It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are "Third World" Regions Actually Starving?

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

how do countries starving to death not die out???




posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Of course it's one of the imperatives for mass immigration too...I mean if they're not starving in the desert, they're being massacred by terrorists, or drowning in the sea in their desperation to get to the privileged West; don't even think about it, where's your 'Christian compassion'? Let them in! Let still more in! LET THEM ALL IN!!!

Alternatively, Western governments, acting on behalf of business conglomerates, could just stop inviting them possibly...?



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Legman

I've seen many many starving kids in central and South America. It's a real deal. I have a hard time blaming them for not eating weeds. They are already eating things most people couldn't imagine.


We don't even realize we (westerners) are probably eating the most unhealthy food that has ever been consumed by humans. "weeds" actually taste amazing. have you ever had purslane? or ramps? wild garlic? even dandelions taste good. You may laugh, but it's true. Once you stop eating skittles and other test tube products your taste buds re-acclimate to REAL food. This type of food is WAYYYYY healthier than cheeseburgers. For anyone who has no idea what I am talking about, I highly insist you read the works of Weston Price. Ever wonder why aboriginal tribes don't need dental care? It's because their food doesn't rot their teeth.



originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
It's great to "teach a man to fish" instead of giving them a fish, assuming there are any fish to catch.


It's also hypocritical to illegally steal their fish like this, illegally pollute their waters and lands; and then claim the moral high ground by pretending to help give them a fish or teach them to fish because they can't find any more fish on their own.


This was my point for the OP, we as westerners think we are so high and mighty culturally, but in fact, we are sick, and a malignancy on this earth. The only reason these "3rd world countries" are "poor" is because we have fiscally enslaved them in our cancerous system.
edit on 13-6-2015 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 09:31 PM
link   
If you want first hand testimony of people starving, you don't need to go to a Third World country.

Just go to any homeless shelter in your home town.

USA, one of the richest countries on the planet (by some definition, if you ignore debt) has some of the highest percentages of starvation people in the Western World.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Legman

Most plants that are considered "weeds" in one country are considered delicacies in another.

And why are dandelions weird? You realize they sell dandelion greens in America right? The only weird thing about them is that people actually buy them when they can just pluck them from their yard.

You can buy them at many places, like this.

And there are many recipes that use them like this.

Here's a recipe from Martha Stewart too.www.marthastewart.com...

Even some prepackaged salads have them, though they usually call them something generic like "baby greens". But the design for their leaves is unique so they're easy to notice... plus they're really bitter. The young ones aren't that bad but the larger, older leaves should only be cooked.



I wish i could down star you like a billion times.
You obviously have never seen a hungry child in person.


A piece of crap imo.... I retire from this thread before i say what I really feel. Its all yours. Eat weeds dude.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton
Beyond what you've heard from organizations that are trying to get you to donate money to their cause (which are often keeping most of the donations), does anyone have any first hand testimony regarding starvation in third world countries? The reason it does not make sense to me, is because if I were "starving" I could literally go and eat weeds on the margins of highways and survive. Anyone with basic foraging knowledge knows that most plants are, at the very least, edible. Africa MUST have a great abundance of food in its various geographic areas. Sure, maybe not the desert, but don't live there, it's the desert (but, even the desert has food).

I think the reason we have this idea that they are all emaciated and desperate for food is:

1) cultural chauvinism; we think because they don't have bacon cheeseburgers that they're starving

2) "Charitable" organizations who are asking for donations while flashing images of emaciated children. Yet, these organizations, assuming they aren't ravenously hoarding ALL profits, are only giving fish, rather than teaching to fish.


Absolutely ridiculous. This is my area of expertise, professionally.

First, there are about 1 billion people living in extreme poverty.

Yes, yes I DO have first hand experience, both in India and in Bangladesh. I worked in Bangladesh, one of the most chronically malnourished countries in the world, specifically on nutrition and food security. India and Bangladesh have far worse malnourishment problems than Sub-Saharan Africa. Between 45% and 52% of children in India and Bangladesh are stunted which not only indicates chronic malnourishment but actual reduction in physical height, size, weight, and cognitive development. Those children will NEVER grow to their full potential. Scientifically and medically factual.

