TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Feed the starving world?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Feed the starving world? - Page 2

post #31 of 46
There is no rule that says that the "haves" must give to the "have nots". If that were the case, then maybe we should focus on the poor and the needy in our own countries 1st. More and more children go to school hungry every year as their families cannot earn a living wage.

And regarding supplying the 3rd world countries with food, I always go back tot he old proverb "give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats always" or something along those lines. Giving food will not solve or even really help their problems. Help from aid agencies doesn't necessary reach where they are most needed. Once the 3rd world governments take their share or if they "direct" the aid actvities then how can you guarenttee the placement of your "charity".

My rule is help at home 1st.
post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by calico2222 View Post
Ok, besides the cloning thing, this is what bothers me the most. Why should WE eradicate their debt? As in their national debt so they could actually provide for their people? If so, why??

Also, isn't the law of nature the "survival of the fittest"? Hence, the weakest ones die because...well, they are weak. Is it fair that these people are born into this area? No. But, again, nature rules (playing devil's advocate here).

Lastly, I have always wondered this...I've heard of the first world, and the third world. Who lives in the second world? I thought this was just one world.
. Has anyone seen a movie called "the Island"? It had an interesting take on cloning, chilling.
I agree with you, there is only one world. First world, third world, all of us live in the same world. My feelings are the same as Natalie_Ca's first post written on this thread.

Life is not at all survival of the fittest, not at all. In the medical field, we HELP people live longer. We remove cancers, we treat childhood illness, and we don't say, oh you are sick, if you die oh well, there are more people, survival of the fittest. I am for one very glad we have this technology or my dad would not be alive today, healthy, active, and in great shape.
Someone breaks their foot or becomes disabled, we help them. They don't go hungry since they can't gather food. Someone is caught in a natural disaster, we don't just say too bad so sad, you shouldn't have lived there. We do what we can, get get first aid to respond. People HELP people, it is one of the better points about humans, humanity, good will to others. Helping each other. Do unto others. All that stuff.

You yourself probably grew up having preventative health care. Better food, more vitamins, fresh air, exercise, love. It is survival of the more lucky for some, the ones born into a certain lifestyle and don't have to work at all for it. Not everyone is as lucky, some do struggle, some win, some lose. Even if they are very strong, very healthy, very adaptable, very spiritual, very intelligent, generally all around very good people, they will not be given equal chance if they live in a poor area in the third world as someone who was born into a middle class first world family, underachiever, not intelligent, does drugs, etc. I doubt Paris Hilton is a "fittest" in this world.

Being born into a family that always has enough food to eat for example makes that person luckier than most. Most people have never felt what it was like to go hungry and be starving for many weeks, the pain of not being able to provide for your children, the pain of doing everything you know how to do, but it still not being enough.

They matter, their life matters! Their pain is real. I have traveled to other countries, seen the poverty. It is a cycle. They don't have money or education, so the next generation is in the same boat. It is very hard to break that cycle. Humanity is the only animal that is forced to pay for access to good food, clean water, etc. There are still some that live in jungles and live off of their own land to survive and don't play by the same rules as mass society, but if their government takes that away from them, they will be left with nothing, in poverty, on a small part of land that might not even be able to produce adequate food and clean water.

Stuff others take for granted in the US. That is much unlike the individuals born into money with a roof over their heads protected from the harsh elements, they have to struggle less in life. It isn't survival of the fittest. I think a valid argument could be made it is survival of the richest, those with access to better medical care, preventative care, more education, better food, adequate shelter, etc. These things all play a role in people's lifespan and overall health in life. Even race still today in the US can play a part in health and longevity, as race is tied to health care, education, and safe and adequate places to live in many cases. There are lots of variables. Even today a lot of people take life for granted when they have never had to understand how hard life can be.
Some get so indifferent to real life and wrapped up in their own selves and their own lives, they lose empathy for others and cannot relate or have an open mind to others different from themselves. May we never lose sight of helping others, having compassion for others, and being thankful for what we have and wanting to give back.
I believe in Karma, what goes around does come around.
post #33 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by calico2222 View Post
Lastly, I have always wondered this...I've heard of the first world, and the third world. Who lives in the second world? I thought this was just one world.
The "second world" was Communist countries with planned economies, and was primarily used to refer to the Soviet Union and the Eastern European countries under its control, but it technically included China, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, etc..

