What do you think about the fact that no American will ever go to bed again hungry?

Question

The Department of Agriculture announced that it was deleting the use of the word hungry in its reports and substituting a more scientific term, "low level food security". Personally, I think we should put the Department of Agriculture in charge of the Iraq war and National Security. We would have the war in Iraq "won" in no time and "terrorism" would be elminated.

Answer 1

Very reassuring. They've cured 35 M cases per year! The White House website calls the war in Iraq, "Renewal In Iraq", and a bill or program to allow more air polution is called the "Clear Skies" initiative. This will really fool historians.

Answer 2

There's nothing particularly unscientific about the word hungry. In fact, the word hungry is much more precise and unambiguous than the phrase "low level food security." What you're looking at, there, is the introduction of vagueness intended to serve as bureaucratic obfuscation.

Someone who is not "in the know" semanticly will read the report and not have a clue that there are hungry people in a certain region. Instead, the naive reader will get the impression that everybody has food, but that some people's food sources are perhaps at risk.

The naive reader will gain an incorrectly softened assessment to the immediacy and severity of the situation. There could be an actual famine sweeping the country, and all this report will say is "a growing number of areas are experiencing low level food security." He yawns and does nothing to prepare himself for famine, which in due course overtakes his own area, leaving him unable to survive.

And there is something about this change of wording that has a subtext, or a message to be read "between the lines."

Your government has found reason to EXPECT famine in the near or intermediate future: within, say, about 10 or 15 years. This is the kind of thing you look for, if you are trying to judge what's really going on in the world and what may happen in the future. Start stocking up of non-perishable foods, such as dry rice and dry beans, because there's no telling when the fan blades might need cleaning.

Answer 3

I think that it would probably benefit many Americans to go to bed hungry once in a while!!! It may help lower the percentage of obese people and therefore the percentage of illness and handicaps induced by obesity (diabetes, for example).
But the solution is not in the AMOUNT of food available. . . it is in the QUALITY of food available and the PRICE of good quality, nourishing food. This is why obesity is even more common among low income families: it is so much cheaper to super-size a Big Mac than to buy fresh vegetables, fruit, or fish and meat!

Answer 4

That's funny. Thousands of American children go to bed hungry at least 3 or 4 times a week.

Answer 5

ought to be the towel..pop it interior the dryer with a fabric sheet at a similar time because it remains damp and it won't scent stale. My sheets are washed another day and that i do no longer plan to cease..!

Answer 6

This is nothing more than a huge joke...and most Americans don't seem to 'get it.' There will ALWAYS be someone in American going to bed hungry. Are you aware that there is no place in the U.S. Constitution that says we can give aide to another country?? Every time the government does that...they are breaking our own laws.

Answer 7

This is why we need to keep the government out of our lives as much as possible. They think changing words can change reality.

Answer 8

What does it matter what the wording is? Whose job is it to make sure people who cannot afford to feed their children, don't have children. But I'm sure its a constitutional right to have kids you can't afford to feed.

Answer 9

That is pretty clever. Minimize a big problem by changing a few words. The problem is that hunger will remain. Government in action. Got to love it!

Answer 10

Anyone who would even suggest this use of terms is clearly dishonest. What can we expect from political appointees?