Vegetarian Discussion: The Politics Of Hunger

The Politics Of Hunger
Posts: 25

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)

Immortalist
2011-08-11 10:25:53 EST
850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005 and
the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.

Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;
rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution
networks or from governmental policies in the developing world.

Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own
people, but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
Bank prevent this from happening.

But the World Bank itself claims to be part of the solution to hunger,
claiming that the best way for countries to succeed in breaking the
cycle of poverty and hunger is to build export-led economies that will
give them the financial means to buy foodstuffs on the world market.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger

Rod Speed
2011-08-11 14:52:51 EST
Immortalist wrote

> 850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005

Hell of a lot less than there used to be, and many of them are
stupid enough to let some fool like Kim Jong Il rule the roost etc.

> and the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.

Thats a lie.

> Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;

Its never the lack of food world wide in modern times.

> rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution networks

More from civil war and civil chaos making it had to supply food etc.

> or from governmental policies in the developing world.

Wrong. The problem in the 'developing world' is that the buggers breed
like flys and are too stupid to control the number of kids they have.

> Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
> city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own people,

Thats very arguable with some places like Iceland etc.

And with plenty of others like Saudi etc it makes absolutely no sense
to feed their own people when they can trade oil for food to do that.

> but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
> institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and
> the World Bank prevent this from happening.

Pigs arse it does.

> But the World Bank itself claims to be part of the solution to hunger,
> claiming that the best way for countries to succeed in breaking the
> cycle of poverty and hunger is to build export-led economies that will
> give them the financial means to buy foodstuffs on the world market.

And that approach does make sense for those that can export.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger



Rupert
2011-08-11 16:14:54 EST
On Aug 12, 12:25 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005 and
> the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.
>
> Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;
> rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution
> networks or from governmental policies in the developing world.
>
> Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
> city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own
> people, but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
> institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
> Bank prevent this from happening.
>

Putting up barriers to free trade would not be a very good way to help
the world's poor. It may be that each country is able to produce
enough food to feed its current population, but people need to be able
to buy the stuff. Free trade gives them more opportunities to earn the
money to do this.

> But the World Bank itself claims to be part of the solution to hunger,
> claiming that the best way for countries to succeed in breaking the
> cycle of poverty and hunger is to build export-led economies that will
> give them the financial means to buy foodstuffs on the world market.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger


Masonc
2011-08-11 17:34:21 EST
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:14:54 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
<*m@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Aug 12, 12:25 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005 and
>> the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.
>>
>> Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;
>> rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution
>> networks or from governmental policies in the developing world.
>>
>> Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
>> city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own
>> people, but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
>> institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
>> Bank prevent this from happening.
>>
>
>Putting up barriers to free trade would not be a very good way to help
>the world's poor. It may be that each country is able to produce
>enough food to feed its current population, but people need to be able
>to buy the stuff. Free trade gives them more opportunities to earn the
>money to do this.
>
That is one of those *great ideas* that may not apply on Planet Earth.

>> But the World Bank itself claims to be part of the solution to hunger,
>> claiming that the best way for countries to succeed in breaking the
>> cycle of poverty and hunger is to build export-led economies that will
>> give them the financial means to buy foodstuffs on the world market.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger

Pat Sweeney
2011-08-11 19:33:27 EST
On Aug 11, 2:34 pm, masonc <mas...@frontal-lobe.info> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:14:54 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Aug 12, 12:25 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> 850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005 and
> >> the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.
>
> >> Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;
> >> rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution
> >> networks or from governmental policies in the developing world.
>
> >> Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
> >> city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own
> >> people, but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
> >> institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
> >> Bank prevent this from happening.
>
> >Putting up barriers to free trade would not be a very good way to help
> >the world's poor. It may be that each country is able to produce
> >enough food to feed its current population, but people need to be able
> >to buy the stuff. Free trade gives them more opportunities to earn the
> >money to do this.
>
> That is one of those *great ideas* that may not apply on Planet Earth.
>

What about freedom "from" choice?