The term really hasn't been used much since the end of the Cold War and China's adoption of a "social market economy".
post #34 of 46
So far there hasn't been much mention of the damage being inflicted on these lesser developed countries by us, the so called developed countries by our greed, our disregard for their lives because it's all about us, we want more, more, more! The slash & burn mentality of the forests for farmland for cheap trees, cheap cattle. The disregard for the animal or human lives that are affected, & how can we really blame them? They are just trying to make a living with what they have in the name of greed & exploitation. How about the poaching of animals like the gorilla or the rhino, or the elephant? Take the demand for such things away & the killing would stop. And where is the demand for such things?? The developed countries.
In my opinion, it is we who need to be better educated, we who are overpopulated & we are the ones who need to practice better birth control.
If anyone can figure out why an Amercan suburban non-farming family needs 16 children, please let me know, I'm all ears.
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by adymarie View Post
There is no rule that says that the "haves" must give to the "have nots". If that were the case, then maybe we should focus on the poor and the needy in our own countries 1st. More and more children go to school hungry every year as their families cannot earn a living wage.

And regarding supplying the 3rd world countries with food, I always go back tot he old proverb "give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats always" or something along those lines. Giving food will not solve or even really help their problems. Help from aid agencies doesn't necessary reach where they are most needed. Once the 3rd world governments take their share or if they "direct" the aid actvities then how can you guarenttee the placement of your "charity".

My rule is help at home 1st.
I agree with you - charity does begin at home. But why do we have to have a `rule' that says we should be charitable? Would it be SUCH a trial to give to people less fortunate than you? This attitude really does astonish me. `I was lucky enough to be born a `have', so therefore the `have nots' can just suck it up. Too bad for them'. Reminds me of Bush's infamous quote `This is an impressive crowd. The haves, and the have-mores'. I was disgusted then, and I'm no less disgusted by this kind of attitude now.

Something I find really offputting is that people who were lucky enough to be born into a good situation - roof over their head, food to eat, access to education and health care, just take it for granted. Have this sense of entitlement, as if they somehow deserve it. And along with that attitude feel that those who weren't as fortunate in the happenstance of their birth somehow don't deserve it - certainly they don't deserve anything from those who were lucky enough to be born better off.

Well, thankfully, not everyone has such ugliness in their nature, and that's why there are people out there working to help those less fortunate, donating money, being charitable, and doing their bit to help their fellow human beings. For some people it's about `us' not `me'. And thank God for those people, because they have a hard road ahead of them to try and balance all the damage the `me' people have done to the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShopCat View Post
So far there hasn't been much mention of the damage being inflicted on these lesser developed countries by us, the so called developed countries by our greed, our disregard for their lives because it's all about us, we want more, more, more! The slash & burn mentality of the forests for farmland for cheap trees, cheap cattle. The disregard for the animal or human lives that are affected, & how can we really blame them? They are just trying to make a living with what they have in the name of greed & exploitation. How about the poaching of animals like the gorilla or the rhino, or the elephant? Take the demand for such things away & the killing would stop. And where is the demand for such things?? The developed countries.
In my opinion, it is we who need to be better educated, we who are overpopulated & we are the ones who need to practice better birth control.
If anyone can figure out why an Amercan suburban non-farming family needs 16 children, please let me know, I'm all ears.
Well said. A lot of the problems in such poor, impoverished nations are made worse - or even caused - by the greed of those in the rich and abundant countries. We should be ashamed of ourselves. But only a few would have that attitude. For the rest, the sense of entitlement, the `why on earth should I possibly help anyone else?' attitude will prevail. Reading some of the posts in this thread has made me feel (and not for the first time) I'd rather be a cat, sometimes. I really would. Because human beings can be despicable.
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheylink View Post
It's all business now, political props and financial investments. Example, Africa's debt as a country is basically for sale right now, an unknown sum, undoubtedly less then debt by far, will cancel the debt and be an investment in Africa's financial production(details ?). Some countries have more to offer as an export, trade, to support themselves. Believe it or not the USA and Japan have the highest national debt of all countries!
A lot of countries have debts because of unreasonable strings that were attached to loans made by the World Bank and the Monetary Fund. Even President Bush was persuaded by Bono that these debts should be relieved for the sake of the world economy.

