Do you feel bad about "the starving kids in Africa" ?

[jdun]

Africa has a lot of liberal corrupted socialist government and that's the main reason why they are starving.

In today mass transportation world where food can be ship anywhere in the world in matter of hours if needed. There is no reason why starvation happen. Starvation happens when Socialist/Communist/Thug government prevent food from imported, government mismanagement of food source, or both. In a free market capitalist you don't have starvation because the market will correct any imbalance in the supply and demand.

For example: A few years back Taiwan had the worst drought in recent memory. Yet the Taiwanese wasn't starving. Why is that? Taiwan government allows food to come into the country without price control. If you're a farmer in the USA and have a lot of extra wheat to export. Where would you export it to? A country that have a normal or below demand for wheat or a country that will pay a premium for it? You ship it to Taiwan because they willing to play more. The Taiwanese won't starve and the US farmer get extra for their wheat.

In a Socialist price control country no farmers will export their product below what it cost to make. In a Thug government the government used starvation against their own people. Africa has a lot of Thug and Socialist governments. That's why they have starvation.

 

[Lalo Lomeli]

Maybe going off the tangent a little bit, but this is the closest place were I can talk about this.

In Mexico, there's a whole mafia about compassion. And it's a multimillion industry.

You have the beggars that you see in the street, kids, blind people, old people singing, playing an instrument of asking for money in the subway, the street and such, the have to give a part of their profits to some leader, and that leader gives that to a superior. That superior are the really rich kind, the one that enforces the minimum quote among the beggars (removing their "licence"), that deals with "unofficial" beggars (sending other people to beat them) and managing the "farms" ( Woman beggars usually carry a baby in their arms, they are always sleep, this is because they are sedated, the farms is were they take the babies at night, and they are pretty much interchangeable between each other).

The government knows this, and they have been reports about it, but they end up being censured (At the internet) and if they manage to go in tv or radio, is easily forgotten, buried or whatnot. this isn't even a secret know that I think about it.

The point is, compassion is a human necessity, and there people out there profiting with that. The best course of action is going to a foundation investigate about their results and give to them directly, or you doing something about it (voluntary work), handing out money without thinking isn't really the answer .

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Even if I could afford to give money and I knew it would get to them, the difference it would make would be negligible. People go from living what can barely be called lives, to living what can just about be called lives. If I were to give money, I would give it to a cause I could actually make a difference to.

 

[breaddough]

I do not feel bad about these kids, because I've seen people who make do, a rough life is not necessarily a miserable one. Also, the parents are the ones that need help, not the kids directly. They raise the kids, they are more likely to be supporting the family with whatever work they find, they need to have skills training (that they may teach their children). On a tangential and entirely emotionally driven tangent - FUCK ANYONE THAT USES 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN' AS A REASON FOR ANYTHING, CHILDREN ARE NOT A PRODUCT TO FURTHER ANYONE'S ENDS AND THEY ARE HIGHLY ELASTIC LITTLE CREATURES WHO CAN SURVIVE TO BECOME INCREDIBLY STRONG FOR THEIR DIFFICULT PASTS

 

[MammothBlade]

I feel bad that people have to go through such torments. But, newsflash: Suffering is everywhere. Why is the starving child in Africa more deserving than the equally starving child closer to home; for that matter, why are starving children somehow more deserving than children suffering from cystic fibrosis? It's difficult to discern who has priority for aid or charity. There are injustices in the system, in nature, and in the way humans treat each other. Randomly throwing money into a charity box is just an impersonal gesture or a convenient way to rid myself of copper coins. No guarantees it will help anyone, and even if it does, it most likely be futile.

This boils down to countless charity causes all competing for the limited resources of money and attention. If it is moral and decent to give to charity, it's best to think carefully about which ones to help, rather than donate on the basis of some guilt-invoking appeal.