I also worked on a project on ten different sites in sub-Saharan Africa, personally analyzing the data, household surveys, and medical results for several thousand households. We specifically looked at the connection between malnutrition in children under-five and malaria prevalence in the same age group.

Yes, yes there are legions of people in south Asia and sub-Saharan Africa who are starving or malnourished in a multitude of ways.

There are legions of reasons for this:

1) Extremely poor economic opportunities
2) Limited education opportunities
3) Extremely high populations
4) Countries are impoverished themselves and do not have the capital (of all kinds) infrastructure, refrigeration, proper transportation, etc, to improve economically and food security wise
5) In most poor communities, there is a very large lack of dietary DIVERSITY, which means that even if someone is getting enough calories of let's say rice and legumes, they are NOT getting the range of dietary input in order
6) Diseases such as parasites: These make it nearly impossible to be fully nourished
7) Inter-generational cycles of malnutrition and poverty. If a child does not get enough nutrition in their first 1000 days, including the 9 months in the mother, they are basically f$cked, and will never develop fully. And mother's who were malnourished themselves in the previous generation have significant problems, including smaller pelvic regions which complicate births, AND with so many malnourished expecting mothers children come out with all kinds of nutrition problems.
8) They are stuck in a "poverty trap," wherein they do not have the raw inputs, capital, nor financing abilities to climb out of subsistence living and farming and hence cannot accumulate capital and get out of poverty.
9) Seed strains of many types of plants were not targeted to the right countries or bio-regions. Basically, agricultural technology still has a ways to go.
10) War, civil strife, exploitation, and yes corruption in some places.

There are more but this is a good list to start with.

Every last one of these is supported by mountains of relevant medical, scientific, economic, and social science research.

This op is a good example of when some ATS people need to not pretend they know what they are talking about. It's also very offensive, especially to those who actually do such work.
edit on 13-6-2015 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-6-2015 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton


originally posted by: Legman

I've seen many many starving kids in central and South America. It's a real deal. I have a hard time blaming them for not eating weeds. They are already eating things most people couldn't imagine.


We don't even realize we (westerners) are probably eating the most unhealthy food that has ever been consumed by humans. "weeds" actually taste amazing. have you ever had purslane? or ramps? wild garlic? even dandelions taste good. You may laugh, but it's true. Once you stop eating skittles and other test tube products your taste buds re-acclimate to REAL food. This type of food is WAYYYYY healthier than cheeseburgers. For anyone who has no idea what I am talking about, I highly insist you read the works of Weston Price. Ever wonder why aboriginal tribes don't need dental care? It's because their food doesn't rot their teeth.



originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
It's great to "teach a man to fish" instead of giving them a fish, assuming there are any fish to catch.


It's also hypocritical to illegally steal their fish like this, illegally pollute their waters and lands; and then claim the moral high ground by pretending to help give them a fish or teach them to fish because they can't find any more fish on their own.


This was my point for the OP, we as westerners think we are so high and mighty culturally, but in fact, we are sick, and a malignancy on this earth. The only reason these "3rd world countries" are "poor" is because we have fiscally enslaved them in our cancerous system.


You have to remember that many people here don't get exposed to actual people from these countries. So all they know are the stereotypes they see on tv. As I try to remind my friends, National Geographic is owned by a company that is owned by Rupert Murdoch. The same guy from Fox News. So it should be no surprise that they only paint these countries in a negative light. They make it seem as if 97% of the citizens are sleeping under withered trees, licking dirt for food while hiding from lions.

What they never show is that the crew for these dishonest documentaries have to fly into the international airports in these countries; get business visas there; arrange for car/truck rentals with standard companies; book different hotels in their desired locations; arrange for meals for the entire crew w/catering, at restaurants, or from stores. Then they have to book appearances with the indigenous groups in advance (for a fee & after signing disclaimers), because those groups do public presentations of their traditional rituals for tourists (for a fee). Then, in their documentary, they present the region as if the people there are all backwards or primitive.

And they do the same thing with their wildlife shows. Their crews go to large national parks to film specific wildlife, then give the impression the whole country is wild like that. They don't show any of the advanced infrastructure because that would defeat the whole narrative. That's why a lot of people here have a hard time realizing that's not the truth. It would be like me doing a documentary on America's homeless cultures. Then promoting that documentary to the world while saying this was the real experience of daily life in America.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Legman

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Legman

Most plants that are considered "weeds" in one country are considered delicacies in another.