[quote=KitEKats4Eva!;2087294
As for why should we help them, well, I don't know. Common human decency? Compassion and care for our fellow man? A sense of justice and charity? [/QUOTE]

Common human decency. An underated virtue that anyone can appreciate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cococat View Post
.
I agree with you, there is only one world. First world, third world, all of us live in the same world

People HELP people, it is one of the better points about humans, humanity, good will to others. Helping each other. Do unto others.

Being born into a family that always has enough food to eat for example makes that person luckier than most. Most people have never felt what it was like to go hungry and be starving for many weeks, the pain of not being able to provide for your children, the pain of doing everything you know how to do, but it still not being enough.

Humanity is the only animal that is forced to pay for access to good food, clean water, etc.

May we never lose sight of helping others, having compassion for others, and being thankful for what we have and wanting to give back.

I believe in Karma, what goes around does come around.
I love your thinking! Most of us are born into fortunate lives. We need to use those lives to develop ourselves spiritually by being kind, warm-hearted and generous. I believe in karma, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShopCat View Post
So far there hasn't been much mention of the damage being inflicted on these lesser developed countries by us, the so called developed countries by our greed, our disregard for their lives because it's all about us, we want more, more, more! The slash & burn mentality of the forests for farmland for cheap trees, cheap cattle. The disregard for the animal or human lives that are affected, & how can we really blame them? They are just trying to make a living with what they have in the name of greed & exploitation. How about the poaching of animals like the gorilla or the rhino, or the elephant? Take the demand for such things away & the killing would stop. And where is the demand for such things?? The developed countries.
America uses the most environmental resources and causes most GHG. We should be thinking in terms of helping underdeveloped nations by using less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post

Something I find really offputting is that people who were lucky enough to be born into a good situation - roof over their head, food to eat, access to education and health care, just take it for granted. Have this sense of entitlement, as if they somehow deserve it. And along with that attitude feel that those who weren't as fortunate in the happenstance of their birth somehow don't deserve it - certainly they don't deserve anything from those who were lucky enough to be born better off.
Well said, thank you.
post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by katie=^..^= View Post
America uses the most environmental resources and causes most GHG. We should be thinking in terms of helping underdeveloped nations by using less.
hmm,last report i saw said china was now putting out more then the US was.

most of the damange being done in third world is the fact they have 0 in the way of EPA laws, clear cutting, with no re-planting. New york, LA are 90 times cleaner then any large third world city you go into.
post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
I agree with you - charity does begin at home. But why do we have to have a `rule' that says we should be charitable? Would it be SUCH a trial to give to people less fortunate than you? This attitude really does astonish me. `I was lucky enough to be born a `have', so therefore the `have nots' can just suck it up. Too bad for them'. Reminds me of Bush's infamous quote `This is an impressive crowd. The haves, and the have-mores'. I was disgusted then, and I'm no less disgusted by this kind of attitude now.

Something I find really offputting is that people who were lucky enough to be born into a good situation - roof over their head, food to eat, access to education and health care, just take it for granted. Have this sense of entitlement, as if they somehow deserve it. And along with that attitude feel that those who weren't as fortunate in the happenstance of their birth somehow don't deserve it - certainly they don't deserve anything from those who were lucky enough to be born better off.

