In the latest World Summit on Food Security held in Rome in November 2009, FAO stated that it would take $44 billion a year to put an end to
world hunger. Does it sound like a lot of money? Governments say it does, as they do not have so much money and it is a utopia to think they can ever
get such an amount. However, governments do not say that in 2007, the expenditure in arms was more than 30 times greater ($1,340 billion), just to set
an example. Or that $44 billion is more or less the budget of Beijing-based Olympic Games of 2008. The only thing necessary to end world hunger is
just politicians’ willpower.
What would it really cost to end global hunger? The United Nations estimates that it would take at least $30 billion per year to solve the food
crisis, mainly by boosting agricultural productivity in the developing world. Over the decade that it would take to make sustainable improvements in
the lives of the 862 million undernourished people, that amounts to $300 billion.
Three hundred billion dollars is a lot of money, and the U.S. government won't foot the bill alone. But it's less than half of 1% of the world's
combined gross domestic products, not an unreasonable sum to invest in ending the misery and degradation of hunger. After all, Congress shelled out
$21 billion last year for foreign aid and this week it approved $162 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for fiscal 2009. The U.S. spent $340
billion in 2006 alone on public and private research and development. Directing just one-tenth of that seed money to sustainable, high-yield
agriculture in the developing world could trigger a second Green Revolution.
The Military Budget of US alone is 711 billion dollars, which is over 16 times more than it would take to end the hunger in the world. If every
advanced country in the world decided to do skip a small part of their national defense budget. Iceland for example has none.
When doing a quick estimate, we can estimate that there are around billion people, who are better of than the rest of the people and can afford many
extra luxuries. It would cost us 1 dollar a week to end the hunger in the world. Is that too much? Skipping a chocolate, coke or an ice-cream weekly.
Just some interesting facts in comparison. Nothing against USA, US statistics are easiest to find
It is a problem everywhere, although probably US
is leading many such statistics per capita.
Wasted energy costs us around $146 billion each year for Americans.
Food American end up tossing away costs a collective $165 billion.
$76 billion is spent on Sodas
$31 billion is spent on Lottery Tickets
$71 billion is LOST at slot machines or tables.
$2.1 billion is spent on tattoos.
$117 billion is spent on fast food.
Even lawn-care takes more money in a year than it would take to end world hunger...
A total of $705 billion was spent on Entertainment
It just makes me sad looking at all those statistics. We spend so much on stuff we really do not need at all, while billion people are starving
As far as I can see, everything is just in the Willpower of Politicians. The world would a better place if they wanted so. Instead of ending the world
war they have decided to spend the necessary money in building nuclear bombs, firearms and wars, And what is the saddest part, it would only take
buying 1/30 of the budget spent on firearms...