3 ms·

There is a conflict of values to consider here: Do we we place a higher value on preventing relative poverty in the United States or extreme poverty around the

There is a conflict of values to consider here: Do we we place a higher value on preventing relative poverty in the United States or extreme poverty around the world? """Poverty rates started to collapse towards the end of the 20th century largely because developing-country growth accelerated, from an average annual rate of 4.3% in 1960-2000 to 6% in 2000-10... China is responsible for three-quarters of the achievement."""[1] [1] http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21578665-nearly-1-billion-people-have-been-taken-out-extreme-poverty-20-years-world-should-aim http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21578665-nearly-1-bill...

ArkyBeagle 11y ago
I think that Americans place a higher value on preventing extreme poverty around the world. When faced with picky eaters, before around 1970, parents all over the USA would use the cliche that "children are starving in China."
- rgbrenner 11y ago
  "before around 1970" You know what happened shortly before 1970? The Great Chinese Famine--where up to 45 million people starved in the span of 3 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine I'm not sure how saying facts out loud indicates a value preference.
  - ArkyBeagle 11y ago
    It was said on a time interval from a very long time before 1970 until around 1970. This was not a direct reaction to the Great Famine ( which wasn't widely discussed in the US ). If you're not familiar enough with American culture to know what I mean, then don't worry about it.
    - rgbrenner 11y ago
      ok, that's interesting. China had a lot of famines though: 7 from 1900-1962: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines_in_China So I wouldn't be quick to rule out the idea that the phrase started with a famine in China. I am American btw. But I wasn't alive in 1970.
jernfrost 11y ago
While that is a fair consideration, for practical reasons there are very real dangers to ignoring inequality within the borders of a country. With great inequality history has given us many examples of sever political instability leading to violent revolutions and sometimes wars. It will not benefit the rest of the world if say the US, collapsed due to severe internal conflict. There has been studies showing that high inequality actually hampers economic growth. Thus inequality in the US is not necessarily to the benefit of poor people elsewhere.

ArkyBeagle 11y ago

I think that Americans place a higher value on preventing extreme poverty around the world. When faced with picky eaters, before around 1970, parents all over the USA would use the cliche that "children are starving in China."

rgbrenner 11y ago
"before around 1970" You know what happened shortly before 1970? The Great Chinese Famine--where up to 45 million people starved in the span of 3 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine I'm not sure how saying facts out loud indicates a value preference.
- ArkyBeagle 11y ago
  It was said on a time interval from a very long time before 1970 until around 1970. This was not a direct reaction to the Great Famine ( which wasn't widely discussed in the US ). If you're not familiar enough with American culture to know what I mean, then don't worry about it.
  - rgbrenner 11y ago
    ok, that's interesting. China had a lot of famines though: 7 from 1900-1962: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines_in_China So I wouldn't be quick to rule out the idea that the phrase started with a famine in China. I am American btw. But I wasn't alive in 1970.

jernfrost 11y ago

While that is a fair consideration, for practical reasons there are very real dangers to ignoring inequality within the borders of a country. With great inequality history has given us many examples of sever political instability leading to violent revolutions and sometimes wars. It will not benefit the rest of the world if say the US, collapsed due to severe internal conflict. There has been studies showing that high inequality actually hampers economic growth. Thus inequality in the US is not necessarily to the benefit of poor people elsewhere.