3 ms·
It's not a hypothetical at all. This is bound to happen sooner or later. You don't want it to happen even once. Food reserves only go so far - and if you use th
by nosianu 7y ago
It's not a hypothetical at all. This is bound to happen sooner or later. You don't want it to happen even once. Food reserves only go so far - and if you use them for this very foreseeable problem (you just don't know when exactly) you leave yourself more open to the unforeseeable catastrophes.
And yes, there is a very good point talking about hypotheticals on such literally vitally important topics.
> People in the US die because they cannot afford medical costs, the US is perfectly happy with that.
Maybe the difference is that sick people don't riot? If I remember the already mentioned "The Omnivore's Dilemma" correctly the current agricultural policies among other factors mentioned there also were created because of civil unrest due to food shortages, to prevent it from happening again. I can find plenty of sources for food riots, I have not read about anything similar caused by medical costs.
- sumedh 7y ago> It's not a hypothetical at all. This is bound to happen sooner or later. Based on your hypothesis? > Maybe the difference is that sick people don't riot? So people dying is ok its just that they should not riot?
- objectivetruth 7y agoThe person you're arguing with NEVER said that they approve of the US healthcare system. It seems weird to me that you keep bringing that up, since it is unrelated to the economics and politics of subsidized corn farming. And for the record, the person you're arguing with is also correct that food security is a major national security concern for every nation. No sane country with any alternatives thinks "Oh, we can just not have agriculture and just buy our country's food on the market instead."
- tehjoker 7y agoTheir family and friends do!