in another thread I posted that ~ 30,000 children died every day out starvation. This number come out of a 30 years old UNICEF/WHO publication, and thus was challenged by JamieD as outdated. Well the numbers below are from recent analysis, and more important have been validated by statiscians with no political or organizational affiliations.

Total number of children that die every year from hunger  15 million
Total percentage of world population considered to be starving  33%
Total amount of time between deaths of people who die from hunger  3.6 seconds 
Total number of people in the world who suffer from hunger and malnutrition  800 million 
Total number of people who do not have enough to eat  936 million people 
Total percentage who do not have enough to eat who live in developing countries  98%
Total percentage of world's hungry that live in 7 countries  65%
Total number of people who died of hunger today  20,864
Total number of people who will die of hunger this year  2,073,588
Total percentage of U.S. households that are at risk of hunger  11%

http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-hunger-statistics/

Horrifying numbers. Just shocking. A reminder to be thankful for what we have. Hugs, Devlyn

I always feel somewhat conflicted by statistics such as these. The emotional response is one of sadness and a desire to alleviate the situation - but the cold, logical part of me realises that nature has methods of population control and really, every species on earth can only exist in environments through which it can sustain itself. And a lot of countries which have high death rates through things like hunger and malnutrition also have extremely high birth rates.



Which means that if you have massive amounts of children in areas where food supplies can't feed them all... well, death is inevitable, as tragic as it is. 

Peky, you're a good scientist!

I don't care about worldwide hunger issues.

We have enough hungry people in the US who aren't adequately cared for (seniors being one major group), and we have a host of other problems (nearly all related to capitalism) that seem to defy getting fixed.

Sorry, but I cannot allow myself to care about people from 90% of the world when we ourselves can't won't take care of our own.

In my "Social Problems" class, I read that the whole world spends over 20 trillion dollars on military arms & equipments every year. The United States is number one on the spending list, which is where I'm from.  The U.S. spends hundreds of billions of dollars every year on military arms & equipments. If the whole world didn't spend any money on military arms & equipments, they would have enough money to help all the starving people in the world & still have plenty of money left over to help people in poverty. Why can't we just love one another & embrace each other & get along... Instead of killing each other. We are just animals...

Quote from: peky on May 26, 2012, 08:26:16 PM
in another thread I posted that ~ 30,000 children died every day out starvation. This number come out of a 30 years old UNICEF/WHO publication, and thus was challenged by JamieD as outdated. Well the numbers below are from recent analysis, and more important have been validated by statiscians with no political or organizational affiliations.

Total number of children that die every year from hunger  15 million
Why are only numbers of children being presented?

Total percentage of world population considered to be starving  33% 33% = 2.33 billion

Total amount of time between deaths of people who die from hunger  3.6 seconds Irrelevant bit of information, and not true. Exactly 3.6 seconds = 1 death? Did we have scientists verifying each and every starvation death, and compile all times of death? No...in fact, the numbers of (estimated) deaths were divided into a defined time frame...which is a long-winded way of saying, "On average, one person dies every 3.6 seconds."  This is a simple way of creating propaganda--establish "a time interval" for each death, and one can use this to create emotion. No government should EVER be motivated by emotion, imho. 

Total number of people in the world who suffer from hunger and malnutrition  800 million  Wait...earlier the post said 33% are "starving"..."hunger and malnutrition" is a less severe form of starving, but normally an extreme is (by definition) a lesser amount than a more broad definition...yet 2.33 billion not less than 800 million.

Total number of people who do not have enough to eat  936 million people  "Do not have enough to eat"...isn't that another way of saying "suffer(ing) from hunger and malnutrition"? Why the different numbers?
Total percentage who do not have enough to eat who live in developing countries  98% Yes. Developing countries do not have adequate resources for creating and distributing food. There are a number of reasons for this, but simply feeding these people will not correct the problem.The core problems are (imho) wars, famines, lethargy on the part of the particular population, and self-control. Food is not a good thing to give to anyone who lives in (and perpetuates) these kinds of problems.

Total percentage of world's hungry that live in 7 countries  65% Which countries? And do they have the problems I mentioned in the point above?

Total number of people who died of hunger today  20,864 20, 86 four? Oh, so now we have real-time updates on who died from hunger TODAY, and in these "developing" countries, with completely inadequate communications and support networks? Simply put....PROPAGANDA.

Total number of people who will die of hunger this year  2,073,588 Umm, wait...20,864 (people who died of hunger today) x 365 (days in a year) = 7,615,360...more than 3 times the estimate given in this point...but only HALF of the "Total number of children that die every year from hunger  15 million" given in the FIRST point in this presentation.

