Starvation
 

The first guy can eat the kid.

It's just a modest proposal...

...remember that this is in mature discussions.

This is a topic i'm very much serious about. People here are getting fat... children and men and women over there are starving to death... it's not fair at all...

For starters, the second guy's parents can begin working harder so he gets fed. Seriously though, you don't see any kid whose parents live in a developed country with a nine-to-five job or even a just about doing it job starving. Why? Maybe government aid services or something. So the only answer is to get those countries to start developing, which they already are. So we're moving towards the solution.


EDIT:

What exactly do you find "unfair" about it?

That's true... but the problem is that there ARE No jobs...

Also, may i reccomend a website, for anyone who might want to help? it's called kiva.org

it's basically a place where you pay small lones to people trying to make their own business in developing countries- once they get their business going and make some money, you can get your cash back and continue lending. it's quite nice. Oh, and it's been on several different big time shows/channels, such as Oprah and PBS, so it's been verified. Wikipedia = win.

Then again... that's still small steps. is there any way we can accelerate the process? i mean.. people are dying of preventable causes in many of these places by the minute...

It was apparently a too-sly reference to Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" in which he discusses such inequalities.

warning: may have disturbing footage
#15 grain used to feed them (animals) could feed them (starving kid)
this reminded me of that

Again, like we've said before, life just isn't fair.

Africa has the potential to be the richest continent in the world, with all of the resources and not to mention diamonds it contains. But it lacks the systems, structure and the people in the countries lack a common ground to thrive like countries like America (not saying this is the case for all of the countries).

Americans are losing jobs, on the verge of becoming homeless, yet a company is out sourcing jobs to India, and other less developed countries. One might say thats good for the people in those countries. But what about home? I personally think countries should fend for themselves when it comes to such things.

Might come off as harsh. But really, the thought of our own people becoming homeless in one of the richest countries in the world just so a company can save a buck and use "helping underdeveloped countries" as an excuse isn't cool to me.

Things like this are a slap of reality for the rest of us. We wouldn't know what we had until we saw someone who didn't have it.

When your 20, you need to eat meat tho =/
Helps your system grow :angel:

Ontopic:
Yay! Some people agree with me, they do have everything/kinda that they need to develop, they arent using it.
The rich ppls in Africa and such are being greedy and taking everything.
If they would share, things could become clearer
I know, Ireland for a fact, donates over 2,000Euro every year to them and also two or three cows to them.
We help them with water and aid them too.
But are they using or learning what we give them?

I'm actually rather surprised that Jik thinks there is a problem, since a lot of Africa is in nearly a pure libertarian/anarchistic state.

Im not an Anarchist Without Adjectives (i.e. pure anarchy) Im an Anarcho-Socialist. I believe in structure and rules, just that the people should be the authority figure, not the government.

And the same problem in africa is going on in native-american reservations... the rich families get benefits, and the poor get nothing :/

I hope that things arent always like this... *Sigh*

As for outsourcing... im not sure of my position on that quite yet. though i AM against the companies using it an excuse, it DOES do alot of good over there... perhaps if we came up with good new jobs here too, like building wind-energy generating turbines and maintaining them, it could kill two birds with one stone? wind energy's doing fantastically well in Spain right now, we need to catch up. And, while doing it, the economy could be stimulated.

But a lot of people do not enjoy calling customer support for their whatever and they get a man with broken English, can barely understand what he's saying, but his name is "Bob".

I believe in helping home before going further. Why should we support other countries if we cannot support our own?

And Hrae wasn't calling you an anarchist, he said Africa is dominantly anarchy and libertarian.

yes, well put. But now you can chat online with people, about problems, so it's harder to tell.

But he was asking why i didnt like how it was over there, due to it's anarchistic ways. It's not an organized anarchy over there, but Chaos. those two things are mistaken for each other far too often...

Organized anarchy? You must be joking. That type of thing would only work on a very small-scale. Once a disagreement rears its head, the strongest wins.

Some people do not like the idea of being rules by someone or a group of people being in charge. Some don't even like democracy, because either way, someones in charge, and you still lose out, especially when you have an opinion opposite of the majority.

Many countries in Africa DO NOT believe in the same things Americans do. In a country, there are smaller communities who believe in things like Hrae mentioned. There are little tribes/villages who have come together and made up their own laws, rules, etc, because they are just a small group of people who believe in similar stuff. Many tribes are ENEMIES. If you do not believe in what they do, or you come trying to change their views, they probably wouldn't like you or even consider anything you say. Hell, some might even chase you out or kill you. But I'm not going to stereotype.

People just have different beliefs =/ some would rather starve to death then have to listen to some authority figure. And some just aren't developing or believe in democracy, equality and rights like America and other developed countries do. I mean sheesh, the apartheid wasn't that long ago, and the Berlin wall went down the year I was born.

Not neccesarilly. Numbers > Strength. 50 guys with sticks beat 1 guy with a shotgun. As long as the majority is good at heart, the few evil ones will never win.

And we could always try City States again. i once again ask you, what about Athens?

I believe that ideal was acctually expressed by aesop... either him or another one of the early writers... i believe it was said in the moral "Better to starve free than to live as a well fed slave". But i wonder, why not have the best of both? why not live well-fed and free? i dont see why anarcho socialism, once in place, wouldnt work :/

Nothing comes free.

Being COMPLETELY free means completely sticking up for yourself. And that means finding food and shelter.

Anarchosocialism sounds a bit like an oxymoron.

Anarchy- anti government and establishment.
Socialism- government essentially runs the economy.

You realize we're not living in a storybook, right? The force of good and evil are nice little ideas, but they are only as good as our definitions of such. What you consider good and evil may be polar opposite of what someone else believes is good and evil. "As long as the majority is good at heart" is way too optimistic to me. I live in the real world.

Pfft. you're trying to make it seem like im living a little story book life. i assure you, im not.

However, im speaking of good and evil in the sense of the obvious: murdering people, for example, is evil. The less obvious things, the people will have to vote on. Athens.

Not everyone thinks murder is evil. Some think of it as vengence, or punishment, or justice. Is justice evil?

Im speaking of blind murder. But it is agreable that going for vengence does nothing but continue the cycle, and lowers you to the level of the murder themselves, and that there are better ways of doing things, correct?

No one murders for no reason.

It'd take a mental disorder to do that.

But often times the reason does not outweigh the taking of a life.

And it's vengence that CREATES the cycle. Someone kills someone, causing him to be killed in an act of so-called "riteous vengence", which results in his children/lover/wife/whatever getting angry, and killing someone in what they concider riteous vengence. Sometimes it's better to just end the cycle where it is.

Yes BUT thats what YOU think. Thats what you would assume most would believe, but not everyone believes that. Some will go as far as they need to to get their point across. People will kill others to prevent themselves from getting caught and turned in for other crimes.

My sister owed a drug dealer money, she wouldn't pay him. What does he do? Tries to kill her. Thats a true story.

Hm... ok. i relent. point made. However, still, could it not be said that our current legal system is just like the one i propose, just without a middle man?

^ No.

Ok, please, i beg of you, point out the differences.