Anybody care about the mass starvation going on in the Horn of Africa right now?

[Egret]

Its tragic, but there is nothing *we* can do to fix the problem. All we can do is shovel money at temporarily blunting the symptoms, knowing that for everyone dollar we commit less than a dollar's worth of food will actually end up in a hungry belly.

 

Meanwhile, there are plenty of kids right here in the US who don't know where their next meal is coming form. They get first dibs on my charity.

The American children might not know where their next meal is coming from, but they'll get a meal. When it comes to a child in need, being born on the right continent isn't too high up on my priorities list. Any child in need should get help, the world just doesn't always work out that way.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Egret

[tazinib1]

It's absolutely heart wrenching and one thing that I simply choose to largely ignore because of the physiological impact it has on me. I cannot take the images of starving children (or any child suffering) and it does give me nightmares.

 

This. +1,000

 

I'd like to add that I often choose NOT to ignore it by helping out a homeless person with a random purchase of a hotdog or fast food item. It sickens me that there are people on this planet that do not eat on a daily basis...let alone starve to death. Who do we blame that we cannot pass out leftover food from hospitals, schools, cafeterias or even fast food restaurants. It's because greedy frivolous lawsuits scare those establishments into throwing it away, rather than being faced with a lawsuit because somebody got sick. Disgusting and something I think about all the time.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Meanwhile, there are plenty of kids right here in the US who don't know where their next meal is coming form. They get first dibs on my charity.

 

Maybe. I'm a licensed minister with the Church of Spiritual Humanism Homerism.

 

Fixed

 

I never understood why there is such a home bias towards "Americans get my first charity". Uh, aren't we all humans from the same planet? Shouldn't all people help all people? Do you also prioritize your charity by your home state? home town? where does it stop and start, and why?

 

I just don't get why some gave a "+1" to this concept.....at all. How can you make a conscious decision that charity stops at our borders?

 

BTW, not meaning to pick on you, Yo....a lot of people apparently agree with you.

[BeeR]

Exactly. Please point out all the starving children in this country. I submit there are exceedingly, exceedingly few and likely most if not nearly all of those are due to abuse and simply not known of to help anyway. Meanwhile children by the thousands - hell, millions - are starving elsewhere and we see it on ads etc every day - but many would rather just "help Americans." Whatever.

[SEC=UGA]

Fixed

 

I never understood why there is such a home bias towards "Americans get my first charity". Uh, aren't we all humans from the same planet? Shouldn't all people help all people? Do you also prioritize your charity by your home state? home town? where does it stop and start, and why?

 

I just don't get why some gave a "+1" to this concept.....at all. How can you make a conscious decision that charity stops at our borders?

 

BTW, not meaning to pick on you, Yo....a lot of people apparently agree with you.

 

Gotta get your own house in order before you start trying to fix someone elses.

 

Many of these third world nations are basket cases (the UN will agree with me.) The misappropriation and waste of the monies going to many of these countries is horrendous. A good deal of the food and monies is taken by those in power and never distributed to those in need.

 

I also look at it this way. In the cases where food, monies and medicine do get to the people we are actually compounding the problem. It is apparent that the resources of these nations are taxed by the current population level, so what do we do, we make sure that people survive longer and continue to procreate. More population, the indigenous resources are more heavily taxed, they become even more finite, people begin to fight over these finite resources with increasing zeal, more death and hunger ensues. And, on top of that, we spend more money sending them food, money and drugs... Vicious cycle, all in the name of charity.

 

Let me put this forth, I think we need to take the approach of the DNR. When a population of, say, deer becomes too large and the ecology around them begins to crumble, what does the DNR do?

Edited July 26, 2011 by SEC=UGA

[darin3]

Gotta get your own house in order before you start trying to fix someone elses.

 

Many of these third world nations are basket cases (the UN will agree with me.) The misappropriation and waste of the monies going to many of these countries is horrendous. A good deal of the food and monies is taken by those in power and never distributed to those in need.

 

I alos look at it this way. In the cases where food, monies and medicine do get to the people we are actually compounding the problem. It is apparent that the resources of these nations are taxed by the current population level, so what do we do, we make sure that people survive longer and continue to procreate. More population, the indigenous resources are more heavily taxed, they become even more finite, people begin to fight over theses finite resources with increasing zeal, more death and hunger ensues. And, on top of that, we spend more money sending them food, money and drugs... Vicious cycle, all in the name of charity.