And why are dandelions weird? You realize they sell dandelion greens in America right? The only weird thing about them is that people actually buy them when they can just pluck them from their yard.

You can buy them at many places, like this.

And there are many recipes that use them like this.

Here's a recipe from Martha Stewart too.www.marthastewart.com...

Even some prepackaged salads have them, though they usually call them something generic like "baby greens". But the design for their leaves is unique so they're easy to notice... plus they're really bitter. The young ones aren't that bad but the larger, older leaves should only be cooked.



I wish i could down star you like a billion times.
You obviously have never seen a hungry child in person.


A piece of crap imo.... I retire from this thread before i say what I really feel. Its all yours. Eat weeds dude.


Retire if you want, that's fine. And saying I've never seen a hungry child is your assumption. I notice you didn't actually respond to the points I made, but that's fine too.

We all learn more as time passes. And hopefully you learned not to dismiss foods like dandelions just because you didn't know that even people in First World countries happily eat them.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Britguy
a reply to: cooperton

Back when I was of school age, there were big charity drives every year for starving Africans, harrowing images of pot bellied fly encrusted starving African babies with a sombre narrative imploring us to GIVE.
I left school at 16, 35 years ago, and there are still the same annual charity drives to help the same Africans, in the same places. Just the faces of the pot bellied fly encrusted starving African babies have changed.

Obviously, the charities were not just collecting in the UK, but throughout the Western world. With that in mind, try to imagine the amount collected, cumulatively, over the decades. And the result? Little if anything has changed for most of those we were trying to allegedly save. One has to wonder where all the money went, and just as importantly, where the intent to do good went as well.

In answer to the 2 points you make:

1. Arrogance dictates that those running round in loincloths and living in huts are somehow backward, primitive, godless and must be saved and brought into the 21st century. In short, they must be civilized. However, as we have seen many times in the past, it doesn't work that way. Dietary needs are different and what may seem meagre to us may be enough to sustain them.

2. You'd think with all that money raised over the years, there would be some massive changes. Problem is, most of those countries are run by western installed and supported dictators or corrupt governments. As such, foreign aid comes with strings attached, meaning resource access for western corporations. If the native people are sitting on top of those resources then they need to be moved, their welfare is of course NOT a consideration. Thus civil wars and massive displacement are a big part of the problem.




Sorry, your point two has validity in some situations, but it fails because medically speaking there are people in a lot of countries experiencing severe malnutrition, to the point of severe disease, or stunted growth, or even stunted brain development (which is usually permanent).

You guys aren't educated on the issues, I understand. But please don't pretend that you know about malnutrition or the people who actually work on these issues.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dr1Akula

originally posted by: wildapache
a reply to: cooperton

Well allow me to tell you,from first hand experience that yes there are starving people in certain places in Africa.The money collected from the charities you talk about,end up in the bank accounts of a few people,most of whom dont care much about starving kids.And about ressources,when you have sometimes less than 10 raining days in a given year,its hard to grow anything...


Absolutely, these charities are the biggest scum, to deceive good people who feel sad for others misery!

those bastards use people's suffer and pain for marketing and wealth


Sorry, you guys are committing slander. SOME are not doing what they are supposed to. MOST are doing real work to address these issues. I know, I work on them..... And know tons of people that do.

Please stop acting like you guys know anything about the world of international development or that you have the data to show how ALL charities are scamming everyone and don't actually care about poor people.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: enlightenedservant


The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that about 805 million people of the 7.3 billion people in the world, or one in nine, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2012-2014. Almost all the hungry people, 791 million, live in developing countries, representing 13.5 percent, or one in eight, of the population of developing counties. There are 11 million people undernourished in developed countries (FAO 2014; for individual country estimates, see Annex 1. For other valuable sources, especially if interested in particular countries or regions, see IFPRI 2014 and Rosen 2014, ).


www.worldhunger.org...


I'm not saying that's wrong. I even said many of those nations are technically poor.

But even the part you quoted says only 13.5% of their populations suffer from "chronic undernourishment". To put that in perspective, more than 16% of Americans are on food stamps. www.washingtonpost.com...