 

[Thaluikhain]

No. Every year its the same thing. An why are these parents having kids when they cant even feed themselves? No matter how much money that is thrown at them it will never solve there problem. Fact is, they leave in a desert - no water and difficult farming land. What do they expect? Throw them some condoms, that will deal with the spread of aids/hiv and the constant babies born into starvation. An then, maybe, they can start fixing there problems for the better and make a better place for any future kids. All they do now is give birth to more victims.

But condoms don't do anything to stop the spread of AIDS, and don't actually stop you from getting pregnant.

Or say some very powerful people who like pushing their rules on others any way they can, regardless of the consequences.

Now, you aren't going to be able to provide enough condoms for everyone in Africa, but there is an awful lot of good that could be done by making them more available. It's fucking monstrous that pro-celibacy groups fight tooth and nail to stop this from happening.

 

[lordbyron227]

I'm gonna be honest, I used to care when I was a child. But now, turning 20, with a job and all. I can't bring myself to give 2 you know whats about them. Why, because now that I have my own source of money, I finally can buy all the **** I want. I already pledged 225 USD of my Budget for the 3 Madoka Magika LE Volumes, approx. ,80 USD for the entirety of SHIKI, 20 for Corpse Party, 90 for Gungir and Growlanser 4, and well you get the point.


Not too mention this (Rise Kujikawa)

and this (Catherine)

has eaten about 1/4 or 1/3 of my discretionary funds while the rest will go into a savings account and a newly opened Roth IRA so I can stop wasting money. Not too mention textbooks and food.

So sorry poor African Children. Really sucks to be you.

 

[Darkmantle]

No. Every year its the same thing. An why are these parents having kids when they cant even feed themselves? No matter how much money that is thrown at them it will never solve there problem. Fact is, they leave in a desert - no water and difficult farming land. What do they expect? Throw them some condoms, that will deal with the spread of aids/hiv and the constant babies born into starvation. An then, maybe, they can start fixing there problems for the better and make a better place for any future kids. All they do now is give birth to more victims.

didn't you hear? the pop stopped by a little while ago and told everyone in africa to not use condoms. So that solution has been severely weakened

 

[Guardian of Nekops]

You know, there are times I really hate myself.

I have money to buy the odd video game now and again, which means I could definitely support a kid in Africa. But I don't. I certainly don't save all the money I could, and many of the things I take for granted that I need are not really necessary. And yeah, I pretty much scrape by every month financially, but if I spent everything I spend for convenience or entertainment on someone else? Wow... that could really help.

Then again, the economy IS based on me buying things I don't really need. A lot of people would be out of a job if I didn't, and the internet would be a very different beast if I (and everyone like me) didn't waste money on a computer and internet access to participate in it.

Let me tell you what I do:

http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/

This site downloads a program onto your computer that runs in the background, particularly in the stretches of time you're not really using your machine. It crunches little parts of the numbers for some humanitarian scientific projects... I've uploaded work on a system for cheap, reliable, and simple water filtration, the sort of system that could be put into place in some of these impoverished countries to make a real difference. I've uploaded work to help cure schistosomiasis and leishmaniasis, which I'm told are pretty bad diseases.

Anyway, what all this amounts to is that I and the millions of others who are part of this World Community Grid are making humanitarian research a little easier and cheaper, replacing the supercomputers that these researchers would need and can't afford. I'm using that absurdly expensive machine (if people can really live out there for $1,000 a year, it's worth a year of life) to work out solutions for people who could never afford to pay for it. I'm doing this without paying a cent, and when it gets in the way of my gaming (rarely) I turn it off for a while.

I dunno. Makes me feel better. Maybe it'll work for you, too. Just make sure you don't put it on something with a data-limited plan, that could get expensive.

 

[FoolKiller]

You'd have to be a pretty cold bastard

I am.

Also, no I don't care... not specifically. If I try to think about it then I feel empathy for them but human nature dictates that I care about myself more than anyone else.

As long as it doesn't directly affect me, I'm fine with it.

