30 billion seems light. But if it's correct, confiscating Putin's stealings would cover 2 years.
Chess to stop world hunger
Sort:
Senior-Lazarus_Long wrote:
30 billion seems light. But if it's correct, confiscating Putin's stealings would cover 2 years.
or maybe stop the U.S. war machine?! Just maybe?
Nature is heartless... but less people starving to death now means more people being born and thus ultimately an even greater number of people starving to death later.
Unless birth control was used to a sufficient degree - that could happen, right?
Ah, but there's a problem with that... then only the portion of the human population that was willing to use it would reduce in number or remain at a relatively constant number.
Those who did practice (some degree) of birth control wouldn't necessarily get selected out entirely, but they would become an increasingly small portion of the world human population - with a correspondingly smaller and smaller influence on what the world population was.
With an increasing human demand for vegetable matter to consume I think that it is reasonable to assume that sooner or later some people would come up with the idea that a (albeit sadly temporary) "solution" would be if there were less animals consuming vegetable matter, and taking up land that could be used to grow food for humans on. "Useless" (to humans) species would likely receive "assisted extinction".
Pretty soon China will take the place of the US as world cop.Our guys need a break.
Streets of London, by Ralph McTell:
balente wrote:
Actually that are not "homeless", they are "derelicts". There is a difference.
Duuuude.....study much psychology?
Feb 3, 2015
0
#48
Murgen wrote:
You have some pretty extreme ideas. I believe it was Hitler who came up with the perfect solution, as he called it. These views of population control, assisted extinction, Useless species all sound frighteningly similar. All I want to know is what harm does a little charity cause?
Nature is heartless... but less people starving to death now means more people being born and thus ultimately an even greater number of people starving to death later.
Unless birth control was used to a sufficient degree - that could happen, right?
Ah, but there's a problem with that... then only the portion of the human population that was willing to use it would reduce in number or remain at a relatively constant number.
Those who did practice (some degree) of birth control wouldn't necessarily get selected out entirely, but they would become an increasingly small portion of the world human population - with a correspondingly smaller and smaller influence on what the world population was.
With an increasing human demand for vegetable matter to consume I think that it is reasonable to assume that sooner or later some people would come up with the idea that a (albeit sadly temporary) "solution" would be if there were less animals consuming vegetable matter, and taking up land that could be used to grow food for humans on. "Useless" (to humans) species would likely receive "assisted extinction".
kaynight wrote:
You cannot change the world, but Bravo for trying Nek.
Why do you respond to pretty much every single thread on this site with snarky comments? Why do you care so much to respond to them?
Feb 3, 2015
0
#50
incantevoleutopia wrote:
Homless, jobless, hopeless is a global epidemic, no one is immune.
Streets of London, by Ralph McTell:
Feb 3, 2015
0
#51
Murgen wrote:
Nature is heartless... but less people starving to death now means more people being born and thus ultimately an even greater number of people starving to death later.
Unless birth control was used to a sufficient degree - that could happen, right?
Ah, but there's a problem with that... then only the portion of the human population that was willing to use it would reduce in number or remain at a relatively constant number.
Those who did practice (some degree) of birth control wouldn't necessarily get selected out entirely, but they would become an increasingly small portion of the world human population - with a correspondingly smaller and smaller influence on what the world population was.
With an increasing human demand for vegetable matter to consume I think that it is reasonable to assume that sooner or later some people would come up with the idea that a (albeit sadly temporary) "solution" would be if there were less animals consuming vegetable matter, and taking up land that could be used to grow food for humans on. "Useless" (to humans) species would likely receive "assisted extinction".
What you wrote is not only ridiculous and immoral, it is also pseudo scientific. I'd say it has nothing to do with the original post as well. There are better reasons to object having organized charity than the malthusian darwinian stuff you wrote.
heres the sad reality
farms can grow up to 10 times more food than what they are producing right now
the thing is that government mandates that they grow food at a certain level to keep prices up
Pulpofeira wrote:
Darth_Algar escribió:
I think the estimated cost to eliminate hunger worldwide is around $30 billion (USD) per year. Good luck.
