Ending hunger by 2030 would cost just $93 billion a year — less than one per cent of the $21.9 trillion spent on military budgets over the past decade, according to the UN World Food Programme (WFP).
Ending hunger by 2030 would cost just $93 billion a year — less than one per cent of the $21.9 trillion spent on military budgets over the past decade, according to the UN World Food Programme (WFP).
This has been the problem since time immemorial. If you have a solution, you are a better person than I.
What if we sent so much food that the hoarders couldn’t hoard it all? Just a metric assload of food. Eventually food is so cheap and plentiful the hoarders give up.
You flood their market with cheap food and you put all their domestic farmers out of business.
Dumping charity on developing countries rarely works. You need to help them invest in their economy. This was shown with that micro loans paper (which won a Nobel prize).
Yup. Goods aid is only a very short-term measure. Vaccines for example expire if not stored correctly and used promptly.
Service aid is more effective medium-term, such as when the BBC World Service ran their health advisory bulletins during the W African Ebola outbreak.
Investment aid is the long-term solution, with the goal of a sustainable uplift in living standards, such as aid money being spent on the Indian space programme which allows satellites to monitor landslides and direct assistance safely.
Food should never have been a buisness in the first place.
Also areas that are struggling with food shortage and famine don’t really have for profit farmers. You’ll find that the majority are subsistence farming and maybe sell a little bit of excess. The exception would be those in these places that own a ton of land and have the money to farm at scale. Remaining food needs typically come from wealthier nations producing excess food at scale.
Ideally the state should produce staple crops at scale. Keep the people fed. This frees up subsistence farmers to engage in other economic sectors or employs them through the state to produce food. Either way it’s more reliable and more people get to eat. For the for profit farmers they could simply focus crops that aren’t staples.
deleted by creator
If you read my comment you’d not be saying this.
Clearly I mean food production shouldn’t be only for profit. We should produce enough food as a service.
Frankly you are using the most obtuse way to define buisness. While I’m sure it’s technically correct, it’s not the only way that term is used and you’ve basically made an argument over something that clearly wasn’t the point.
No it’s purely irrelevant. I didn’t see the need to specify you need to grow crops suitable to land/region. This point is so bad I’m starting to believe you asked AI to make an argument for you.
Not if you listen to experts. Kinda funny how you believe that corporations can grow crops no issue, but the state can’t. Corporations already produce most of the global food supply.
Not if you listen to experts
Because they didn’t listen to experts. Also did you already forget we were talking about regions already under famine conditions?
So it’s totally possible for the state to do it too. Corporations prioritize profit that’s why we burn crops to keep prices stable.
You came to an inherently untrue conclusion. The state can be motived just to take care of its citizens. That’s what we should aim for.
So basically you made an argument that is overall unrelated, relies on the assumption the state must always fail, and that corporations are good. I’m unconvinced to say the least
deleted by creator
Objectively false. The state is a concept that can and has been changed repeatedly. It’s not some universal truth you can make such statements about.
Not an accurate statement since there has never been an attempt without massive interference. Also not an accurate description since you are clearly thinking about a system i did not describe. I described a completely different system than those you’re likely thinking of
What the actual fuck are you talking about. Nobody ever talked about a totalitarian state. I simply talked about state owned agriculture working in a not for profit fashion. And only to produce staple foods. Really not that different from socialized medicine.
Seems like a sane and reasonable response the the suggestion that maybe we should just try to feed people without trying to make money off of them.
Honestly this reply is unhinged
The hoarders have guns. They will take it all, and they will be able to recruit more with the promise of that food.
Maybe the solution is more peacekeeping forces to ensure the food output from the local farmers isn’t stolen, destroyed or hoarded.