 

Let me put this forth, I think we need to take the approach of the DNR. When a population of, say, deer becomes too large and the ecology around them begins to crumble, what does the DNR do?

Pretty much my view as well. And my view extends to more than just feeding the hungry of other countries; it has to do with getting involved in others' affairs when our own affairs are still completely out of whack.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Gotta get your own house in order before you start trying to fix someone elses.

 

In this regard, my definition of my "own house" is the human race. Not the human race that lives in North America tucked between Canada and Mexico.

 

So what you are saying is that, in lieu of people who were unfortunate enough to be born into a situation where the leaders of their countries are tyrants and psychotics, we should just not contribute to causes to help them, and only focus on our own "house"? Because the charity we dontate/contribute has a lesser effect (due to factors you mention), we should stop helping altogether?

 

I really hope that isn't the view of most humans....if so, I fear for our future generations.

[Clubfoothead]

I'd like to add that I often choose NOT to ignore it by helping out a homeless person with a random purchase of a hotdog or fast food item. It sickens me that there are people on this planet that do not eat on a daily basis...let alone starve to death. Who do we blame that we cannot pass out leftover food from hospitals, schools, cafeterias or even fast food restaurants. It's because greedy frivolous lawsuits scare those establishments into throwing it away, rather than being faced with a lawsuit because somebody got sick. Disgusting and something I think about all the time.

 

I think about things all the time. That doesn't make it true.

 

This would be impossible except in the case of gross negligence. It's called the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act.

[BeeR]

Gotta get your own house in order before you start trying to fix someone elses.

? They aren't mutually exclusive. Second, our "house" is in so much better shape than so many of the others it's not even close. Kinda like saying you have to help a dog next door with a thorn in its paw instead of saving one starving down the street because the first one is closer. Finally, to me my "house" is my family and friends. I care about other Americans as much as I care about any other stranger in any other country and don't get why anyone would place more value on a stranger's life because they happen to live in the same country.

 

The misappropriation and waste of the monies going to many of these countries is horrendous. A good deal of the food and monies is taken by those in power and never distributed to those in need.

No argument there.

 

I also look at it this way. In the cases where food, monies and medicine do get to the people we are actually compounding the problem. It is apparent that the resources of these nations are taxed by the current population level, so what do we do, we make sure that people survive longer and continue to procreate. More population, the indigenous resources are more heavily taxed, they become even more finite, people begin to fight over these finite resources with increasing zeal, more death and hunger ensues. And, on top of that, we spend more money sending them food, money and drugs... Vicious cycle, all in the name of charity.

Frankly this is weak and scary logic. Based on that, we should go around committing genocide as if people were an insect infestation and eliminate this pesky problem.

 

That said, I would be for neutering to address the gist of what I think you're trying to say, but then you also of course run into other big morality issues.

 

When a population of, say, deer becomes too large and the ecology around them begins to crumble, what does the DNR do?

 

 

 

I fear for our future generations.

You should.

Edited July 26, 2011 by BeeR

[Grimm74]

Exactly. Please point out all the starving children in this country. I submit there are exceedingly, exceedingly few and likely most if not nearly all of those are due to abuse and simply not known of to help anyway. Meanwhile children by the thousands - hell, millions - are starving elsewhere and we see it on ads etc every day - but many would rather just "help Americans." Whatever.

 

All my tax dollars are going to a kid with a PS3 and a cell phone. I heard he ate Modern Warfare Black Ops for breakfast. Imagine the number of kids who could get a meal in Africa with the cost of Madden 12.

[bpwallace49]

All my tax dollars are going to a kid with a PS3 and a cell phone. I heard he ate Modern Warfare Black Ops for breakfast. Imagine the number of kids who could get a meal in Africa with the cost of Madden 12.

 

Cmon man . . .

[SEC=UGA]

? They aren't mutually exclusive. Second, our "house" is in so much better shape than so many of the others it's not even close. Kinda like saying you have to help a dog next door with a thorn in its paw instead of saving one starving down the street because the first one is closer. Finally, to me my "house" is my family and friends. I care about other Americans as much as I care about any other stranger in any other country and don't get why anyone would place more value on a stranger's life because they happen to live in the same country.

 

 

No argument there.