Sorry but that's nothing.
In the scheme of national spending, correct. It is nothing. In the scheme of chess tournaments, however, it might be a bit much.
Feb 3, 2015
0
#54
Nekhemevich wrote:
Murgen wrote:
When a population doesn't balance itself,nature balances it: starvation, epidemics, war etc.
Human ingenuity can ward off these things for a while... that allows problems to get bigger before coming to a head (on a grander scale).
Water can be removed from the ocean with a teaspoon - but the ocean won't get emptied that way.
When a population doesn't balance, nature balances it. That's a heartless way to look at it.
It's not only heartless (well, he'll say moral opinion has nothing to do with it) but it is false. It is a myth that there is such thing as human overpopulation. There is localized overpopulation due to uneven population density in different parts of the world, and poor resource management/transportation. That is not over population.
But even assuming this myth of overpopulation were true, it should have no bearing on our moral standards. What Murgen is suggesting is "it is me or them, so let those people starve". Of course by "them" he refers to people in distant lands.
the world sucks, it's a corporative fascist pseudo-democracy and EVERYTHING is polluted. From health to food to economy... there's nothing to save. And some people, most of them, will die proud of it. Great.
Feb 3, 2015
0
#56
incantevoleutopia wrote:
the world sucks, it's a corporative fascist pseudo-democracy and EVERYTHING is polluted. From health to food to economy... there's nothing to save. And some people, most of them, will die proud of it. Great.
I don't know what it is with people from Slovenia. I hope it is just a coincidence. But you are the second person with Slovenian flag next to their name who expressed this nihilist, pessimistic view point. "Humanity is destined to die, we're all going to die. We're surrounded by lies and crappy governments. What's the point?"
For one, there is no one world government you refer to. So you should only speak for your country.
But more importantly, I don't even see how you're addressing anything the OP or others wrote in this thread. Is this just a way for you to rant?
Feb 3, 2015
0
#57
HueyWilliams wrote:
Oh I know, and then we could talk a bunch of bands into donating their efforts! And maybe then we could put on a worldwide concert for one day with all the proceeds going to charity...
Haha! Live Aid gave us a lot of cool performances from great musicians. "We are the world, we are the children!"
Feb 3, 2015
0
#58
Maybe I'm a dreamer... What I would like to see is people all coming together. A special tournament once a year featuring the top players and open to the public. All prizes and proceeds go to fighting hunger in one select region. It would be a charity festival sponsored from all over. There will be people from all over coming together. I would hope to see about 2 to 3 thousand in the tournament. It would be televised as a relief effort. The festival will have an assortment of activities. When it's all said and done they should net close to 10 million dollars in donations from people contributing all over the world. Next festival would soon see a new region.
Drawgood wrote:
I don't know what it is with people from Slovenia. I hope it is just a coincidence. But you are the second person with Slovenian flag next to their name who expressed this nihilist, pessimistic view point. "Humanity is destined to die, we're all going to die. We're surrounded by lies and crappy governments. What's the point?"
For one, there is no one world government you refer to. So you should only speak for your country.
But more importantly, I don't even see how you're addressing anything the OP or others wrote in this thread. Is this just a way for you to rant?
You must be either naive, or blind, or maybe you have your own interests to save. When you open your eyes, notify me. It has nothing to do with Slovenia. Or Austria. Or whatever. It has to do with being tired of hypocrisy, lies, western fascism, fake freedom, fucked up societies. If you can't see what's wrong, it's not my problem. The conclusion of your reasoning is that all is ok, we're doing our best, we will continue our lives as they are now, no problem. Corporations are ok, being owned is ok, don't worry etcetera.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5dBZDSSky0
When a population doesn't balance itself,nature balances it: starvation, epidemics, war etc.
Human ingenuity can ward off these things for a while... that allows problems to get bigger before coming to a head (on a grander scale).
Water can be removed from the ocean with a teaspoon - but the ocean won't get emptied that way.