Well, thankfully, not everyone has such ugliness in their nature, and that's why there are people out there working to help those less fortunate, donating money, being charitable, and doing their bit to help their fellow human beings. For some people it's about `us' not `me'. And thank God for those people, because they have a hard road ahead of them to try and balance all the damage the `me' people have done to the world.


Well said. A lot of the problems in such poor, impoverished nations are made worse - or even caused - by the greed of those in the rich and abundant countries. We should be ashamed of ourselves. But only a few would have that attitude. For the rest, the sense of entitlement, the `why on earth should I possibly help anyone else?' attitude will prevail. Reading some of the posts in this thread has made me feel (and not for the first time) I'd rather be a cat, sometimes. I really would. Because human beings can be despicable.

First and foremost I am offended by this post. Never once did I say not to be charitibale. All I said is that providing food is not the answer. Teaching people how to grow their food, have a trade, etc is the better option for 3rd world countries. Go to a poor neighbourhood of your city or your country and see the poverty that gets ignored in favour of "helping" the poor in other countries. Have you lobbied your government to increase minimum wage so that people can make a living wage. All I am saying is that we should be ashamed to let children starve in your own backyard. Why is it every year that the food banks have trouble getting in enough food to help the people who need it?

Actions do not have to be seen by others for their impact to be felt. Why do people always have to say what type of charitble work they do? Why does it seem more important or more worthy to help out a 3rd world country then your own?

I work hard daily to keep the roof over my head and food on my table. I do not live a luxerious lifestyle. I do not go out, I don't party. The only debt I have is my mortage, but once the monthly bills are paid there isn't always a lot left over. Yes I give to charity, and I volunteer my time. I am actually quite the activist, but why would anyone here need to know that. I don't see the need to advertise what I do, because the only validation I require is from myself.

And since you would rather be a cat, I hope that you living in a loving home with access to vet care and not lost and lonely and starving on the streets!
post #39 of 46
Gently, folks, please. Charity is charity, but we can't do it all and we each need to make our own decision as to where to apply it. Please keep the posts friendly, OK -- and report any that are not, rather than taking the poster to task publicly. Thanks.
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by adymarie View Post
First and foremost I am offended by this post. Never once did I say not to be charitibale. All I said is that providing food is not the answer. Teaching people how to grow their food, have a trade, etc is the better option for 3rd world countries. Go to a poor neighbourhood of your city or your country and see the poverty that gets ignored in favour of "helping" the poor in other countries. Have you lobbied your government to increase minimum wage so that people can make a living wage. All I am saying is that we should be ashamed to let children starve in your own backyard. Why is it every year that the food banks have trouble getting in enough food to help the people who need it?

Actions do not have to be seen by others for their impact to be felt. Why do people always have to say what type of charitble work they do? Why does it seem more important or more worthy to help out a 3rd world country then your own?

I work hard daily to keep the roof over my head and food on my table. I do not live a luxerious lifestyle. I do not go out, I don't party. The only debt I have is my mortage, but once the monthly bills are paid there isn't always a lot left over. Yes I give to charity, and I volunteer my time. I am actually quite the activist, but why would anyone here need to know that. I don't see the need to advertise what I do, because the only validation I require is from myself.

And since you would rather be a cat, I hope that you living in a loving home with access to vet care and not lost and lonely and starving on the streets!
Lol! I agree! I usually say that, too, when I tell people I'd rather be a cat. My comment is usually `I'd rather be a well-looked after cat!'.

I didn't mean to offend - and I also didn't mean to imply that you don't work hard. My post came after yours because I wanted to agree that I think that charity should be directed towards your own country, too. First and foremost, actually. And no I haven't lobbied my government for getting a better minimum wage, because in Australia that particular problem isn't nearly as bad as it is in the US. But I know you were just using an example

I do a lot of work in my own country in terms of charity - which I don't advertise, either. I agree with you, one of the things that irritates me the most is when people are philanthropic and then bang on about it every time they open their mouths i.e Oprah.

