Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Really, don't get me wrong You're offering a most disingenuous argument. Would a pediatric hospital in a relatively poorer town in the US ask the same question while treating a child?
Moving food to a poor town in the US from somewhere else is a trivial task. Africa has its own set of problems.
U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
31–40 of 85 posts
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#32Now the devil's question: how are we going to feed all the people that survive because of this? Really, don't get me wrong, it's fantastic that lives are being saved. The amount of grief being spared by this, by not losing a child for so many families, is unimaginable. I am just wondering if we are not creating an even bigger problem by solving this problem before the other.
Humans are (on average) a net plus to society. Feeding them is not an issue, we already have the technology.
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#33This will kill the rainforrest in Africa. Because the survivors will use it for bushmeat, wood, jobs, fields for cows, ...
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#34Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#35Now the devil's question: how are we going to feed all the people that survive because of this? Really, don't get me wrong, it's fantastic that lives are being saved. The amount of grief being spared by this, by not losing a child for so many families, is unimaginable. I am just wondering if we are not creating an even bigger problem by solving this problem before the other.
What's with the downvotes? The question is asked in good faith and it produced an interesting discussion. Would y'all prefer for the author to remain silent with his thoughts, and for the opposing arguments to remain untold?
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#36Now the devil's question: how are we going to feed all the people that survive because of this? Really, don't get me wrong, it's fantastic that lives are being saved. The amount of grief being spared by this, by not losing a child for so many families, is unimaginable. I am just wondering if we are not creating an even bigger problem by solving this problem before the other.
Improving women's education and children's health is probably the best way to reduce uncontrolled population growth. Wanted, healthy children are more likely to grow up to be productive adults.
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#37This will kill the rainforrest in Africa. Because the survivors will use it for bushmeat, wood, jobs, fields for cows, ...
That is not true, but even if it were: fuck the rain forrest. What we are talking about here is peoples children.
tell this to those whose children die of hunger because of climate change.
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#38This will kill the rainforrest in Africa. Because the survivors will use it for bushmeat, wood, jobs, fields for cows, ...
A friend of mine once retitled a similar headline "U.S. Malaria Donations create an additional 2M starving Africans". I'll not add _my_ opinion of the matter, but I would love to see intelligent discussion on the matter. Is saving lives from disease just putting these same people on the path to starvation?
You don't create a self-sustainable economy by destroying human capital.
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#39Even if you don't want to give, set your Amazon to smile.amazon and it will donate a very small portion of your purchases to the charity of your choice. It may add up to $50-$100 in money given on your behalf over time.
Re: U.S. Malaria Donations Saved Almost 2M African Children
#40This will kill the rainforrest in Africa. Because the survivors will use it for bushmeat, wood, jobs, fields for cows, ...