It is not the availability of food that is the issue. Nations like the US can produce several times more food than we use domestically. It is the logistics and the economics of sending food to the world's most starving places. They are starving for a reason. Usually it is because some warlord has blocked shipments of food to a region. Making people starve is often a great war strategy. Obviously the elimination of corruption is easier said than done, but it has to start somewhere.
Also, these nations often do not have the money or means to buy a lot of food. World hunger will be solved by the reduction of corruption and the ability to provide everyone, especially in highly impoverished areas, with an industrious means of income. If you want to eliminate war, get people buying and selling together. Foreign investment to create jobs and industry along with international trade is the way forward.
2007-01-16 17:34:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rofonzo 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope, permanent birth control 30 or 40 years ago when they starrted feeding the hungry might have, but as long as they breed 10 or 20 mouths to feed, generation after generation, it only increases the number of people who are suffering and starving, at some point it will be a mass starvation.
2007-01-16 17:24:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sorry but about 15% of your money will get to the poor and starving. Sad but true.What a decent idea.
2007-01-16 17:28:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Dancingsun 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
no, do you really know that the food would get to those starving people?
2007-01-16 17:25:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by connie m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it would work for a little while but not for long
2007-01-16 17:22:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Gurl 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The thought is good.
2007-01-16 17:22:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Royal Racer Hell=Grave © 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
no because it would put macdonalds out of business
2007-01-16 17:23:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