The only thing in your post that I found upsetting was that you started it by asking where there were any rules that said that the `haves' had to give to the `have nots'. The implication there was that we shouldn't have to - and if we WERE forced to, that we should do it at home first. It did remind me horribly of that quote I posted from Bush, and I was surprised and angered by it.

But I wasn't trying to target you specifically with my post. Again, it's just the attitude that somehow we have no responsibility to help others with greater need than us that has come up in this thread just baffles and saddens me.
post #41 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
The only thing in your post that I found upsetting was that you started it by asking where there were any rules that said that the `haves' had to give to the `have nots'. The implication there was that we shouldn't have to - and if we WERE forced to, that we should do it at home first. It did remind me horribly of that quote I posted from Bush, and I was surprised and angered by it.
But to be honest, there isn't any rules. The whole notion of charity is that you are doing it to be charitable, not because you have to. What a country decides to give through the World Bank etc, with all the strings attached, is not charity IMO.

I also agree that we should help those at home first. Why should we be sending aid abroad to be misused by the people who got or are getting those countries in a mess to sit back and watch people at home go through the same thing with less help?
post #42 of 46
The entitlement mentality almost seems like it could be a catch 22 situation..on one hand you have some entitlement with the silver Spoon crowd who look down on anyone they consider below themselves, & on the other end you have some with the people living in poverty who play the charity system like a game. Key word being "some" here, not all!
Education & compassion is important for both sides of the spectrum. It seems like a delicate balance, especially if you are dealing with another culture-we need to respect their identity, their way of life, not turn them into a bad copy of "us" by building a McDonald's & bringing in satellite TV...(now that is another thing that would really make me sick)
Also I think we need to also work on building the strength of our own people, for me, it's the people of the USA, work on relying less on cheap imports & more on human & animal rights. The stronger we are, the better we can help others.
But that is just a dream & alot of talk for now.
post #43 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShopCat View Post
The entitlement mentality almost seems like it could be a catch 22 situation..on one hand you have some entitlement with the silver Spoon crowd who look down on anyone they consider below themselves, & on the other end you have some with the people living in poverty who play the charity system like a game. Key word being "some" here, not all!
Education & compassion is important for both sides of the spectrum. It seems like a delicate balance, especially if you are dealing with another culture-we need to respect their identity, their way of life, not turn them into a bad copy of "us" by building a McDonald's & bringing in satellite TV...(now that is another thing that would really make me sick)
Also I think we need to also work on building the strength of our own people, for me, it's the people of the USA, work on relying less on cheap imports & more on human & animal rights. The stronger we are, the better we can help others.
But that is just a dream & alot of talk for now.
Great post.

But it's not just a dream - there are people working sooooo hard to make what you say a reality. Just not enough people. I think in the current world climate, though, people are realising that it can't be up to everyone else to make changes anymore - that each of us have a responsibility. And people are getting on board, they really are.
post #44 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by icklemiss21 View Post
But to be honest, there isn't any rules. The whole notion of charity is that you are doing it to be charitable, not because you have to. What a country decides to give through the World Bank etc, with all the strings attached, is not charity IMO.

I also agree that we should help those at home first. Why should we be sending aid abroad to be misused by the people who got or are getting those countries in a mess to sit back and watch people at home go through the same thing with less help?
Thr World Bank that I was referring to isn't a charity. It's an actual bank that makes loans to imporverished governments, not people. Loans with plenty of strings attached, that make it impossible for the economies of these countries to ever become prosperous.
post #45 of 46
I know that was why I was making the distinction between aid and World Bank loans and actual charity. I believe that was what I said, although some people look at it as 'aid' because the repayment terms are so low to begin with, ignoring the interest and strings attached.
post #46 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by icklemiss21 View Post
I know that was why I was making the distinction between aid and World Bank loans and actual charity. I believe that was what I said, although some people look at it as 'aid' because the repayment terms are so low to begin with, ignoring the interest and strings attached.
I apologize. I did misinterpret what you said.

I'm trying to stay out of this thread, even thou it's really interesting to me.

The people that are posting are saying it all so much better than I could.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Feed the starving world?