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.
Originally posted by sty
But why I love the american ppl : because they created things like Above Top Secret!
Going back to the issue of the low quality food in the US.....
Originally posted by 44soulslayer
... The people of Africa must start electing better leaders who will serve their needs, and deposing dictators.
Originally posted by Hellish-D
I think it's time to put things in perspective....
4% of the bailout would end world hunger
World hunger seems like one of those grand unsolvable problems – the perennial favorite wish of beauty pageant queens. The truth is, it’s not unsolvable at all.
The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) stated that it would only take $30 billion a year to launch the necessary agricultural programs to completely solve global food insecurity. (Severe hunger afflicts 862 million people annually.)
solving world hunger is a nice idea as is solving world poverty, but i dont think iether are very realistic goals, i like the ideas my self but goverments, corruption, banksters & the like will make sure there gravy train doesnt stop.
the reason i wanted to reply, 4% seems too small, i think for eg, if it was attempted that 4% due to stealth taxes & unforseen problems along the way has a very good chance of becoming 15% maybe 20%, sounds like a big jump i know but according to statistics the london 2012 olympics would cost no more than around 3 billion, the current figure is now over 10 billion !!.
so when a figure is used on a project of this size it normally grows making the first number 4% inaccurate.
i think the biggest problem is that humans tend to live beyond there means, weather you have a mortgage or a credit card debt too big or a large family with limited food resorces, humans tend to push the envilope when it comes to reality. so even if you used 100 billion per year on word hunger, how long would it be befor, 300 billion could solve world hunger ? becuase the 100 billion expanded the problem, of people trying to live beyond there means. this is a hard arguement with no clear winner, currently there are over 6 billion people on earth, how many people can earth sustain without large parts of the foodchain collapsing ???, 12 billion ? 15 billion ? 25 billion ? 50 billion ?.
i think world hunger has been on earth as long as humans & will continue.
the noble intent to solve world hunger maybe noble, but in some ways may be short sighted.
you may not agree with what ive said here, but if all sides of a debate are not heard then the thread becomes a one sided bashing thread.
thanks.
It also has other statistics. It makes you wonder what our priorities are, doesn't it?
[edit on 14-2-2009 by Hellish-D]
Originally posted by Hellish-D
The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) stated that it would only take $30 billion a year to launch the necessary agricultural programs to completely solve global food insecurity. (Severe hunger afflicts 862 million people annually.)
And I wasn't the only slave to my nesting instinct. The people I know who used to sit in the bathroom with pornography, now they sit in the bathroom with their IKEA furniture catalogue. ~Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club, Chapter 5
You buy furniture. You tell yourself, this is the last sofa I will ever need in my life. Buy the sofa, then for a couple years you're satisfied that no matter what goes wrong, at least you've got your sofa issue handled. Then the right set of dishes. Then the perfect bed. The drapes. The rug. Then you're trapped in your lovely nest, and the things you used to own, now they own you. ~Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club, Chapter 5