World Hunger


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : World Hunger

1 · 2 · Next
Author Message
MrGray
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 05
Posts: 3177
Credit: 60,411
RAC: 0
United States
Message 613095 - Posted: 1 Aug 2007, 18:41:22 UTC
Last modified: 1 Aug 2007, 18:45:08 UTC

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2814431804762730889&q=heifer+international&total=35&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TcAuwMzXEo


Heifer International



.
____________
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Profile Clyde C. Phillips, III
Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 00
Posts: 1851
Credit: 5,955,047
RAC: 0
United States
Message 613112 - Posted: 1 Aug 2007, 19:08:48 UTC

Probably one of the best ways to reduce world hunger is to reduce the number of births. But I guess convincing all those people over there to do that is harder than jumping over the Moon. Maybe there's a way but I don't know it.
____________

MrGray
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 05
Posts: 3177
Credit: 60,411
RAC: 0
United States
Message 613196 - Posted: 1 Aug 2007, 21:26:24 UTC

Over There...


hmm...
____________
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Profile thorin belvrog
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 06
Posts: 6418
Credit: 8,893
RAC: 0
Germany
Message 613418 - Posted: 2 Aug 2007, 9:08:30 UTC - in response to Message 613112.

Probably one of the best ways to reduce world hunger is to reduce the number of births. But I guess convincing all those people over there to do that is harder than jumping over the Moon. Maybe there's a way but I don't know it.

best way to reduce world hunger is to share all resources with everyone. There is enough on Earth to feed twice the actual population, it only has to be alloted to everyone instead of a few.
____________
Account frozen...

Profile BrainSmashR
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 7 Apr 02
Posts: 1770
Credit: 234,266
RAC: 274
United States
Message 613544 - Posted: 2 Aug 2007, 17:23:52 UTC - in response to Message 613418.

Probably one of the best ways to reduce world hunger is to reduce the number of births. But I guess convincing all those people over there to do that is harder than jumping over the Moon. Maybe there's a way but I don't know it.

best way to reduce world hunger is to share all resources with everyone. There is enough on Earth to feed twice the actual population, it only has to be alloted to everyone instead of a few.


That's called Communisum and it's failed in every country every time with the exception of China and that's because they are no longer pure communist.

Any other signs of your political "intelligence" you care to share with the class today?
____________

MrGray
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 05
Posts: 3177
Credit: 60,411
RAC: 0
United States
Message 613547 - Posted: 2 Aug 2007, 17:26:38 UTC
Last modified: 2 Aug 2007, 17:37:22 UTC

That's actually called compassion for your fellow man. Common sense.



.
____________
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Profile kinhull
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 3 Oct 03
Posts: 1029
Credit: 636,475
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 613584 - Posted: 2 Aug 2007, 19:02:38 UTC - in response to Message 613418.

Probably one of the best ways to reduce world hunger is to reduce the number of births. But I guess convincing all those people over there to do that is harder than jumping over the Moon. Maybe there's a way but I don't know it.

best way to reduce world hunger is to share all resources with everyone. There is enough on Earth to feed twice the actual population, it only has to be alloted to everyone instead of a few.


Whilst I agree with you on the sharing of resources, you shouldn't forget the human capacity to make developments in technology to improve agriculture and improve food yields.

____________
Join TeamACC

Sometimes I think we are alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we are not. In either case the idea is quite staggering.

Profile Rush
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 3133
Credit: 302,569
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 613589 - Posted: 2 Aug 2007, 19:12:31 UTC - in response to Message 613418.
Last modified: 2 Aug 2007, 19:14:01 UTC

best way to reduce world hunger is to share all resources with everyone. There is enough on Earth to feed twice the actual population, it only has to be alloted to everyone instead of a few.

More empty rhetoric. An endless parade of slogans, ideology, and bromides without clarity, depth of thought, or basic understanding of the fundamentals of economics or reality.

Same hint as before: this is why there had to be a wall, with the machine guns pointing inward...
____________
Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

MrGray
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 05
Posts: 3177
Credit: 60,411
RAC: 0
United States
Message 613594 - Posted: 2 Aug 2007, 19:29:10 UTC

Same hint as before: this is why there had to be a wall, with the machine guns pointing inward...