 

[Guardian of Nekops]

I don't give a damn about anyone in miserable countries, and here is why:

The country can't provide for a lot of people, so stop thinking that having 4 children or more is a good idea. You don't need a higher population, and by having children you're simply sending more people into a world of suffering.

I'll start feeling anything at all for them when they start using their brains.

See, what we have at work here is not stupidity. It is, if anything, the Tragedy of the Commons, but it's not even that, not really. In your classic Tragedy of the Commons scenario, just using the resource less would end up being better for everyone in the long run... but that's not the case here.

You want to know why people have a lot of children when they live in a world where most of those children will die? It's the same reason why we used to have a lot of children here in America, back when disease or a bad winter would just randomly kill half your kids. They have so many children so that there's a CHANCE that one of them might survive. That they might actually have someone to talk to and to care for them in their old age. So that they can feel like they're doing something with their lives rather than just sitting there waiting to die.

Obviously, the ideal situation is a world in which each couple of people have two children, keeping the population steady, where that world is safe enough to ensure that both of those children will live to have their own kids. However, that's not the world in which these people find themselves, so having only two kids is basically equivalent to having none at all... it ensures that they will die out in a few generations. While such might be a bit more convenient for us, can you see how saying, "You folks should all just stop trying to survive, and the problem will go away in a few years," sounds... callous?

To sum up, people are going to keep breeding like it's the end of the world until it isn't any more, and honestly? It's the only thing they can do.

 

[rookie.of.the.year]

I don't give a damn about anyone in miserable countries, and here is why:

The country can't provide for a lot of people, so stop thinking that having 4 children or more is a good idea. You don't need a higher population, and by having children you're simply sending more people into a world of suffering.

I'll start feeling anything at all for them when they start using their brains.

See, what we have at work here is not stupidity. It is, if anything, the Tragedy of the Commons, but it's not even that, not really. In your classic Tragedy of the Commons scenario, just using the resource less would end up being better for everyone in the long run... but that's not the case here.

You want to know why people have a lot of children when they live in a world where most of those children will die? It's the same reason why we used to have a lot of children here in America, back when disease or a bad winter would just randomly kill half your kids. They have so many children so that there's a CHANCE that one of them might survive. That they might actually have someone to talk to and to care for them in their old age. So that they can feel like they're doing something with their lives rather than just sitting there waiting to die.

Obviously, the ideal situation is a world in which each couple of people have two children, keeping the population steady, where that world is safe enough to ensure that both of those children will live to have their own kids. However, that's not the world in which these people find themselves, so having only two kids is basically equivalent to having none at all... it ensures that they will die out in a few generations. While such might be a bit more convenient for us, can you see how saying, "You folks should all just stop trying to survive, and the problem will go away in a few years," sounds... callous?

To sum up, people are going to keep breeding like it's the end of the world until it isn't any more, and honestly? It's the only thing they can do.

Well said!

And I don't know much about politics but no matter how much aid they get, I don't think anything will change until they see political change.

I've been on an expedition to Zambia, and I've heard stories of food aid not helping. For instance, in one of the towns, a farmer had finally scraped together enough money to get a farming operation started, with a few employees, and from there life should have got better for him and the community. But nope. Come harvest/food selling time red cross swanned in and gave a whole lot of free food to the community, nobody bought the farmers stock, and then his operation failed and everyone went back into poverty.

 

[Jamieson 90]

To be honest it's gotten to the point that I just see it as guilt tripping and manipulation, because lets behonest that's what it is. I see the advert and hear the dire depressing music and switch off, you don't need that when you've had a hard day.

It might be better if they took a different approach, a positive one, people react better to seeing positive results than trying to guilt trip them, show us what good the work is doing, that way we know there are results, then say what needs to be done, I bet they would get more support that way rather than everything being so depressing.

As for me actually caring? I find myself not really caring, It's hard to relate to people in a nation in another part of the world, I know nothing of their culture or their way or life, how can I relate to them? It would be arrogant of me to even say I knew anything about them or understood their problems because I don't.