Total percentage of U.S. households that are at risk of hunger  11% "At risk" is a meaningless statement. What does "at risk" mean? No money for food? Not enough food banks? Living paycheck-to-paycheck (even if the household eats "three squares" each day? Another appeal to emotion...PROPAGANDA.

http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-hunger-statistics/

Quote from: Smuffypower on May 26, 2012, 09:31:52 PM
In my "Social Problems" class, I read that the whole world spends over 20 trillion dollars on military arms & equipments every year. The United States is number one on the spending list, which is where I'm from.  The U.S. spends hundreds of billions of dollars every year on military arms & equipments. If the whole world didn't spend any money on military arms & equipments, they would have enough money to help all the starving people in the world & still have plenty of money left over to help people in poverty. Why can't we just love one another & embrace each other & get along... Instead of killing each other. We are just animals...

Well, yes. In a manner of speaking. Worse than animals, all things considered.

Why do we spend trillions on weapons and war? Easy...hypothetical situation:

I want to kill you. The "why" doesn't matter. You have food, women, land, water, I hate you, you hate me...doesn't matter, any of it. I want to kill you. I get a weapon to help me out.

You get a weapon to protect yourself. In response, I get friends to help me.

You get friends to help you. In our own camps, we organize our friends...some get food, some learn medicine (because of anticipated wounds), others learn to fight.

We establish borders ("countries"). In time, we fight. We bring in our neighboring countries--either due to treaties or pressure.

Time passes...history is written. We have people who study history; to better to learn how to kill those we don't like. We also notice that countries which don't actively pursue a war stance only last a few decades...overrun by those that do.

This is the nature of the beast, of humanity. Because it involves thousands--millions, or billions--of people, not all of whom we may know, there is no way to control it...except by establishing our own countries, with our own sets of rules and ideas to minimize conflict.

Over time, this creates inequity...and passions are fueled, yet again.

Welcome to Real Social Problems 101. There'll be a test on Friday. 

Quote from: Sephirah on May 26, 2012, 09:02:32 PM
I always feel somewhat conflicted by statistics such as these. The emotional response is one of sadness and a desire to alleviate the situation - but the cold, logical part of me realises that nature has methods of population control and really, every species on earth can only exist in environments through which it can sustain itself. And a lot of countries which have high death rates through things like hunger and malnutrition also have extremely high birth rates.



Which means that if you have massive amounts of children in areas where food supplies can't feed them all... well, death is inevitable, as tragic as it is.

Um what? The countries that have high birth rates are underdeveloped so they need the children to do labor. If they didn't have a bunch of children, no one would do sustenance farmer, ergo there would be A LOT less food. Never mind that Africa has WAY better land for farming than the US but produces only a fraction of the food that is produced in the US, much of which is then thrown away, so Africa is totally capable of feeding the entire African population if the US can more than adequately feed its population.

Quote from: Smuffypower on May 26, 2012, 09:31:52 PM
In my "Social Problems" class, I read that the whole world spends over 20 trillion dollars on military arms & equipments every year. The United States is number one on the spending list, which is where I'm from.  The U.S. spends hundreds of billions of dollars every year on military arms & equipments. If the whole world didn't spend any money on military arms & equipments, they would have enough money to help all the starving people in the world & still have plenty of money left over to help people in poverty. Why can't we just love one another & embrace each other & get along... Instead of killing each other. We are just animals...

It's not just that, there's actually already enough food produced to feed the whole world.

Okay I'm tired and I probably can't back that up adequately but seriously, you all should look into that instead of blaming poor countries for the problems that come as a result of feeding YOUR lifestyles*.

While I was trying to look up global crop yields and other stuff I can't handle 5 minutes before bed I did come accross this article:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2008/2008-08-22-01.asp

"More than enough food is produced to feed a healthy global population. Distribution and access to food is a problem - many are hungry, while at the same time many overeat," the brief states. But, it says, "we are providing food to take care of not only our necessary consumption but also our wasteful habits.

"As much as half of the water used to grow food globally may be lost or wasted," says Dr. Charlotte de Fraiture, a researcher at IWMI. "
-------
*Mine too, obviously, but I didn't ask for this anymore than the ex-colonies asked to be colonized. At least admitting there's a problem is a start though.

Quote from: Beth Andrea on May 26, 2012, 09:55:09 PM
Well, yes. In a manner of speaking. Worse than animals, all things considered.

Why do we spend trillions on weapons and war? Easy...hypothetical situation:

I want to kill you. The "why" doesn't matter. You have food, women, land, water, I hate you, you hate me...doesn't matter, any of it. I want to kill you. I get a weapon to help me out.

You get a weapon to protect yourself. In response, I get friends to help me.

You get friends to help you. In our own camps, we organize our friends...some get food, some learn medicine (because of anticipated wounds), others learn to fight.

We establish borders ("countries"). In time, we fight. We bring in our neighboring countries--either due to treaties or pressure.

