I set my homepage to http://www.thehungersite.com and click on the various free donations everyday before going off to browse the internet, a nice freebie!
Thanx,
Brackis
Thanx,
Brackis
:thumbsdown:don't be a jerk.Originally posted by: tcsenter
I just gave 1.1 cups of staple food to help a starving child reach the age of sexual maturity, so he/she can have 6 more starving children, so on and so forth. I'm such a humanitarian! 😀
Originally posted by: tcsenter
I just gave 1.1 cups of staple food to help a starving child reach the age of sexual maturity, so he/she can have 6 more starving children, so on and so forth. I'm such a humanitarian! 😀
Originally posted by: spaceghost21
Originally posted by: tcsenter
I just gave 1.1 cups of staple food to help a starving child reach the age of sexual maturity, so he/she can have 6 more starving children, so on and so forth. I'm such a humanitarian! 😀
Sad but true....
So what you're saying is, the tens of thousands of starving children who otherwise would never live to see sexual maturity but for the nutritional and medical boost they receive from humanitarian gestures do not have a significant impact on population growth? Isn't that sort of in diametric opposition to the very reason we are encouraged to donate to these causes (because lots and lots of children would die)?Actually not as true as you would think. But just becuase something "makes sense" it must be true right? If you are going to discount humanitarian gestures and slap millions of desperate impoverished people in the face, why don't you learn something about what you are talking about?
The relationship between population growth and poverty is a very very complex relationship that turns out to be fairly unintuitive.
Originally posted by: CasmirRadon
Originally posted by: spaceghost21
Originally posted by: tcsenter
I just gave 1.1 cups of staple food to help a starving child reach the age of sexual maturity, so he/she can have 6 more starving children, so on and so forth. I'm such a humanitarian! 😀
Sad but true....
Actually not as true as you would think. But just becuase something "makes sense" it must be true right? If you are going to discount humanitarian gestures and slap millions of desperate impoverished people in the face, why don't you learn something about what you are talking about?
The relationship between population growth and poverty is a very very complex relationship that turns out to be fairly unintuitive.
Originally posted by: tcsenter
So what you're saying is, the tens of thousands of starving children who otherwise would never live to see sexual maturity but for the nutritional and medical boost they receive from humanitarian gestures do not have a significant impact on population growth? Isn't that sort of in diametric opposition to the very reason we are encouraged to donate to these causes (because lots and lots of children would die)?Actually not as true as you would think. But just becuase something "makes sense" it must be true right? If you are going to discount humanitarian gestures and slap millions of desperate impoverished people in the face, why don't you learn something about what you are talking about?
The relationship between population growth and poverty is a very very complex relationship that turns out to be fairly unintuitive.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that, without humanitarian assistance, the entire populace would be wiped out (except perhaps humanitarian organizations in their dire fund-raising pitches). Only that feeding these people does absolutely nothing for their situation but compound it.
But who am I to talk? I just gave $50.00 to Second Harvest. Damned compassion!