Comments on: Let’s end world hunger World Economic Forum Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:35:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Krispin Tue, 22 May 2012 13:24:55 +0000 Telling people that birth control is a sin is wrong, but telling people not to reproduce is wrong too. Sometimes it is not the persons fault they can’t take care of themselves and feed thier children. Like in third world countries these people work really, really hard to survive but its not thier faults. If they had the chance to have a job feed thier children and live comfortably don’t you think they would. There are people in the U.S that could have a nice home and live happily that don’t deserve people to give them whatever they want all theyhad to do to live happily is apply themselves.

By: matthewslyman Wed, 04 Apr 2012 19:09:10 +0000 The truth about Monsanto and its motivation: JA

It’s NOT their mission; to end world hunger…

By: skyraider Thu, 26 Jan 2012 03:53:00 +0000 There is a hugely obvious reason for poverty and hunger.
People with no resources to care for children have them anyway. It doesn’t mean we have to kill people. But we could provide birth control to people who want it. And we could stop telling unbelievably poor people (like Haitians) that birth control is a sin. Somehow that seems evil.

By: GMKnow Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:03:20 +0000 Ending world hunger is a tall task and will not be met by the blustery boasts of biotech CEO, Hugh Grant. The Monsanto head honcho touts that by virtue of higher yielding GMO crops they can produce enough food to feed the earth’s growing population.

It’s still not yet been resolved how the world’s population will digest all the dent corn, soy, sugar, cotton seed and canola oil considering the processing, chemicals, water and equipment involved with producing it. What Huge also failed to mention is that part about Monsanto requiring farmers to buy new seed every year, they can’t save seed because it’s in their technology licensing agreement, which introduces a bit a snag for those poor countries, farmers and starving types who are looking for self-sufficiency and a REAL sustainable way to grow their own food.

The only feeding going on, or even remotely associated with Grant’s propaganda, is feeding the fat-cat Monsanto investor class. It’s they who possess the insatiable appetite for ever-increasing profits on the backs of farmers and poor 3rd world countries. Quarter on quarter profits are promoted by quasi-governmental BIOTECH shills USAID and our foreign ambassadors foisting subsidized GMO crops onto foreign nations under the threat of trade sanctions. Wikileaks confirmed this fact. Sure, they’re feeding the world: a huge freaking stick of GMO baloney.

Producing more GMO food cannot overcome or thwart government corruption. Warlords also don’t care about more food. More food won’t solve distribution problems. It’s abuse of power, corruption and food distribution that are the cause of famine and starvation. The glory and promise of bountiful harvests don’t mean crapola when it’s dependent on bank loans, chemical inputs, heavy equipment and annual seed purchase agreements. This isn’t feeding the poor. It’s holding them hostage.

Stay in Davos, Mr. Grant. I understand they don’t force-feed the animals GMOs like they do here in the US.

By: OneOfTheSheep Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:46:30 +0000 @matthewslyman,

You frequently don’t acknowledge that you live in England, probably because you wish your socialist ideas to appear less the failure that they are. Given the recent youth riots in your country, why don’t you try to rectify things there before purporting to share your “wisdom” here in the U.S.?

Obvious fact: Neither you nor respective governments are going to take the ever-increasing number of unproductive, unskilled, unintelligent economic basket case individuals and make them productive by building more school buildings or employing more teachers in the present hopelessly failing “educational establishments”.

These failed generations will be a drag on their respective economies as long as they exist. All they do is produce ever more of themselves to suck at the public teat. They are already a generation economically without hope of recovery.
You suggest as “proven fact” that “…there are already plenty of resources in the world for 7 billion people to live comfortably.” How do you define “comfortably”? Certainly not in American terms.

The reality is that if all existing wealth were collected and redistributed absolutely equally among all humans present that the result would be (1) universal poverty and (2) with no “surplus” anywhere or incentive to work mass starvation, sickness and warfare would quickly reduce world population by approximately half in the collective rust to occupy and secure tillable land and reliable water supplies.

It is MY “…theory that people are biologically & psychologically programmed to…” war, rape and pillage. In modern times we lay the thin veneer of civilization over that, but in times of civil disorder we revert. We can only survive as a species in other than mean circumstances when we agree to overcome our baser instincts and work together for the common good. Pakistan is an excellent example of a nation unable to do that.

In America, the poor look out the windows in our fine schools while class is in session, and disrupt order in the halls and on the grounds with drugs, gangs and intimidation. They intentionally nullify and detract from the effectiveness of an academic environment.

We ALREADY “share opportunities”. They reject the idea that they have to “do the math”, learn to speak and write proper English, and learn and support the culture of the country in which they reside. You offer only failed ideas for an ever grimmer future ahead if we do not change what is currently done and not done.

Should WE, the elite, by definition those with computers and literate here reading and commenting, “Interfere in some way with the lives of people with the potential to reproduce?” YES!

In those locales of ever-prevalent and increasing hunger and starvation put something in the food distributed by humanitarian relief efforts that inhibits fertility. Condoms don’t work if not used, and in many cases local custom and practice is what must be “defeated” to achieve a lower birth rate.