This also goes into what I talked about in my first post in this thread. It's easy to say that people are starving, but they never mention which people or why they're in those conditions. Many of these are war refugees and socially undesirable classes. It's no different than the Roma/Romani in Europe, who suffer higher poverty rates because most of Europe simply doesn't want them. It's the same for India, which is one of the major countries in your link. Remember, they have an entire class of citizens ("dalits") who are oppressed as "untouchables". Even though things are getting better for them, they're still a socially undesirable class of citizens who just so happen to also be severely impoverished.

And your stats also include developing nations like Mali, Libya, Afghanistan, which have recently been ravaged by Western backed wars. So of course they're going to have high rates of malnourishment too. It's all linked.


People on food stamps here don't even compare to serious malnourishment. I've worked on poverty both here in the states and in the developing world.

Chronic malnourishment is VERY rare here in the US. Chronic malnourishment means basically Stunting, which almost no-one in the US experiences. Shrunken children/adults and shrunken brain/cognitive capability (permanently usually).

In India the stunting rate for children is 52%. FIFTY TWO PERCENT.

It's probably like 1% here in the States.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
Is this thread real or satire?

I ask because I've seen some pretty ignorant things on ATS in the past few days and I'm wondering if people have gone stark raving mad.


Yeah, this is pretty bad. I'm really offended by this.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: neformore

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

But even the part you quoted says only 13.5% of their populations suffer from "chronic undernourishment". To put that in perspective, more than 16% of Americans are on food stamps. www.washingtonpost.com...


You do understand the difference between being given food stamps to go to a convinience store and pick up a variety of items that can provide a balanced diet, and access to a clean water system in the USA and living off a single bowl of rice/grains of some kind per day and untreated water sources in third world countries....don't you?



Obviously I understand that the infrastructure conditions can be vastly different. The point is that even in a rich "first world country", there are still 16% of the people who face food insecurity. The question in the OP is "are 'third world' regions actually starving?". We're just pointing out that "third world" countries aren't the hellholes of famine that people are led to believe they are.

Also, your link was focusing on "malnourishment". It even goes into vitamin deficiencies and some of the points I mentioned like the hunger caused by war/conflicts and poverty. So the question is, do you know the difference between being malnourished & needing food stamps? Is there even a difference? And can you honestly say the Americans in trailer parks, ghettos, projects, and reservations don't face tainted water supplies, untreated sewage, and other horrible environmental conditions also? Kind of like this:

Filthy water and shoddy sewers plague poor Black Belt counties
Sewage problems in Alabama's Black Belt spawn parasites and serious illness, Al Jazeera reports


Yes, there is a vast difference between needing food stamps and being truly malnourished, especially from youth.

Again, some of these countries have extreme malnourishment. And some of them ARE hellholes of famine in some areas. I know, I've done first-hand field research in rural communities in some of these countries, specifically on malnutrition.

Honestly, guys, just drop this one and admit when you are wrong. Almost no-one is experiencing in the US, North America, or Europe what the poor are experiencing in sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia. Not even close.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I don't believe many in first world countries have any idea of the actual depth of real third world poverty. I was born into an extremely poor (by first world standards) family, I spent two years homeless as a young adult/teenager, but my own tribulations don't hold a candle to some of the extreme poverty in third world nations. There are areas, still, today, where life expectancy is in the 30's, where education is non-existent, where access to clean water is a luxury, where any access to any vital resource is extremely rare.

I was able to pull myself out of poverty through education, and work opportunities, many opportunities that are unavailable in much of the world today. You don't have to go far, go on a trip to the barrios of Mexico City - You will see things there you'd never see in the worst ghettos in the United States.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Legman

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Legman

Most plants that are considered "weeds" in one country are considered delicacies in another.

And why are dandelions weird? You realize they sell dandelion greens in America right? The only weird thing about them is that people actually buy them when they can just pluck them from their yard.

You can buy them at many places, like this.

And there are many recipes that use them like this.

Here's a recipe from Martha Stewart too.www.marthastewart.com...

Even some prepackaged salads have them, though they usually call them something generic like "baby greens". But the design for their leaves is unique so they're easy to notice... plus they're really bitter. The young ones aren't that bad but the larger, older leaves should only be cooked.