a victim of collision on the open sea
nobody ever said that life was free
sank, swam, go down with the ship
but use your freedom of choice

i'll say it again in the land of the free
use your freedom of choice
your freedom of choice

in ancient rome there was a poem
about a dog who found two bones
he picked at one
he licked the other
he went in circles
he dropped dead

freedom of choice
is what you got
freedom of choice!

then if you got it you don't want it
seems to be the rule of thumb
don't be tricked by what you see
you got two ways to go

i'll say it again in the land of the free
use your freedom of choice
freedom of choice

freedom of choice
is what you got
freedom of choice!

in ancient rome
there was a poem
about a dog
who found two bones
he picked at one
he licked the other
he went in circles
he dropped dead

freedom of choice
is what you got
freedom from choice
is what you want
(repeat)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVGINIsLnqU&ob=av2e

>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> But the World Bank itself claims to be part of the solution to hunger,
> >> claiming that the best way for countries to succeed in breaking the
> >> cycle of poverty and hunger is to build export-led economies that will
> >> give them the financial means to buy foodstuffs on the world market.
>
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger


MANFRED The Heat Seeking OBOE
2011-08-12 08:56:42 EST

We Will Always Be a AAA Nation
-- OBAMA'10

People understand, Politicians need to raise money
-- OBAMA'10, as the stock market melted down


If a President of the United States
ever lied to the American people he should resign.
-- William J. Clinton, 1974


http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/160688.jpg
http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/144709.jpg
Supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."
Rev. Jay Scott Newman'08 on OBAMA.



IT REALLY IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.


The world should be
VERY CONCERNED about the OBAMA's sequel.
http://www.hillarythemovie.com/trailer.html
http://www.paragraph11.com/images/all/Paragraph11-Clinton-Joker.jpg



CTHILLARY::2012, We were WARNED.
If WAR be HELL, what comes AFTER?
She STILL has SUCH sights to show you.
http://omglog.com/thomas/archives/4083


DESERVE PEACE.
DESERVE FREEDOM.
DEMAND COMPETANCE.
DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY.
DEFEAT LIB STRATEGIC INSANITY. IMPEACH BARACK OBAMA.
---
LIBs plead for a Morality which holds COMPROMISE as its standard of
Value, making it possible to judge Virtue on the basis of the number of
Values which one is willing to Betray.




http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/02/28/barack-obama%E2%80%99s-moral-
concession-to-evil/

Barack Obama\ufffds Moral Concession to Evil

American presidents who declare that they will bow to the demands of
dictators who threaten American citizens are declaring that there is
nothing they will not betray. For those who were disturbed by President
Obama\ufffds diffidence in the face of Qaddafi\ufffds wickedness, it\ufffds worse than
you think. The ramifications of Mr. Obama\ufffds actions will outlive whatever
happens in Tripoli.



http://www.amazon.com/Roots-Obamas-Rage-Dinesh-DSouza/dp/1596986255
THE ROOTS OF OBAMA's RAGE

The real Obama is a man shaped by experiences far different from those
of most Americans; he is a much stranger, more determined, and
exponentially more dangerous man than you\ufffdd ever imagined. He is not
motivated by the civil rights struggles of African Americans in the
1960s those battles leave him wholly untouched. He is not motivated by
the socialist or Marxist propaganda that hypnotized a whole generation
of wooly minded academics and condescending liberals those concepts
also leave him cold.

What really motivates Barack Obama is an inherited rage an often
masked, but profound rage that comes from his African father; an
anticolonialist rage against Western dominance, and most especially
against the wealth and power of the very nation Barack Obama now leads.
It is this rage that explains the previously inexplicable, and that
gives us a startling look at what might lie ahead.

In The Roots of Obama\ufffds Rage you\ufffdll learn: Why Obama\ufffds economic
policies are actually designed to make America poorer compared to the
rest of the world Why Obama will welcome a nuclear Iran Why Obama sees
America as a rogue nation worse than North Korea The real reason Obama
banished a bust of Winston Churchill from the White House and ordered
NASA to praise the scientific contributions of Muslims Why Obama would
like to make America\ufffds superpower status a thing of the past



http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-
private-enterprises-obama-business-problem.html
HOW OBAMA THINKS

Barack Obama is the most antibusiness president in a generation,
perhaps in American history. Thanks to him the era of big government is
back. Obama runs up taxpayer debt not in the billions but in the
trillions. He has expanded the federal government's control over home
mortgages, investment banking, health care, autos and energy.



