Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Discussion: Feeding starving people only makes more starving people
Posts: 7121
-
Karma: 15
The argument is that if you give food to a starving person, near the brink of death, that they regain their strength only to sruvive and possible one day to produce one or more children in the famine suseptible area that they once starved in. And another famine hits, now you have their multiple children that face starvation, and instead of 10 million starving people as was the case if the first famine, you have 40 million people that might starve, once again someone intervines, feeds them, they reproduce, and at another time a famine hits only to threaten more people.
Posts: 11256
-
Karma: 424
You don't place much value on the human life, do you? I can see your logic behind that, but going by that theory we may as well just have a mass suicide so problems like that couldn't exist. Try looking at people in poor nations as other humans, not as objects requiring constant attention.
Posts: 8068
-
Karma: 43
yea, and AIDS, bird flu, abortion, and plauges are population control...
(sarcasm)
Posts: 7121
-
Karma: 15
it wasn't me who said it, I just wanted to see what other people had to write about it
besdies, YOU don't care much for human life, as you seemingly might save 10 millions lives is preferable to more lives
"the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few"
Posts: 7121
-
Karma: 15
just "tradegy of the commons"
Posts: 3150
-
Karma: 421
they are in a way, it is like survival of the fittest, where the ones who can avoid those things will be the ones to survive.
unless you mean that we should use those as population control, like sending bird flu to an overpopulated area to kill people. then i wouldnt agree with that
Posts: 2960
-
Karma: 15
have you ever heard of the man credited to saving a billion lives?
Posts: 8068
-
Karma: 43
no, i just meant like, theres a TON of people who die everyday becuase of things. we try to fix them, so we find a cure.
so, theres no more AIDS, no more (any kind of) plauges, no more abortion, no more genocide, no more deaths that "shouldnt" happen.
we wipe all of the major killers of the world out. then what?
Posts: 8068
-
Karma: 43
i guess what im tryin to say is if we didnt have these kinds of things, the world would be insanely overpopulated
Posts: 3150
-
Karma: 421
then overpopulation causes more deaths, rainforests are taken down for farming land, more animals are killed for food. we dont have a predator, so there is nothing to stop us from killing everything else. we eventually kill everything
maybe
Posts: 7121
-
Karma: 15
its hard to be coldly rational isn't it, when dealing with pain and human emotion
Posts: 2620
-
Karma: 164
well the problem in a lot of poor nations is that you need to have lots of kids to survive. the kids go out and work to help support the family. so the problems just keep multiplying, literally. the key to helping third world countries is not to just give them food. like that thing, 'give a man a fish, and he has food for a day. teach a man how to fish, and he has food for a lifetime' you have to help them help themselves. This means introducing appropriate technoilogy. That might mean not giving them tractors to farm. they cant use it if they run out of fuel, and they dont have the knowledge to maintian them. like a man powered pump for irrigaton would be suitable. instead of wasting energy carrying buckets of wate rto water home gardens, they use the pump. the pump may be an expensive investment to them. alot of poor people do not undersatnd the concept of an investment. lets say a pump costs $70. thats a lot of money for them, maybe 70 days of food. but they dont understand that if they spend that money, they will get it back through increased yields.
Posts: 2128
-
Karma: 19
That would never happen. Other diseases will come along. There will be mutation, resistance of bacteria and viruses. It has always been in history and it will always be so that there will be a cure after the disease. Not the way around...
Posts: 7121
-
Karma: 15
"We can maximize the number of human beings living at the lowest possible level of comfort, or we can try to optimize the quality of life for a much smaller population."
Meaning we can all live in cubicles and eat phytoplankton, or the obvious later.
Think of Iceland, 280,000 people living with arguable the highest standard of living in the world, or some slum.
Posts: 3488
-
Karma: 11
The whole 3rd world poverty thing is the biggest smoke show in the world. I've talked with actual dudes from crazy countries in Africa (they were taxi drivers in Fort McMurray). They say they can't grow their own food. If a police officer/soldier sees you scratching the ground with a hoe, you get shot in the fuckin head. The gov't wants the world to think they have a famine so they can get handouts. They said the nicest estates in a city had like golf courses and game reserves and shit built right into them and they were owned by the UN dudes in charge of distributing wealth. The military would confiscate food and medical supplies so they could go on genocide campaigns. And even the whole perception of Africa is bogus. The people pictured in those drippy late-night ads are tribal, rural dwellers. The problem with them is they are self-sufficient and have no need for currency. therefore they don't pay taxes. African governments want money to build factories so they can enslave the tribal people and take them from their land, pay them peanuts to make sneakers and AK47's and tax the shit out of them. The reason they look so disheveled is because The Man takes away their food so they look like shit, then let the cameras roll so people in developed countries cough up money, which never goes where its supposed to. Its one hell of a situation, you're better off fighting poverty in your own town, which is a whole other can of worms...
Posts: 2061
-
Karma: 27
thats exactly the problem.... but i suppose in time natural selection will cover all the basis.
Posts: 7121
-
Karma: 15
one day, probibly far in the future, that will be the "bullet we hesitate to bite"
either that or nature will cause us to undergo a population correction
being a density dependant plague or world wide food shortage.
Posts: 21362
-
Karma: 5,142
You're not being coldly rational. You're being utilitarian. Which I guess is arguably coldly rational, but they aren't interchangeable. Anyway, utilitarianism is worthless, there are at least a dozen reasons why, and as a result, the implication of the thread title is bunk.
Posts: 3727
-
Karma: 13
i think its pointless to feed starving people with aids.
just let the cure do its work
Posts: 10281
-
Karma: 36
was it you or stowebum who said that AIDS was the cure for gay people and sickle cell was the cure for black people.
there are more things that we can do for a community or country in deep debt or famine, aside from going hey, have a cheeseburger with this care package to keep you alive a little while longer.
untied aid, and more money put into education and architecture would cure famine and overpopulation.
Posts: 1317
-
Karma: 7
This is Bob Barker reminding you to get your poor person spaid or nuetered
Posts: 10281
-
Karma: 36
hint, don't listen to everthing the crazy taxi driver tells you.
if it was that low-pro and you'd get shot in the head for touching the ground with a hoe, he wouldn't be telling the national secret to some white tourist in his cab
Posts: 10281
-
Karma: 36
and yea, I've been to countries in not really all that bad of shape in the "Third world scheme of things", and believe me, they aren't pretending to live in shacks and shanty towns.
All times are Eastern (-5)