Time passes...history is written. We have people who study history; to better to learn how to kill those we don't like. We also notice that countries which don't actively pursue a war stance only last a few decades...overrun by those that do.

This is the nature of the beast, of humanity. Because it involves thousands--millions, or billions--of people, not all of whom we may know, there is no way to control it...except by establishing our own countries, with our own sets of rules and ideas to minimize conflict.

Over time, this creates inequity...and passions are fueled, yet again.

Welcome to Real Social Problems 101. There'll be a test on Friday. 

Yes, that's true. I think it's more complex than easy. In a simple terms, like you said, "Hate" is one main reason. Beth Andrea - "We have people who study history; to better to learn how to kill those we don't like..." - What kind of teacher do you have??? I have collections of guns, but  I go shooting as a hobby & competition shooting, not to kill or hurt anybody. And I don't shoot or kill animals. I also reload ammunitions. Obviously we never stop learning, but I wouldn't mind learning everything.  Like I said before, we should all love each other and get along or else we are just going to tear ourselves apart. Some people say without wars & military, we wouldn't have the advance technology that was created by the military. I don't think you really need military to have or get advance technology, because there is a lot of technology created from & by civilians. I heard that the military technology is ahead by 100 years compared to civilian technology.

I'm guessing your in "Real Social Problems 101" class, unless you were just being sarcastic. What are you majoring in? Good luck on your test!  I hope you do well! LOL! My class I took was just called "Social Problems". With "Constitutional Law", "Physical Anthropology", & "Photography I". Those were my last spring semester classes. I focused more on my other classes, besides my "Social Problems" class. I got  "A's" on all three classes, except "Social Problems", which I got a "B". Finally graduated with my "Criminal Justice" degree 2 weeks ago. YAY!

Quote from: Carbon on May 26, 2012, 09:59:31 PM
Um what? The countries that have high birth rates are underdeveloped so they need the children to do labor. If they didn't have a bunch of children, no one would do sustenance farmer, ergo there would be A LOT less food. Never mind that Africa has WAY better land for farming than the US but produces only a fraction of the food that is produced in the US, much of which is then thrown away, so Africa is totally capable of feeding the entire African population if the US can more than adequately feed its population.

It's not just that, there's actually already enough food produced to feed the whole world.

Okay I'm tired and I probably can't back that up adequately but seriously, you all should look into that instead of blaming poor countries for the problems that come as a result of feeding YOUR lifestyles*.



While I was trying to look up global crop yields and other stuff I can't handle 5 minutes before bed I did come accross this article:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2008/2008-08-22-01.asp

"More than enough food is produced to feed a healthy global population. Distribution and access to food is a problem - many are hungry, while at the same time many overeat," the brief states. But, it says, "we are providing food to take care of not only our necessary consumption but also our wasteful habits.

"As much as half of the water used to grow food globally may be lost or wasted," says Dr. Charlotte de Fraiture, a researcher at IWMI. "
-------
*Mine too, obviously, but I didn't ask for this anymore than the ex-colonies asked to be colonized. At least admitting there's a problem is a start though.

I know I wasn't blaming the poor countries. You probably meant it to somebody else. I agree with you. There seems to be more blaming the victim, than actually doing something about it & trying to help. I know obviously we have enough food to feed all the starving people.

Quote from: Sephirah on May 26, 2012, 09:02:32 PM
I always feel somewhat conflicted by statistics such as these. The emotional response is one of sadness and a desire to alleviate the situation - but the cold, logical part of me realises that nature has methods of population control and really, every species on earth can only exist in environments through which it can sustain itself. And a lot of countries which have high death rates through things like hunger and malnutrition also have extremely high birth rates.

<snip>

Which means that if you have massive amounts of children in areas where food supplies can't feed them all... well, death is inevitable, as tragic as it is.

I have a tendency to agree. 

A part of me feels bad for the children, but a part of me also says that it is population control and population control needs to happen.  That is the same part of me that has a serious dislike of vaccinations and life support (and I'm a person that has had to be on life support).  It's rather conflicting and the arguments go 'round and 'round in my head because I contradict myself in what I'm feeling.

Quote from: Beth Andrea on May 26, 2012, 09:24:31 PM
I don't care about worldwide hunger issues.

We have enough hungry people in the US who aren't adequately cared for (seniors being one major group), and we have a host of other problems (nearly all related to capitalism) that seem to defy getting fixed.

Sorry, but I cannot allow myself to care about people from 90% of the world when we ourselves can't won't take care of our own.

I also very much agree with this. 

I'm more for taking care of the population of the country that I reside in than for a country that I have no emotional connection to.  I think we should focus on taking care of our own first and then focusing on others, but I'll also admit that if I have no sort of visible connection with someone I don't really care what happens to them. (I'm lacking in the empathy department.)