IT REALLY IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.
LIB STRATEGIC INSANITY CAN AND MUST BE DEFEATED.
EVIL HAS NO POWER WHEN THE GOOD REMAIN UNAFRAID.

Perseus
2011-08-12 15:41:31 EST
On Aug 11, 3:25 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005 and
> the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.
>
> Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;
> rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution
> networks or from governmental policies in the developing world.
>
> Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
> city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own
> people, but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
> institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
> Bank prevent this from happening.
>
> But the World Bank itself claims to be part of the solution to hunger,
> claiming that the best way for countries to succeed in breaking the
> cycle of poverty and hunger is to build export-led economies that will
> give them the financial means to buy foodstuffs on the world market.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger

To agree with this thesis, I should have to accept this planet is a
cornucopia one. .
The Greeks had also their "makaron nesoi" or "happy islands". In
those islands, it never was extreme heat or cold, and the land
provided three harvest of grain a year, without doing any tilling. A
nice breezed refreshed the people during the summer. The story about
the happy islands never said if there existed any trouble at all with
overpopulation. Then just imagine an island of this sort, with a
thousand square miles of surface. Just image that about a 10% of the
surface could provide some grain and, and the rest some grazing
mountains. Then 10 persons of both sexes arrived to this paradisaical
island and began to reproduce at a rate of 2.5% a year (this is rather
common in poor countries of America and Africa). When they arrived to
this island it was not inhabited. Now how many people would be in 200
years if they grow at 2.5% a year? 10*(1.025)^200=1,395 persons. It
is not much for a thousand square miles.
But could happen after a 500 years? Let me see, 10*(1.025)^500=2.3
millions
It seems to me these 2.3 millions are too many millions for an island
of a 1,000 square miles. Then, a lot of time before this point, they
would be going to have serious problems. In about 450 years they
would be like 670 thousand people. And this is too many people for a
thousand miles with a 10% of farming land. Then, well before this
moment, would be a lot of troubles and small wars among the
inhabitants of the happy islands, I suppose.

So, I was seriously angry with those people that are telling stories
like this one of you, about the people suffering of hunger in the
world. The most countries where there is most people is suffering of
hunger, are in Africa. But in Africa had been growing in the last 100
years at 1.9 % a year. It passed in 1,900 from being 114 million to
being 760 in year 2,000 it is a multiplication by 6.66 in hundred
years. Then, it would kind of miraculous if there were not be some
hunger here and there, as some countries had been growing at 2.5 and 3
% a year during the last 50 years. I feel very bad, that someone is
trying to make me feel bad for this hunger.

Why I think this is too much? It is very easy, and you only need to
know a little bit of maths to understand it. Just imagine that the
only humans of our same type, come out of Africa 70,000 years ago.
And let us assume they were a mere 1,000 people. The got out of
Africa to conquer the world. Well, the population of the planet in the
year 1,800 were 1 billion. Let's do some computing.
Time of growth 70,000 years
1,000,000,000/1,000=1,000,000
Then (Log 10^6)/70,000=8.57 (10^-5) Let me call this number B
So, 10^B =1.000197 that is rate of 197 persons per million people a
year.
So slow can be a "natural rate of growth".

We can verify this: (1.000197)^70,000= 1 million that multiplied by
the original population of a thousand people makes a billion.
You can think there could had been a lot more people in Africa than
the thousand people that emigrated out. Well, they emigrated because
they had some sort of crisis. But if in the planet were more people,
something like 100,000 persons, by example, then the growth in 70,000
years had been a little slower.

How much? It is easy. (Log 10,000)/70,000=8.16 (10-7)
Then, 10^8.16(10^-7)=1.000164 That makes 164 people per million
It is a slower rate of growth.
Then if we divide 164 by 197 = 0.83 that is an 83% rate of growth.
It is not a great difference.

