4 ms·
The human cost of having too little food is literally orders of magnitude worse than the cost of having too much. (Having too much necessarily implying having t
by seoaeu 6y ago
The human cost of having too little food is literally orders of magnitude worse than the cost of having too much. (Having too much necessarily implying having to waste/throw some of it away). To give a sense from past famines, take the fatality numbers from covid and add a zero or two.
Add to this backdrop all the unpredictability that goes into producing food. Growing crops has months of lead time during which unpredictable events like droughts or floods or pests can obliterate a large fraction of your production. Even after harvesting, natural disasters or industrial accidents can destroy significant quantities of food (think of a grain elevator explosion).
In short, growing surplus food is the only rational approach. Of course, what you do with the surplus once you have it is another question. There I agree with you that it is shameful we don't ensure more ends up in the hands of those going hungry.