Quote from: Carbon on May 26, 2012, 09:59:31 PM
Okay I'm tired and I probably can't back that up adequately but seriously, you all should look into that instead of blaming poor countries for the problems that come as a result of feeding YOUR lifestyles*.

It has nothing to do with "our" lifestyles. The problems come because while countries may well have the resources to feed themselves, some don't because there is a lack of infrastructure - due in the most part to massively corrupt governments who squander money from oil and precious metals to build lavish palaces and fight stupid wars rather than spend it on actually improving the lives of the people who live there - which forces people into subsistance farming, trying to sell what they can to make ends meet and having a diet lacking in all the nutrition they need to live healthy lives. And then these self same governments control the distribution of food and aid relief which does get imported in, so the people don't get that, either.

It's not the amount of food which is produced which needs to be looked at, it's the way some countries are run. And by the same token, you can't blame more developed countries for not constantly rushing to the aid of these countries when the people there either don't get it distributed to them, or are willing to let their country be run by a corrupt government, content to see the population scratching around in the dirt while they drive around in Bentleys and quaff the finest wines.

Change has to come from within. Thankfully this is happening in some places.

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

Many of the countries with the highest rates of starvation have authoritarian governments.

North Korea, for example.

Exactly!  Just like Sephirah said. This subject is a complex issue, but it is solvable as long as someone's (politicians, governments, people, & etc...) willing to do it.

I have some relatives that I never met who is still in North Korea. I don't even know if their still living.  I hope their doing well.

Obviously I didn't do a good job sleeping.

Quote from: Smuffypower on May 26, 2012, 10:30:25 PM
I know I wasn't blaming the poor countries. You probably meant it to somebody else. I agree with you. There seems to be more blaming the victim, than actually doing something about it & trying to help. I know obviously we have enough food to feed all the starving people.

Yeah, sorry. I was just getting frustrated a lot of the people in this topic because that kind of callousness and privileged thinking makes me angry. I dislike arguments that center around increasing food production to solve world hunger, though. Like I am a vegetarian and it's not unusual for vegetarians to argue that vegetarianism is an objectively better lifestyle because it uses less resources than a meat-centic diet. But that implies that there isn't already enough food that's just being squandared.

Your point about the military spending is useful in that it shows the priorities of the most powerful people in our countries- and the complacency of people who see no need to object. I personally would be in favor of a tax on the people tax int he richest countries to pay for basic healthcare in the rest of the world. It wouldn't get everyone fed, but it would be a start. Oh and if that money was squandered? It could create problems, but I have a feeling people would be very angry if money set aside to help them was being used for some other purpose.

Quote from: SephirahIt has nothing to do with "our" lifestyles. The problems come because while countries may well have the resources to feed themselves, some don't because there is a lack of infrastructure - due in the most part to massively corrupt governments who squander money from oil and precious metals to build lavish palaces and fight stupid wars rather than spend it on actually improving the lives of the people who live there - which forces people into subsistance farming, trying to sell what they can to make ends meet and having a diet lacking in all the nutrition they need to live healthy lives. And then these self same governments control the distribution of food and aid relief which does get imported in, so the people don't get that, either.

oh my gosh where do you think those corrupt governments came from? why did those countries failed to develop infrastructure when the (neo)colonial countries managed to develop a relatively amazing infrastructure? why do you think those leaders stay in power and where do you think those leaders get the economic support to carry out their regimes?

anyway it has EVERYTHING to do withour lifestyles because it is literally impossible for the whole world to live like people in the US live. there are just not enough resources in the world.

Maybe this is my selfish beliefs but for the world to exist there must be sorrow from people less better off than us in countries that are ripe in corruption and would rather see there population starve cause they don't carry if you live of die.
If there was no death how long would it take before human growth out grows the food sources that we need to sustain the plant for future generation
Looking after people starts at home not in another country ...
Natural selection is the same as the animal/plant kingdom where the healthiest of us survive...

Quote from: Floritine on May 27, 2012, 02:23:14 AM
Maybe this is my selfish beliefs but for the world to exist there must be sorrow from people less better off than us in countries that are ripe in corruption and would rather see there population starve cause they don't carry if you live of die.
If there was no death how long would it take before human growth out grows the food sources that we need to sustain the plant for future generation
Looking after people starts at home not in another country ...
Natural selection is the same as the animal/plant kingdom where the healthiest of us survive...

Most of the wealthiest countries actually have population decline or at least much slower growth. (people call it "an aging population") Increasing the well being of people in poorer countries is probably the easiest way to slow and eventually lower the global population.

join www.worldvision.org or www.childsfund.org if you can afford it.(25.00 a month) . i did for the last 11 yrs and have had a chance to help two kids from lusaka zambia