Then, we are living a singular point in history, in which machines and
the use of fossils fuels had permitted a great increase in the
production of food and cheap means to distribute it around the world.
Then, do not ask for more technological miracles. Ask for a
population control in this planet.

Anyway, if the fossil fuels are going to be soon exhausted, we are
really busted, even with the help of a lot of nuclear power stations.
Rod speed thinks these damned nuclear power stations would save
humanity from starvation and even from a global thermonuclear war.

Perseus



Perseus
2011-08-12 15:47:07 EST
On Aug 11, 9:14 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 12, 12:25 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > 850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005 and
> > the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.
>
> > Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;
> > rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution
> > networks or from governmental policies in the developing world.
>
> > Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
> > city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own
> > people, but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
> > institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
> > Bank prevent this from happening.
>
> Putting up barriers to free trade would not be a very good way to help
> the world's poor. It may be that each country is able to produce
> enough food to feed its current population, but people need to be able
> to buy the stuff. Free trade gives them more opportunities to earn the
> money to do this.

It is not either a problem of existing barriers to the trade of
grain. The trouble is those nations that had nothing to sell in
exchange for this grain. I was observing that most hunger are nations
on the Sahel belt, at the south of Sahara. These nations had not any
valuable minerals to sell in exchange for food. Then, if they are
growing as fast a many nations, it is not any riddle to understand why
they are suffering hunger. They are living in a region with very
poor rains. They passed some years with good rain, then more with a
severe drought.

Perseus




Perseus
2011-08-12 15:51:17 EST
On Aug 12, 12:33 am, Pat Sweeney <resmac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2:34 pm, masonc <mas...@frontal-lobe.info> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:14:54 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
>
> > <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >On Aug 12, 12:25 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> 850 million people worldwide were undernourished in 1999 to 2005 and
> > >> the number of hungry people has recently been increasing widely.
>
> > >> Hunger in modern times is not typically the product of a lack of food;
> > >> rather, hunger usually arises from problems in food distribution
> > >> networks or from governmental policies in the developing world.
>
> > >> Every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some
> > >> city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own
> > >> people, but the "free trade" economic order associated with such
> > >> institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
> > >> Bank prevent this from happening.
>
> > >Putting up barriers to free trade would not be a very good way to help
> > >the world's poor. It may be that each country is able to produce
> > >enough food to feed its current population, but people need to be able
> > >to buy the stuff. Free trade gives them more opportunities to earn the
> > >money to do this.
>
> > That is one of those *great ideas* that may not apply on Planet Earth.
>
> What about freedom "from" choice?
>
> a victim of collision on the open sea
> nobody ever said that life was free
> sank, swam, go down with the ship
> but use your freedom of choice
>
> i'll say it again in the land of the free
> use your freedom of choice
> your freedom of choice
>
> in ancient rome there was a poem
> about a dog who found two bones
> he picked at one
> he licked the other
> he went in circles
> he dropped dead
>
> freedom of choice
> is what you got
> freedom of choice!
>
> then if you got it you don't want it
> seems to be the rule of thumb
> don't be tricked by what you see
> you got two ways to go
>
> i'll say it again in the land of the free
> use your freedom of choice
> freedom of choice
>
> freedom of choice
> is what you got
> freedom of choice!
>
> in ancient rome
> there was a poem
> about a dog
> who found two bones
> he picked at one
> he licked the other
> he went in circles
> he dropped dead
>
> freedom of choice
> is what you got
> freedom from choice
> is what you want
> (repeat)
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVGINIsLnqU&ob=av2e
>

this post it has not any sense at all. Someone suffer hunger because
the freedom of choice, or for some errors committed? They had many
children in times of plenty, than many of those children starved in
times of drought. It has nothing to do with freedom of choice. They
breed like rabbits; that is all. Is a command of nature in his most
natural condition.
Perseus