Over food? lol

I know what you mean. Our point is that humans are all ****'ed up on their logic. Walls are visible and invisibale, but all are wrong, and created by ignorance and hatred.

Do we have the answers? Obviously, not.

Do we have a problem with the way things are? Obviously, yes.

Are there people who can't see this? Yes.



.
____________
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Profile Gavin Shaw
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 8 Aug 00
Posts: 1116
Credit: 1,304,337
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 613960 - Posted: 3 Aug 2007, 9:39:43 UTC - in response to Message 613589.
Last modified: 3 Aug 2007, 9:40:35 UTC

best way to reduce world hunger is to share all resources with everyone. There is enough on Earth to feed twice the actual population, it only has to be alloted to everyone instead of a few.

More empty rhetoric. An endless parade of slogans, ideology, and bromides without clarity, depth of thought, or basic understanding of the fundamentals of economics or reality.

Same hint as before: this is why there had to be a wall, with the machine guns pointing inward...


I have heard this too. So what part don't you agree with?

1. Is there actually enough or the capacity to have enough food for the entire population (or twice)?

2. That equally sharing it is wrong (not arguing about whether it would work or not, I know it would be next to impossible for it to happen/work successfully)?

3. Something else?

This is not a go at anyone, but rather an attempt to better understand your view.

____________
Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

Profile BrainSmashR
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 7 Apr 02
Posts: 1770
Credit: 234,266
RAC: 274
United States
Message 613980 - Posted: 3 Aug 2007, 10:56:38 UTC - in response to Message 613547.
Last modified: 3 Aug 2007, 10:57:55 UTC

That's actually called compassion for your fellow man. Common sense.



.


No, when the government FORCES you to compensate someone else's short comings it is not even CLOSE to compassion.

Of course, you knew that was a bull**** LIE when you typed it.
____________

MrGray
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 05
Posts: 3177
Credit: 60,411
RAC: 0
United States
Message 614200 - Posted: 3 Aug 2007, 16:41:54 UTC
Last modified: 3 Aug 2007, 16:53:34 UTC

I love u, cousin!

:P



.
____________
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Profile BrainSmashR
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 7 Apr 02
Posts: 1770
Credit: 234,266
RAC: 274
United States
Message 614204 - Posted: 3 Aug 2007, 16:49:25 UTC - in response to Message 614200.

I brains were dynamite, you couldn't blow your nose.



.


and if you were half as smart as you seem to think you are, you'd proofread your work.
____________

MrGray
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 05
Posts: 3177
Credit: 60,411
RAC: 0
United States
Message 614213 - Posted: 3 Aug 2007, 17:06:29 UTC

I'm not smart.



.
____________
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Profile BrainSmashR
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 7 Apr 02
Posts: 1770
Credit: 234,266
RAC: 274
United States
Message 614220 - Posted: 3 Aug 2007, 17:19:15 UTC - in response to Message 614213.

I'm not smart.



.


Smart enough to go back and change your post after the fact...

...but we've already discussed the difference between leftism and honesty.
____________

MrGray
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 05
Posts: 3177
Credit: 60,411
RAC: 0
United States
Message 614224 - Posted: 3 Aug 2007, 17:32:01 UTC

per ardua ad astra
____________
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Profile Rush
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 3133
Credit: 302,569
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 614604 - Posted: 4 Aug 2007, 4:21:41 UTC - in response to Message 613960.

best way to reduce world hunger is to share all resources with everyone. There is enough on Earth to feed twice the actual population, it only has to be alloted to everyone instead of a few.

More empty rhetoric. An endless parade of slogans, ideology, and bromides without clarity, depth of thought, or basic understanding of the fundamentals of economics or reality.

Same hint as before: this is why there had to be a wall, with the machine guns pointing inward...


I have heard this too. So what part don't you agree with?

1. Is there actually enough or the capacity to have enough food for the entire population (or twice)?

Easily. There already is both the capacity and the quantity.

2. That equally sharing it is wrong (not arguing about whether it would work or not, I know it would be next to impossible for it to happen/work successfully)?

Define "equally sharing," and then tell me if you go to work for free, or if you go to work because they pay you?

____________
Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Profile Gavin Shaw
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 8 Aug 00
Posts: 1116
Credit: 1,304,337
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 614618 - Posted: 4 Aug 2007, 4:56:17 UTC - in response to Message 614604.

best way to reduce world hunger is to share all resources with everyone. There is enough on Earth to feed twice the actual population, it only has to be alloted to everyone instead of a few.