Those irresponsible enough to keep breeding that cannot support themselves and the existing family should not have the option of passing on the expense to those better off with more sense. We’ll feed you, but NO MORE! If you don’t like those “conditions”, STARVE! Their choice, as the increasing problem is theirs and theirs alone to solve in the longer term.

By: OneOfTheSheep Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:06:37 +0000 @WeWereWallSt,

Identifying an arbitrary and non-specific 3.5 billion people as a non-contributing and unnecessary burden on planetary resources is quite different to advocating their deliberate destruction. Humanity has a unique PROBLEM in that it’s very success may well eventually destroy it.

This isn’t about “making things a bit better for the rest of us”, but, rather, trying to halt the current rush to a Soylent Green society. That’s the rather obvious destination of the present course of humanity.

By: matthewslyman Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:31:17 +0000 I have read your article now, Mr. Grant!

> “…environmental sustainability…”
> “…corporate responsibility…”

I appreciate your acknowledgement of these vital topics (which generally represent well-known concerns about Monsanto’s business-practices). But where do you mention biodiversity?

How can poverty and inequality be eradicated, if part of the people on this planet are becoming ever more dependent on an ever smaller oligarchy of ever more economically dominant biotech companies?

By: matthewslyman Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:28:58 +0000 Haven’t read the main article yet but…

@OneOfTheSheep: “unrestrained reproduction”… What do you propose to do about this? Interfere in some way with the lives of people with the potential to reproduce?

Proven fact: high poverty and low educational oppotunities/ attainment are positively correlated with high reproductive rate. Low poverty, high income equality and high educational opportunities/ attainment tend to lead naturally to slower population growth, and more harmonious societies for everyone.

Other proven fact: there are already plenty of resources in the world for 7 billion people to live comfortably.

This supports my theory that people are biologically & psychologically programmed to put their hopes into the next generation, when they cannot find hope in anything else. When people cannot find happiness and comfort in their own lives, they give everything to their children and grandchildren and wish happiness for them – hoping to receive happiness by proxy through their children’s lives. In terms of political & social psychology, people may even be genetically programmed to fight their kinsmen’s corner in class warfare by multiplying more when the system pushes them to the edge of survival. End results? The Arab Spring should give us some idea…

Educate the poor. Share the opportunities. Share the fresh air, the sunshine, the nature and park-land: don’t just fence off massive tracts of land to make huge gardens for billionaires, while everyone else lives in shanty-towns and cramped apartments. And then, “problematic” and uneven population growth will even itself out. The ship will right itself, when the cargo is redistributed…

I might read the main article later – though I’m very sceptical of the ethics and value of what Monsanto does, from what I’ve read previously… Ever heard of “biodiversity”, Mr. Monsanto? How are we going to resist the pandemics of the future or reduce our carbon footprint, without the reintroduction of local crop varieties and localised distribution of goods? What should the response be, to crop disease? Ever deepening dependency on uniform genetic engineering???

I do hope your article answers these questions, or it will leave me even more disenchanted with Monsanto’s propaganda…

By: WeWereWallSt Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:44:56 +0000 Wow. Bonus. We thought we were going to get to mock that Notting Hill actor guy when we clicked on this page but instead we get to have a little fun with Adolf Malthus here, aka, “oneofthesheep” who wants to clear out about 3.5 billion people to make things a bit better for the rest of us (well, we hope it’s “us” anyway).

We can guess he’d start with the 10 million people in Somalia, but we’re wondering if we might get some granularity on where he’d go next, or which government might run on a platform of ridding half their population.

Also, some details, but maybe worth looking at. When a place like Japan does its own downsizing, does that take a little heat off somewhere else? If yes, can we have a global straw-drawing rather than let the Japanese pick who gets off the hook, or firing line, or whatever?

We love the concept, just want to flesh it out a bit.

If it doesn’t get much traction though, maybe it’s worth hearing out the CEO of Monsanto.

By: OneOfTheSheep Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:10:44 +0000 “The simple, incontestable fact is that to thrive — and in many cases to survive — we as a global society must address poverty and hunger.”

No, we don’t. And we shouldn’t. You advocate treating the symptom and ignoring the cause, which is unrestrained reproduction worldwide by people who have no land to grow crops, decreasing water per capita, poor or no education, poor or no skills, poor or no prospects in a world that does not need and should not welcome more open mouths already doomed by their circumstances to produce nothing but urine and feces.

Forty years ago the people were starving in Somalia. Twenty years ago the people were starving in Somalia. Today the people are starving in Somalia. The world “celebrated” the tragedy of SEVEN MILLION PEOPLE on a planet that cannot provide a decent life in the distant future for half that number.

“By 2050 there will be 9.5 billion people living on earth.” WHY? For governments the world over to permit this to come to pass is the ultimate irresponsibility.

Don’t make a “global promise” you can’t keep. If by some miracle you “keep it” this year, there will be ever more people year after year until you don’t. You can’t keep doing the same thing year after year and expect different results!