World poverty - an answer?

Question

I think when half the world is starving it is obscene the amount of money paid to Footballers, Actors etc for just doing their jobs.
My answer to world poverty would be that everyone in the world, that is in paid employment, has to give 1 weeks wages to charity every year.
While my salary would mean not a very large donation I am sure the contributions of many celebrities, sportsmen, actors etc. would be substantial enough to make a huge difference in the fight against hunger & starvation in the world.
What do you think?
Would everyone contribute?

To the first answer - It could be to any charity so long as you could prove it had been done.
To the second answer - did you not nitice I said WORLD - America is not the only nation in the world - asshole.

Answer 1

Yes that's quite a logical answer because if we all donated more to the needy charities then there may be less poverty. There is such inequality in the world. People such as actors are paid ridiculous amounts of money whilst others do not even have the necessities of life- basic food water and shelter. To end poverty, we all need to contribute our time and money. Its not an easy process but it can make a difference. However I don't think poverty will ever be completely eradicated, it can only be significantly reduced.

Answer 2

I would participate as long as your suggestion is part of a multi-faceted program. By the end of this century, it is estimated that the world population will be at 9 billion. We already have unacceptable levels of starvation. My suggestion is to sterilize each adult after the second child they have, regardless of any demographic. Do this for at least 200 years and then evaluate the results. It's the only reasonable and humane alternative that I can imagine.

Answer 3

I was a big fan of John Denver who spent most of the 1980s and 1990s working to end world hunger. He was absolutely sincere in his efforts. He worked tirelessly, and never tried to get any publicity for his efforts. He worked in anonymity during the Jimmy Carter administration trying everything he could to alleviate hunger in Africa.

What broke my heart to see him toiling away, practically killing himself with effort and grief, because I instinctively knew he was taking the wrong approach. His efforts weren't completely wasted, but they were not at all efficient, and his results were fleeting.

Remember the big Live Aid concert that Britain championed in the 1980's? After an astounding amount of work, the participation of countless numbers of people, and all the money people contributed, its actual results were quite paltry.

In contrast, the free Live 8 concert urged millions to sign an online petition demanding Third World debt cancellation and doubled aid for these countries.

Which approach to you think will have longer lasting effects?

Do you know one major reason why Africa is so poor? Farm subsidies in the rest of the world. Africa can't compete, so its farmers can't thrive.

Do you know why Canada is rich and Mexico is poor? Because entrenched corruption and governmental incompetence is rife in Mexico.

Don't throw your money away. Work to change governmental policies. Your "return on investment" will be 100,000 times greater.

Answer 4

You have a valued point and I always used to say when children in need was on and the likes that they should take a few pound from everyones bank account......but the problem is a lot of corruption out there and this is why Africa has lots of problems with the richer ones taking a vast cut of aid for themselves when others need it so this will always be an ongoing issue

Answer 5

A nice idea but when only something like 40% of the 100% of money gets through to the people who need it, it becomes just another way to grab money for governments.
Also would some countries use the money on weapons of war and to build armies?
History has taught us this does tend to happen.

Answer 6

I think we pretty much do that already in the USA and most other countries. We call it taxes, plus on top of that most people contribute to churches and charities.

I don't think it's always about the amount of money being raised as it is in how smartly it is used.

Answer 7

The poor you will have with you always...the Bible says, and so it is, especially when you realize that starvation is just a 'sign' of a bigger underlying problem...like corruption or hatred. Until we really understand that we are indeed our brothers keeper there will not be the unity necessary to resolve these kind of problems.

Answer 8

No, how about we allow the countries to dig themselves out of debt... people would do a lot better giving them money for sustainable devel;opment, like buying fair trade food, and encouraging the world bank to wipe out thrid world debT!

J

Answer 9

hahaha footballer's. Honestly someone throw me a friggin bone here. Your solution is idealistic but not possible. There are too many greedy people and it would be imbossible to enforce this "proposal."

Answer 10

useless war in Iraq costs already 400 billion $. Poverty could be eliminated with this money......