I wish i could down star you like a billion times.
You obviously have never seen a hungry child in person.


A piece of crap imo.... I retire from this thread before i say what I really feel. Its all yours. Eat weeds dude.


This is one of those ops that makes me reconsider being a member of ATS...



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: neformore

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

But even the part you quoted says only 13.5% of their populations suffer from "chronic undernourishment". To put that in perspective, more than 16% of Americans are on food stamps. www.washingtonpost.com...


You do understand the difference between being given food stamps to go to a convinience store and pick up a variety of items that can provide a balanced diet, and access to a clean water system in the USA and living off a single bowl of rice/grains of some kind per day and untreated water sources in third world countries....don't you?



Obviously I understand that the infrastructure conditions can be vastly different. The point is that even in a rich "first world country", there are still 16% of the people who face food insecurity. The question in the OP is "are 'third world' regions actually starving?". We're just pointing out that "third world" countries aren't the hellholes of famine that people are led to believe they are.

Also, your link was focusing on "malnourishment". It even goes into vitamin deficiencies and some of the points I mentioned like the hunger caused by war/conflicts and poverty. So the question is, do you know the difference between being malnourished & needing food stamps? Is there even a difference? And can you honestly say the Americans in trailer parks, ghettos, projects, and reservations don't face tainted water supplies, untreated sewage, and other horrible environmental conditions also? Kind of like this:

Filthy water and shoddy sewers plague poor Black Belt counties
Sewage problems in Alabama's Black Belt spawn parasites and serious illness, Al Jazeera reports


Yes, there is a vast difference between needing food stamps and being truly malnourished, especially from youth.

Again, some of these countries have extreme malnourishment. And some of them ARE hellholes of famine in some areas. I know, I've done first-hand field research in rural communities in some of these countries, specifically on malnutrition.

Honestly, guys, just drop this one and admit when you are wrong. Almost no-one is experiencing in the US, North America, or Europe what the poor are experiencing in sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia. Not even close.


Ah, I was waiting for you to address me. Why did you ignore the post showing that only 13.5% of the total citizens in developing countries are suffering from critical malnourishment? Just because you've served in some of the bad areas doesn't mean they all are. That's no different than only showing the struggles of America's homeless, America's ghettos, America's trailer parks, and America's projects. Then saying that all or even most of the people are living under those conditions.

Also, the thread was about "third world" regions in general. Most of the countries labeled "third world" don't have the conditions you're referring to. Especially not with the majority of their populations, as the 13.5% stat suggests. And like I've mentioned in many of my posts, many of those groups who are in extreme poverty are a direct result of war/conflicts or because they are seen as socially undesirable classes. I even mentioned the "dalits"/"untouchables" in India as an example.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Syyth007
I don't believe many in first world countries have any idea of the actual depth of real third world poverty. I was born into an extremely poor (by first world standards) family, I spent two years homeless as a young adult/teenager, but my own tribulations don't hold a candle to some of the extreme poverty in third world nations. There are areas, still, today, where life expectancy is in the 30's, where education is non-existent, where access to clean water is a luxury, where any access to any vital resource is extremely rare.

I was able to pull myself out of poverty through education, and work opportunities, many opportunities that are unavailable in much of the world today. You don't have to go far, go on a trip to the barrios of Mexico City - You will see things there you'd never see in the worst ghettos in the United States.


For the record, I'm not discounting the existence of extreme poverty. I'm discounting the ridiculous notion that all or most of the people in "third world" countries suffer from that extreme poverty. Each of those countries is vastly different, as are their standard living conditions.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

Please stop acting like you guys know anything about the world of international development...


So when you say:


4) Countries are impoverished themselves and do not have the capital (of all kinds) infrastructure, refrigeration, proper transportation, etc, to improve economically and food security wise


Do you mean that money and "modernization" is the answer? Don't you think us unsustainable westerners are already a herd of buffalo heading towards a cliff, why should we force these false ideals on others? "poverty" came when imperialism strangled these various nations.

In my humble opinion I don't think international development policy should be to get everyone burning up fossil fuels and polluting waterways (westernization) so they can refrigerate bacon. They were doing fine before the western world changed their way of life.

