "change" president has saw fit to appoint a "more of the same" Secretary of Agriculture.
People. I cannot repeat this enough. Just because a Democrat will be in office, doesn't mean we can take our eyes off the ball. Vilsack might be our new Sec of Ag, but that doesn't mean we have to take things lying down. As Green Bean writes, we need to constantly be pestering him and Obama both.
Because at the end of the day, what's more important than the food you eat?