More empty rhetoric. An endless parade of slogans, ideology, and bromides without clarity, depth of thought, or basic understanding of the fundamentals of economics or reality.

Same hint as before: this is why there had to be a wall, with the machine guns pointing inward...


I have heard this too. So what part don't you agree with?

1. Is there actually enough or the capacity to have enough food for the entire population (or twice)?

Easily. There already is both the capacity and the quantity.

2. That equally sharing it is wrong (not arguing about whether it would work or not, I know it would be next to impossible for it to happen/work successfully)?

Define "equally sharing," and then tell me if you go to work for free, or if you go to work because they pay you?


Thanks for that, but the last part wasn't needed. I was asking for which part you disagreed with. I did not ask you to justify your view and I was not trying to force my view on you, so I don't need to justify anything.

It would be difficult to define equal sharing since what you define as equal might and most likely be different to others. But I guess you are more against the idea of giving something to someone who has done nothing to earn it (not necessarily in terms of money, but often is) or is perhaps undeserving of it. Which I can understand and agree to in nearly all the way.

I would further assume that you would have no problem with help during emergencies (such as natural disaster, unless perhaps the person put themselves deliberately in danger and into the situation) which are one-off and not ongoing over a 'long' time period. Especially if the people affected earned their living but now have had a storm flatten their town and need help to get back 'on their feet' as it were.

If my assumptions are wrong feel free to correct them. But you do not have to attack. Yes or no is enough as I am not asking for justification or explanations.

____________
Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

Profile Rush
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 3133
Credit: 302,569
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 614629 - Posted: 4 Aug 2007, 5:19:08 UTC - in response to Message 614618.
Last modified: 4 Aug 2007, 5:19:22 UTC

Thanks for that, but the last part wasn't needed. I was asking for which part you disagreed with. I did not ask you to justify your view and I was not trying to force my view on you, so I don't need to justify anything.

Duly noted.

It would be difficult to define equal sharing since what you define as equal might and most likely be different to others....

Hence the rub.

...But I guess you are more against the idea of giving something to someone who has done nothing to earn it (not necessarily in terms of money, but often is) or is perhaps undeserving of it. Which I can understand and agree to in nearly all the way.

All I have a problem with is initiating force against others to make them do things that they otherwise would not.

I would further assume that you would have no problem with help during emergencies (such as natural disaster, unless perhaps the person put themselves deliberately in danger and into the situation) which are one-off and not ongoing over a 'long' time period. Especially if the people affected earned their living but now have had a storm flatten their town and need help to get back 'on their feet' as it were.

In principle, no.
____________
Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Profile Gavin Shaw
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 8 Aug 00
Posts: 1116
Credit: 1,304,337
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 614641 - Posted: 4 Aug 2007, 5:53:40 UTC - in response to Message 614629.

Thanks for that, but the last part wasn't needed. I was asking for which part you disagreed with. I did not ask you to justify your view and I was not trying to force my view on you, so I don't need to justify anything.

Duly noted.

It would be difficult to define equal sharing since what you define as equal might and most likely be different to others....

Hence the rub.

...But I guess you are more against the idea of giving something to someone who has done nothing to earn it (not necessarily in terms of money, but often is) or is perhaps undeserving of it. Which I can understand and agree to in nearly all the way.

All I have a problem with is initiating force against others to make them do things that they otherwise would not.

I would further assume that you would have no problem with help during emergencies (such as natural disaster, unless perhaps the person put themselves deliberately in danger and into the situation) which are one-off and not ongoing over a 'long' time period. Especially if the people affected earned their living but now have had a storm flatten their town and need help to get back 'on their feet' as it were.

In principle, no.


All good.

Forcing people to share or forcing people to accept something (though most might be grateful) is of course wrong and would only make the situation worse as the resentment would build until something gave.

Giving support to the implementation of help systems/charities etc is always more difficult due to human nature and the stories/reports etc you hear about charities that are frauds, misplaced money in relief efforts, misused etc.

Makes it hard to have faith (hence why a gave up on religion when I was younger, but that's another story)...

____________
Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Politics : World Hunger

Copyright © 2014 University of California