Then there is the last issue, is me donating actually going to help the situation or just make it worse? Is the money really going to the right places and even if it is will it help? Providing food and equipment is indeed a good cause but it's only a short term fix, it's not a long term solution. You can provide people with machinery to help them but they also need the training to understand/use/fix it. I've spoken to a few charity workers and they often complain how expensive equipment isn't used after a few months because a small part broke and they don't know how to repair it.

You need to sort out the corruption, educate people and invest in infastructure, what it really comes down to is Africa helping itself, sure the rest of the world can provide help but only the African people are going to be able to fix the problem.

 

[Aikayai]

I'd probably get a lot of stick for saying it but I think aid money should only go towards people affected by natural disasters. I can't feel guilty when half of the countries with starving kids are war torn nations with those surviving kids just growing up to fight more. Drought and famine can be remedied with charity. Wars just get funded by it.

 

[Soushi]

No, I'm completely desensitized to it.

It isn't my fault they have it rough and when we do send them aid their governments often spend it on weapons to fuel wars or just spend it on themselves while people continue to starve and die from disease.

Yes things are tough for them but me caring won't do shit.

I had one of those die-hard "think of the childrens!" types of girls in my high school who would always be talking about how much she wanted to go to Africa, and how we should all donate a dollar a day to feed a kid in Africa.
It'd always get the same reception: "shut up, we don't care", which is what it really boils down to. Yeah it sucks, but I'd rather buy myself a coke than donate the money. Is that insensitive? You betcha. Will my dollar actually do anything? No idea.

The problem with a lot of these charities is that an absolutely stunning amount of the money never actually does any good and just goes to the people in charge of said charities. Still, that's not the root of the problem.

The root of the problem is that a lot of us can't stand the idea of not being the one who changes everything. All we can do is our own small part. Think of it this way, if one person throws a single Coffee Crisp wrapper on the ground, it really isn't a big deal. Ten people, still not a big deal. One hundred people, kind of a mess. ten thousand or one hundred thousand people and suddenly we're drowning in a plasticy tsunami! However, the problem works in reverse too, if ever person does just a little bit, picks up one wrapper, places one sandbag, donates one dollar, then you'd be amazed at the progress we can make.

The problem is that people think that they need to be the savior, that something totally isn't worth their time unless they get a statue for it (metaphorical or literal, whichever). Can you change the situation on your own, probably not, but can each person do a little part and make things better over all, hell yes. Be a part of something much larger and you will make much more of a difference then trying to be some kind of maverick.

One more thing to, it isn't about fixing the problem overnight. Sometimes it is about taking the pressure off one little part of their lives and making them better. Donating money for mosquito nets to stop malaria, or making milk bag mattresses can do immensely more than just throwing money at the problem. Don't expect the problem to be fixed in twenty four hours, patience is needed.

 

[Buleet]

I feel guilty about it whenever a lot of food for something like a cruise or a party is mentioned. Then i just feel irrationally guilty.
It's very annoying.

 

[SeeIn2D]

I do care about anything bad happening to people around the world (unless of course they deserve it), but when I see an advertisement or hear someone talking about starving people somewhere I don't feel guilty about it, which I think is a large part of the strategies of charity organizations. I'm not saying it's a bad thing that they do this, but they do try to make people feel like it is in some way their own fault that people are in these situations and suffering. This obviously makes people more likely to donate and help.

In short I do care about this stuff. I don't hear about it and think "...meh...", but I also don't feel like I should be leaving my house to go to these places and assist.

 

[Phantomess]

I'm less inclined to donate to starving people overseas when there's poverty in my own country, since I believe you're in no position to help out another country when your own is up the proverbial creek (anyone been watching the soap opera in Canberra at the moment?). I still give $20 a month to wilderness conservation, but then I live in a country that's renowned for it's mineral exports and sometimes it's to the detriment of the surrounding environment.

So no, I'm not too worried about the 'starving children of Africa'. I'm more worried about the starving children of Australia.