I understand this may insult you, and I don't want it to, because your intentions are respectable, donating your time for free to these causes is great and everyone should be doing it.



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: neformore

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

But even the part you quoted says only 13.5% of their populations suffer from "chronic undernourishment". To put that in perspective, more than 16% of Americans are on food stamps. www.washingtonpost.com...


You do understand the difference between being given food stamps to go to a convinience store and pick up a variety of items that can provide a balanced diet, and access to a clean water system in the USA and living off a single bowl of rice/grains of some kind per day and untreated water sources in third world countries....don't you?



Obviously I understand that the infrastructure conditions can be vastly different. The point is that even in a rich "first world country", there are still 16% of the people who face food insecurity. The question in the OP is "are 'third world' regions actually starving?". We're just pointing out that "third world" countries aren't the hellholes of famine that people are led to believe they are.

Also, your link was focusing on "malnourishment". It even goes into vitamin deficiencies and some of the points I mentioned like the hunger caused by war/conflicts and poverty. So the question is, do you know the difference between being malnourished & needing food stamps? Is there even a difference? And can you honestly say the Americans in trailer parks, ghettos, projects, and reservations don't face tainted water supplies, untreated sewage, and other horrible environmental conditions also? Kind of like this:

Filthy water and shoddy sewers plague poor Black Belt counties
Sewage problems in Alabama's Black Belt spawn parasites and serious illness, Al Jazeera reports


Yes, there is a vast difference between needing food stamps and being truly malnourished, especially from youth.

Again, some of these countries have extreme malnourishment. And some of them ARE hellholes of famine in some areas. I know, I've done first-hand field research in rural communities in some of these countries, specifically on malnutrition.

Honestly, guys, just drop this one and admit when you are wrong. Almost no-one is experiencing in the US, North America, or Europe what the poor are experiencing in sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia. Not even close.


Ah, I was waiting for you to address me. Why did you ignore the post showing that only 13.5% of the total citizens in developing countries are suffering from critical malnourishment? Just because you've served in some of the bad areas doesn't mean they all are. That's no different than only showing the struggles of America's homeless, America's ghettos, America's trailer parks, and America's projects. Then saying that all or even most of the people are living under those conditions.

Also, the thread was about "third world" regions in general. Most of the countries labeled "third world" don't have the conditions you're referring to. Especially not with the majority of their populations, as the 13.5% stat suggests. And like I've mentioned in many of my posts, many of those groups who are in extreme poverty are a direct result of war/conflicts or because they are seen as socially undesirable classes. I even mentioned the "dalits"/"untouchables" in India as an example.



Please see my first post, where I went into far more detail. Second, third-world is an outdated cold war term, and is not used in development.

Third, again, I've worked on poverty both here and abroad. The ghettos and poverty here, with few exceptions, are far better off than in the developing world. By far. I live in the ghetto in the US as I write! And I've lived in ghettos in the developing world. Absolutely NO comparison. I not only worked in "bad areas," I have entire graduate degrees studying the trends, realities, economics, you name it, of the developing world, at local, national, regional, and international levels. I studied with the leading experts precisely on these issues.

The murder rate for a DAY in San Pedro Del Sul, in Honduras, trumps the murder rate for a year in most ghettos in the US.

Again, I would have to give you an education literally as to why you are wrong, and how your numbers and assertions are misleading. It is an entire field of expertise. I already explained the reasons in my first response to this thread for much malnutrition.

If you think, finally, that most slightly malnourished poor people in the developed world are even close to the destitution of the extreme poor in the developing world, you have no idea what you are talking about.

And before you claim I'm callous to them, i've worked for years on poverty issues in the US.
edit on 13-6-2015 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Of course ALL of a nations population isn't in poverty, in the poorest third world countries you still have the wealthy. Extreme malnourishment also isn't a requirement for living in extreme poverty - You are correct in saying each nation has a different situation, but the problem is most definitely wide spread and endemic in many areas - urban and rural poverty are two very different situations, but share many of the same social/economic problems. It's hard to actually grasp how dire the situation in these areas are until you see/smell/experience it first hand. Over half the population of the world live on less then $100 a month. That's around 3.5-4 billion people. I'd say it's pretty widespread.




top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join