FEW of the world's people are starving to death. There are a lot of people who are undernourished. But STARVING means wll die within a very short time. Yout comment is ludicrous. MOST means that out of the world's 6 billion plus people, that over 3 billion of them will be dead within perhaps a few days to a few weeks.
Well considering that 3 billion people live on less than $2/day, I think that they are pretty hungry and close to starving. But I guess I corrected, most are not dropping like flies from starvation, only a couple hundred million are literally doing that. The rest are just undernourished & malnourished, living in perpetual hunger. So yeah, things are just fine & dandy. Just a "few" people dying from hunger, and a couple others slowly perishing from hunger & malnutrition.
I'm going to risk sounding ludicrous as well, but I've felt for a long time that the elitists, including many at the UN, would rather just see mass starvation instead of the logistical and political problems associated with feeding the world. You know these people... the ones that want to abort the population down to what they feel is a sustainable level.
If only poverty and hunger were a "money" problem. There not, they're political problems. You'd have to be pretty naive to not see that.
Annual deaths caused by malnutrition: 6 million. Or about 0.1% of the world's population: http://www.androidworld.com/prod94.htm 3 times as many people die of heart disease and it is also less than those who die of cancer
Where is it predestined that everyone should live to be 90 years old? We are already scraping down the last vestiges of nature. It is a matter of WHEN not IF there is little left of the natural world in many countries. Is it a crime that people die? Overpopulation in nature leads to reductions in a population - such as predator-prey ratios. Many areas of human malnutrition are in areas where there are too many people for the resources even in a plentiful year. So the future is going to be people depending on UN relief centers to survive. Instead, some think that only when death is completely conquered, that we should feel stop feeling guilty. Did you send all your excess money to relief yet? Are you eating cold beans and living in a box, so that you can send your money to keep more people alive? By wandering into areas with our modern technology and western mindsets, and trying to ensure no one croaks via vaccines, clean water, modern farming methods, we are also causing future hardship for the land and for its people. We have destroyed more primitive and indigenous cultures than can be counted. We do a lot of good, and we do a lot of harm. We were meant to live with the land, not depend on daily handouts because we have grown out of control
It's always easy to ask this question when it is somebody halfway across the world who dies. Any person who dies is somebody's son or daughter, mother or father, sister or brother, best friend, etc. A death never occurs in a vacuum... somebody else is affected. I would never want to be in the position to decide who is worthy to eat, and who should just be allowed to die.
no shit.. when a tomato or an apple or two costs as much as a happy meal.. i agree that's a crises when ONE tomato costs a $1.50 or more give me a break thats BS!
Most of the food disasters are political not natural. Remember Starvin' Marvin from Etheopia in the eighties? His frigging government was starving him on purpose...