Perseus
2011-08-12 15:59:08 EST
On Aug 12, 1:56 pm, MANFRED the heat seeking OBOE
<*.@au.revoir.gov> wrote:
>   We Will Always Be a AAA Nation
>                         -- OBAMA'10
>
>   People understand, Politicians need to raise money
>                         -- OBAMA'10, as the stock market melted down
>
>    If a President of the United States
>    ever lied to the American people he should resign.
>        -- William J. Clinton, 1974
>
> http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/160688.jpghttp://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/144709.jpg
> Supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."
>          Rev. Jay Scott Newman'08 on OBAMA.
>
> IT REALLY IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.
>
> The world should be
> VERY CONCERNED about the OBAMA's sequel.http://www.hillarythemovie.com/trailer.htmlhttp://www.paragraph11.com/images/all/Paragraph11-Clinton-Joker.jpg
>
> CTHILLARY::2012, We were WARNED.
> If WAR be HELL, what comes AFTER?
> She STILL has SUCH sights to show you.http://omglog.com/thomas/archives/4083
>
> DESERVE PEACE.
> DESERVE FREEDOM.
> DEMAND COMPETANCE.
> DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY.
> DEFEAT LIB STRATEGIC INSANITY. IMPEACH BARACK OBAMA.
> ---
> LIBs plead for a Morality which holds COMPROMISE as its standard of
> Value, making it possible to judge Virtue on the basis of the number of
> Values which one is willing to Betray.
>
> http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/02/28/barack-obama%E2%80%99s-m...
> concession-to-evil/
>
>       Barack Obama’s Moral Concession to Evil
>
> American presidents who declare that they will bow to the demands of
> dictators who threaten American citizens are declaring that there is
> nothing they will not betray. For those who were disturbed by President
> Obama’s diffidence in the face of Qaddafi’s wickedness, it’s worse than
> you think. The ramifications of Mr. Obama’s actions will outlive whatever
> happens in Tripoli.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Roots-Obamas-Rage-Dinesh-DSouza/dp/1596986255
>         THE ROOTS OF OBAMA's RAGE
>
>    The real Obama is a man shaped by experiences far different from those
>    of most Americans; he is a much stranger, more determined, and
>    exponentially more dangerous man than you’d ever imagined. He is not
>    motivated by the civil rights struggles of African Americans in the
>    1960s those battles leave him wholly untouched. He is not motivated by
>    the socialist or Marxist propaganda that hypnotized a whole generation
>    of wooly minded academics and condescending liberals those concepts
>    also leave him cold.
>
>    What really motivates Barack Obama is an inherited rage an often
>    masked, but profound rage that comes from his African father; an
>    anticolonialist rage against Western dominance, and most especially
>    against the wealth and power of the very nation Barack Obama now leads.
>    It is this rage that explains the previously inexplicable, and that
>    gives us a startling look at what might lie ahead.
>
>    In The Roots of Obama’s Rage you’ll learn: Why Obama’s economic
>    policies are actually designed to make America poorer compared to the
>    rest of the world Why Obama will welcome a nuclear Iran Why Obama sees
>    America as a rogue nation worse than North Korea The real reason Obama
>    banished a bust of Winston Churchill from the White House and ordered
>    NASA to praise the scientific contributions of Muslims Why Obama would
>    like to make America’s superpower status a thing of the past
>
> http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-
> private-enterprises-obama-business-problem.html
>         HOW OBAMA THINKS
>
>    Barack Obama is the most antibusiness president in a generation,
>    perhaps in American history. Thanks to him the era of big government is
>    back. Obama runs up taxpayer debt not in the billions but in the
>    trillions. He has expanded the federal government's control over home
>    mortgages, investment banking, health care, autos and energy.
>
> IT REALLY IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.
> LIB STRATEGIC INSANITY CAN AND MUST BE DEFEATED.
> EVIL HAS NO POWER WHEN THE GOOD REMAIN UNAFRAID.

this capitalist breed is playing the Russian roulette. When the
financial world collapses, the whole castle of cards would collapse
also. If they ruined farther the people of the planet to whom are
they going to fleece out?
The prediction of Marx of the collapse of the capitalism can occur
really, if they do not put some money on the markets to make people
back to work. If they continue to import cheap goods from China and
South East Asia, they would end wrecking the whole damned system they
are praying on.

Perseus
Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron