Social Question

BobaStars81's avatar

Why are children still starving in this world and without clean water?

Asked by BobaStars81 (81points) April 28th, 2016

Why are people still starving on this planet?

Why?

Last night I went to Disneyland here in California. Most people were awestruck by Disneyland, but for me all I kept thinking about is the plight of others suffering in the world. Surely Disneyland must have cost millions upon millions and millions to create. Countless hours and energy to create this wonderful theme-park…... and yet why are there children still dying on this earth without food????

The prices on things (rent, food, clothing, etc) here in Los Angeles keeps on getting higher and more expensive as the years and decades go on…......... Million dollar houses, but why is there people who can’t even afford a few dollars, none the less even have access to clean water? Why?

After years and years of advanced technology….. healthcare….... why are people still starving in this world?

I really think it’s due to corruption and greed…..

There is more than enough resources on this planet for everyone to have enough food to eat…...

It makes me so angry and depressed and I feel powerless to stop it all…...........

Why?

How?

Last week I was walking in Target and saw a woman carrying a $7,000 Chanel purse. While I believe they have a right to spend money on whatever they choose…....... I just can’t help to think money, resources is not correctly shared…........ Why does this woman own a 7,000 purse, but yet so many children starve to death each and every single day??? Why?

How is this possible in this day and age?

Is it because most of the food goes to the animals for slaughterhouses?

Is it because we are racist jerks who believe we are superior and therefore others should suffer and have less???

Why is it ONE child has the option and luxury to get food, water, education, etc…. while another one barely struggles to survive???

The scale seems off and tipped and I wonder if it is on purpose….......

For example the Middle East, we took their resources, fight about their oil. We bombed their cities, killed their women, men and children.

In India and Asia we have sweat shops to make clothing for us Americans.

Are Americans so selfish and greedy? That we believe we have the right to the best of the best while the rest of the world suffers?

OR is this just the way that life is and I should accept it?

Is this just the natural order of things, that some should suffer while others have more???

I am just wondering WHY in this day and age of advancement we still have children dying from starvation…...................

BUT we have enough money for theme parks, The Olympics, etc while others starve to death on a daily basis in third world countries.

Please explain and forgive my ignorance I am just simply confused and want to know the truth…...

Did Americans set it up this way so America would be the biggest powerhouse taking the resources of others and not equally distributing wealth?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

20 Answers

SecondHandStoke's avatar

Oh boy…

Take a look at the first item on my profile. It’s there for a reason.

Then get back to me.

BobaStars81's avatar

@SecondHandStoke I give as much as I can and I work with a nonprofit organization here in the U.S to feed the homeless. I also volunteer and give back as much as I can.

BobaStars81's avatar

@SecondHandStoke The point of Fluther is to discuss ideas and share opinions. I do as much as I can. The reason I posted this question was to get an insight and listen to what others have to say.

Coloma's avatar

There is no, one size fits all, answer. We have plenty of homeless and hungry people, right here in America. There has always been poverty and wealth discrepancy all over the globe and all we can do is what we can do, as individuals. Give to our local food banks, buy a homeless person a bag of food, or give them a few dollars. You have to be careful about reverse discrimination, the women carrying the 7k purse might also give generously to charity.

You can;’ judge a person by their wealth or poverty. appearances can be deceiving.
I know a woman that drives a Mercedes, has several other high end vehicles, makes very good money, has about 10 horses, travels and enjoys many of the finer things in life and she also goes out of her way to help all kinds of people. Stop focusing on the ills of the world and just focus on what you can do to make things a little better.

CWOTUS's avatar

Welcome to Fluther.

The short answer to your question is that unless people work to support themselves, and thereby pay for or directly produce the things that they (and their families) need to survive, there simply isn’t enough altruism among those who do earn and produce a surfeit to give it away to the needy. And if that kind of altruism became prevalent by force, then we would find – as we often do find – that suddenly it was “impossible” for larger and larger numbers of people to produce what they need to make ends meet – and producers would find more creative ways to shield their production from those who would take it because they “need” it.

In other words: There has to be some basis of universal production to make ends meet means for all people. As people drop out of “production” mode and move into “needs” mode then it becomes harder and harder to force producers to pay for consumers. And that, unfortunately, includes children who simply aren’t old enough or capable enough to produce according to their needs. (I’m sure that some will read or interpret this to mean that I favor putting children to work as soon as they can stand up, and keep them chained to a machine or a galley oar for the remainder of their pitiful lives, but that is assuredly not my meaning.)

josie's avatar

There is no real shortage of anything in the world. But there are certainly plenty of places on Earth where there is a shortage of money to buy it.
There are lots of reasons for this, and in my opinion the most common one is the politics of the region in question. But it has nothing to do with Disneyland.
Also, see @SecondHandStoke

stanleybmanly's avatar

There is no legitimate reason, and everyone knows it. The question isn’t why. No matter how convoluted the explanation, the bottom line is always that they starve because they are dirt poor. As for why the rest of us tolerate it, that answer is also rather obvious. We tolerate it because we can do without them, and most of us are distracted from the misery with our own concerns and don’t have to personally witness it.

BobaStars81's avatar

Thank you everyone (except for the first person) for your answers, much appreciated.

@Coloma
@CWOTUS
@josie
@stanleybmanly

BobaStars81's avatar

@Coloma That is very true… I see where you are coming from. You are right I shouldn’t judge those that have wealth. Even for me growing up I felt very guilty about my wealth and my families wealth…. Like you said what matters is just giving back and doing as much as we can…. and to not focus on all the bad….. It’s hard to not get down from all the pain and suffering…...... but you’re right I shouldn’t let that spoil my head. There’s so many beautiful things out there in the world.

BobaStars81's avatar

@josie I never said that poverty or hunger came from Disneyland or that the problem was Disneyland. I was simply just making an observation of the stark contrasts.

I do agree with you about politics.

That was my point in saying corruption and greed.

BobaStars81's avatar

@stanleybmanly Yup, so true. Great answer.

Love_my_doggie's avatar

@BobaStars81 Welcome to Fluther! It’s nice to have you here. Please expand your profile so we can get to know you better.

I can’t speak for the first person who responded, but I interpreted his answer very differently than you did. I think he was saying that he, too, is concerned about and frustrated by this very question, and that his profile shows him on the same page as you.

Ok, sure, I’m trying to keep the peace and stop your feelings from being hurt. I really did have the opposite reaction, though.

kritiper's avatar

Too many people and too few who really care. Maybe it would be better if the population was reduced to less than 500 million, but I still don’t think it would be enough.

CWOTUS's avatar

People have to understand something very clearly and which far too few do understand. It’s not a failure of “caring”, as @kritiper says, but not to pick on him specifically, I’m sure that the OP cares just as much. That’s obvious from the question itself.

It’s a failure of production. The things that people want and need: food, shelter, medical care, transportation, and yes, even clear air and water – all have to be produced by someone. That takes a lot more than just “caring” and good intention. It’s not enough to say “the system can’t produce enough”, because clearly it can. Work must be done and goods must be produced. And in order for that to happen people need to do a lot more than just want for it to be done.

The people who do the work and “produce all of the things” expect to be paid for their labor, their time away from their families, their risk – and to be rewarded for the time that they could have been doing the things that they might prefer to do if they didn’t have to work, or didn’t have to risk investment capital over long periods of time. People expect some kind of exchange for the work they do and the risks that they take.

The recent history of the world shows, in fact, that even as the number of people in the world has passed seven billion – an all-time high, and apparently still increasing – the rate of poverty has also reached an all-time low. (Even an all-time low “rate” of poverty still means that more than a billion people in the world live in abject poverty, however.) People are learning. Governments – except for those in the West, for some inexplicable reason – are liberalizing, however slowly and in fits and starts – and dictatorial rule is being replaced by more open government that gradually recognizes the forces of freer markets – and more people can produce more stuff, including the clean air and water (and food, shelter, medical care, etc.) that people need.

ANef_is_Enuf's avatar

Great question.
I think that human beings are wonderful at forgetting about tragedy that is out of sight/out of mind and I also think that we are excellent at being self absorbed. It’s easy to feel like your own struggle is so enormous that you fail to see the incredible privileges we have. Most people forget about the big picture, even those of us who try to be conscious of it, and when faced with a hard question like that most people will get defensive. Our culture tells us that if we work hard enough we deserve everything that we could ever want, and consumerism tells us that what we want is a bigger house/newer car/bigger patio/Chanel purse.

Unofficial_Member's avatar

The cause of most famine problems: over-reproduction (which is exacerbated by low agricultural capacity). Really, people need to stop bringing another life in this world if they can’t sustain such life materially, financially, and emotionally. They make their own problem so they’ll have to deal with it. I will, however, put victims of natural calamities as exceptions.

cazzie's avatar

How dare those women with no access to health care or birth control keep breeding. Every area where women are educated and given adequate education, birth control and even small start loans for enterprises, the quality of life improves.
Ask why kids are going to school with no breakfast and no dinner in America, so much wealth, only out counted by the greed.

cazzie's avatar

^^ add that to my overtired, poorly written, confused second-language posts

Response moderated (Spam)
stanleybmanly's avatar

Some troll has resurrected the goose woman. Perhaps they do serve some useful purpose. Here’s to her memory! I smile at the thought of it.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther