Pet food Vs Famine in Africa

[RetiredAt22]

True fact: The United states alone spends more money on Pet food each year ($18million) than it would cost to provide nourishment for all of sub-saharan africa ($16million)

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
True fact: The United states alone spends more money on Pet food each year ($18million) than it would cost to provide nourishment for all of sub-saharan africa ($16million)

[/ QUOTE ]

True fact: There are 600 Million people in sub-saharan Africa.
True fact: 16/600 < .03

What exactly are you going to feed them for 3 cents/year?

Of course, your pet food number is pretty stupid, too.

[goodsamaritan]

Whats wrong with that? In Kazakhstan we say God, man, horse, dog, woman, chocolate face, then rat.

[hmkpoker]

Pets are more valuable to us than sub-saharan Africans.

[madnak]

Are you thinking billion, maybe? You aren't looking credible.

[evank15]

Lost in the poster's obvious ignorance is the fact he is actually right.

"Comrade, I did not want to kill you. . . . But you were only an idea to me before, an abstraction that lived in my mind and called forth its appropriate response. . . . I thought of your hand-grenades, of your bayonet, of your rifle; now I see your wife and your face and our fellowship. Forgive me, comrade. We always see it too late. Why do they never tell us that you are poor devils like us, that your mothers are just as anxious as ours, and that we have the same fear of death, and the same dying and the same agony—Forgive me, comrade; how could you be my enemy?"

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
Lost in the poster's obvious ignorance is the fact he is actually right.


[/ QUOTE ]

Umm...you mean the fact that he is right is lost in the fact that he's wrong? Startling facts aren't nearly so startling when they are untrue.

As to any point like 'we spend more on X than on stopping famine in Africa', I would say:
1) The purpose of the US economy is not to stop famine in Africa. The reason western countries are as successful as they are is free markets. Capitalism is based on free choice, which makes people focus on providing goods for oneself and one's loved ones (including pets).

2)The problems of Africa are not related to the monetary cost of the food needed to fill up the stomachs of all Africans. It's not like we can mail a few dollars to everyone and they can stop by their local 7-11.

3) The good news is that from what I hear, our wanton disregard of AIDS will soon make our wanton disregard of famine a moot point.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
True fact: The United states alone spends more money on Pet food each year ($18million) than it would cost to provide nourishment for all of sub-saharan africa ($16million)

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, neither pet food sales nor the money required to feed Africa would be less than 10 billion.

Secondly, it's not as simple as throwing food or money at the problem. People in Africa have the instincts of rabbits, and they appear to lack the intelligence to stop breeding. Any food you throw at the problem will be gobbled up by more hungry mouths in very short order.

There is plenty of arable land in Africa, and whites have provided a lot of the basics required to develop sustainable agriculture and government. Unfortunately, most of these people lack the IQ and long term planning skills to be able to capitalize on these opportunities and improve their own lot in life. Their natural aggressive and tribal tendencies combine with a lack of awareness and desire for civilized society, resulting in widespread crime and the development of warring factions. Unfortunately, such problems are inevitable when you have populations where 95% of individuals have an IQ less than 100.

You may as well flush the food down the toilet as give it to Africa. In the long term, it's going to do about as much good.

*Note that this doesn't apply to genuine natural disasters, where we should obviously offer aid.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason western countries are as successful as they are is free markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not entirely. The reason western countries are successful is because of the large number of +120 IQs available to advance knowledge,technology, politics and law. A free market without an adequate number of bright individuals will not turn out anything like the West.

[alphatmw]

if that statistic was even close to true, then bill gates and probably thousands of other people would have eliminated this problem a long time ago.

[arahant]

Well, I was about to call you grotesquely racist, but what you say appears to be true.

Quite unfortunate.