 

Frankly this is weak and scary logic. Based on that, we should go around committing genocide as if people were an insect infestation and eliminate this pesky problem.

 

That said, I would be for neutering to address the gist of what I think you're trying to say, but then you also of course run into other big morality issues.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You should.

 

If I improve the quality of life in my community, a community in which I live, I improve the quality of my life directly. By funding and supporting the overpopulation of African, South American and other states I am not improving my life directly. In fact, I am endangering the lives of people who live in those areas by indirectly funding their tyrannical leaders and adding to the burden of those there by supporting an unsustainable population level. By our government or private charity giving money to these nations, my quality of life, as well as the quality of life of those in my country is being somewhat compromised by directing expenditures that could be used here to some nation that is not going to efficiently distribute them to those that need the most help.

 

You are also endangering the lives of many other people by directing aid to these people. UN soldiers are being killed while distributing aid, as are American and other foreign relief workers.

 

Foreign aid/charity may make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but in reality you are creating a bigger problem than you are solving as these countries will continue to be overpopulated and will never, not in our lifetime, be able to produce the goods needed to be self sufficient. The resources are not there.

[SEC=UGA]

Wiegie, you having fun yet?

[MikesVikes]

My niece went to Western Africa a few years ago with the peace corps.

 

link

[The Holy Roller]

I donate to the over one billion Chinese on the planet everytime I go to WalMart.

[i_am_the_swammi]

If I improve the quality of life in my community, a community in which I live, I improve the quality of my life directly. By funding and supporting the overpopulation of African, South American and other states I am not improving my life directly. In fact, I am endangering the lives of people who live in those areas by indirectly funding their tyrannical leaders and adding to the burden of those there by supporting an unsustainable population level. By our government or private charity giving money to these nations, my quality of life, as well as the quality of life of those in my country is being somewhat compromised by directing expenditures that could be used here to some nation that is not going to efficiently distribute them to those that need the most help.

 

[SEC=UGA]

 

It is all about me and my community.

 

You, on the other hand want to create a disaster of epic proportions that will lead to more death, destruction and irresponsibility. If you truly cared about the next generation of Africans you would be all for not funding the dysfunctional governments that are in power over there. If you were truly for a peaceful planet you would want to make more resources available to the world community as a whole. Instead you are for promoting despots and irresponsible procreation.

[i_am_the_swammi]

It is all about me and my community.

 

You, on the other hand want to create a disaster of epic proportions that will lead to more death, destruction and irresponsibility. If you truly cared about the next generation of Africans you would be all for not funding the dysfunctional governments that are in power over there. If you were truly for a peaceful planet you would want to make more resources available to the world community as a whole. Instead you are for promoting despots and irresponsible procreation.

 

yes, because I want kids being abandoned on the side of the road to have something to eat

[SEC=UGA]

yes, because I want kids being abandoned on the side of the road to have something to eat

 

Well, tell their mom to fix them a sammich.

[TimC]

Well, tell their mom to fix them a sammich.

 

Where's the Dad?

[SEC=UGA]

Where's the Dad?

 

Humping a goat before he gets on a raft to go hijack a few boats.

[Ursa Majoris]

In this regard, my definition of my "own house" is the human race. Not the human race that lives in North America tucked between Canada and Mexico.

 

So what you are saying is that, in lieu of people who were unfortunate enough to be born into a situation where the leaders of their countries are tyrants and psychotics, we should just not contribute to causes to help them, and only focus on our own "house"? Because the charity we dontate/contribute has a lesser effect (due to factors you mention), we should stop helping altogether?

 

I really hope that isn't the view of most humans....if so, I fear for our future generations.

I would refer you to post 7, first paragraph. I also think another poster stated that much of what we donate gets appropriated by those tyrants and psychotics, and he was right. Ideally, I'd be right there with you but the help we tried to give Somalia in the Clinton era came back to bite us big time. Right now, the local warlords or whatever they are have stated they will not allow supplies in.

 

Charity, like politics, is the art of the possible. As much as we wish it otherwise, the solutions to Africa's problems must come from within like they do everywhere else and have done throughout history.

[darin3]

I didn't have room on my new sig to fit what I used to have: think globally, act locally.

[Scourge]

Humping a goat before he gets on a raft to go hijack a few boats.

 

I know it might mean that I'm going to hell, but I couldn't help but at this.