4 ms·

I feel like hunger is much more likely to be solved with innovative economic thinking than with innovative engineering. We should be able to grow enough food fo

I feel like hunger is much more likely to be solved with innovative economic thinking than with innovative engineering. We should be able to grow enough food for everyone as it is. That's not really the issue. The issue is getting the economics worked out so that we do grow enough food, and so that we can distribute it to everyone who needs it without breaking all of the economies.

kyllo 13y ago
You are right on track with this comment, but I'd go one step further to say that we already do grow enough food. We just don't distribute it equitably, at all. The fact that hunger, malnutrition, and starvation still plague humanity, is a choice that we have made. The most powerful among us have effectively decided that not everyone deserves food.
CapitalistCartr 13y ago
Yes, this! People keep trying to solve a problem they don't understand, that doesn't really exist. We have enough food in the World to feed our population. Countries like North Korea, Somalia, Ethiopia, Congo have starvation problems not from a lack of food in this World but from monsters running their government that won't allow their people the freedom to live their lives. In spite of a growing population, farm land in the USA is declining. "In 1990, there were almost 987 million acres in farms in the U.S., that number was reduced to just under 943 million acres by 2000, and then reduced to 914 million acres in 2012." http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/ag101/landuse.html http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/ag101/landuse.html
- obviouslygreen 13y ago
  Politics aside, there's an appalling amount of food waste in developed countries. It's certainly not as simple as "send all the not-pretty produce to Africa" or "ship all the no-longer-perfectly-fresh bread to North Korea," but there is a huge potential target for reducing what we throw away and getting it to people who need it. The major problem, of course, is interfering with people's lifestyles, if only in marginal ways... we as first-world countries just don't handle having our convenience messed with very well.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    there is a huge potential target for reducing what we throw away Yes and getting it to people who need it. Not so sure about this one. Fostering dependence and quite simply the costs of airlifting tons of produce and bread to North Korea on the regular come to mind.
  - jeltz 13y ago
    If we reduce the food waste it will only mean reduced food production, those in need would not get any of the former waste production.
  - tomjen3 13y ago
    You just touched all of my buttons wrt food and economics here. First of all, just because food isn't used doesn't mean it is wasted. I don't like to go to the store all the time so I buy more food than I may end up using -- but I still consider it worth it. Second there is not an limited amount of food in the world and there is no reason we have to cut down on our use in order to feed hungry Africans -- we can, as GP correctly pointed out -- feed the entire world. At this point the only reason there is hunger anywhere in the world is bad governments and failed states -- Haiti is hell on earth (and has been before the recent earthquake), but it borders the Dominican republic, which is much better (if still far from the western world), NK is the worst place on earth with street urchins scavenging for single kernels of rice in animal dung, SK, which it borders, is a pretty good place to live and has basically no starvation. It is one country today, but the same difference (albit to a lesser degree) could be seen between East and West Germany. Finally, take the recent hunger situation in Africa -- people had to walk miles through the desert, leaving their dead and dying children behind in the sand because they couldn't carry them. They had to walk until they came out of Somalia and entered Kenya where they would receive held and food -- because the warlords of Somalia didn't allow the food aid into the country as they believed it was a western emperialist attempt to make Islam look bad.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - Shivetya 13y ago
- angersock 13y ago
  So, the obvious question presents itself: What is to be done with the countries that through corruption, incompetence, or malice prevent food aid from reaching their citizens? What exactly is the developed man's burden, here? This is a tricky point.
- abdullahkhalids 13y ago
  If the developed world did not screw over the developing world in international trade agreements and prices...
ippisl 13y ago
the problem is that social solutions are much harder to implement than technological ones , and rarely do succeed. But i've seen better solutions to this problem .one example is letting bacteria grow basic food elements at 10x less cost, like pronutria claims.another example is making high quality chicken substitute from soybean,which,depending on proces could be much cheaper than chicken.
JonnieCache 13y ago
>We should be able to grow enough food for everyone as it is. We already grow more than enough food, and have for a long time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_waste http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_waste
jvm 13y ago
To be fair, technology has allowed crop yields to grow considerably which has been credited with decreasing world hunger. Lower food prices is clearly a good thing, even though I agree more buying power for the world's poor would be better.
leef 13y ago
The actual purpose of this project is to provide years-long space travelers with food. This makes sense. The bit about solving world hunger looks to be a side aspiration of the creator.
tomjen3 13y ago
The problem is that there economics is pretty simple, so there isn't much that can be invented here: you want the people who are currently starving to produce more stuff that others want to buy so that they can buy food for themselves and their family. Economic innovations won't help with that, but engineering ones might. Or just remove the trade barriers with Africa and start buying from them like we do with the Chinese.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

kyllo 13y ago

You are right on track with this comment, but I'd go one step further to say that we already do grow enough food. We just don't distribute it equitably, at all. The fact that hunger, malnutrition, and starvation still plague humanity, is a choice that we have made. The most powerful among us have effectively decided that not everyone deserves food.

CapitalistCartr 13y ago

Yes, this! People keep trying to solve a problem they don't understand, that doesn't really exist. We have enough food in the World to feed our population. Countries like North Korea, Somalia, Ethiopia, Congo have starvation problems not from a lack of food in this World but from monsters running their government that won't allow their people the freedom to live their lives. In spite of a growing population, farm land in the USA is declining. "In 1990, there were almost 987 million acres in farms in the U.S., that number was reduced to just under 943 million acres by 2000, and then reduced to 914 million acres in 2012." http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/ag101/landuse.html http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/ag101/landuse.html

obviouslygreen 13y ago
Politics aside, there's an appalling amount of food waste in developed countries. It's certainly not as simple as "send all the not-pretty produce to Africa" or "ship all the no-longer-perfectly-fresh bread to North Korea," but there is a huge potential target for reducing what we throw away and getting it to people who need it. The major problem, of course, is interfering with people's lifestyles, if only in marginal ways... we as first-world countries just don't handle having our convenience messed with very well.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  there is a huge potential target for reducing what we throw away Yes and getting it to people who need it. Not so sure about this one. Fostering dependence and quite simply the costs of airlifting tons of produce and bread to North Korea on the regular come to mind.
- jeltz 13y ago
  If we reduce the food waste it will only mean reduced food production, those in need would not get any of the former waste production.
- tomjen3 13y ago
  You just touched all of my buttons wrt food and economics here. First of all, just because food isn't used doesn't mean it is wasted. I don't like to go to the store all the time so I buy more food than I may end up using -- but I still consider it worth it. Second there is not an limited amount of food in the world and there is no reason we have to cut down on our use in order to feed hungry Africans -- we can, as GP correctly pointed out -- feed the entire world. At this point the only reason there is hunger anywhere in the world is bad governments and failed states -- Haiti is hell on earth (and has been before the recent earthquake), but it borders the Dominican republic, which is much better (if still far from the western world), NK is the worst place on earth with street urchins scavenging for single kernels of rice in animal dung, SK, which it borders, is a pretty good place to live and has basically no starvation. It is one country today, but the same difference (albit to a lesser degree) could be seen between East and West Germany. Finally, take the recent hunger situation in Africa -- people had to walk miles through the desert, leaving their dead and dying children behind in the sand because they couldn't carry them. They had to walk until they came out of Somalia and entered Kenya where they would receive held and food -- because the warlords of Somalia didn't allow the food aid into the country as they believed it was a western emperialist attempt to make Islam look bad.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- Shivetya 13y ago
angersock 13y ago
So, the obvious question presents itself: What is to be done with the countries that through corruption, incompetence, or malice prevent food aid from reaching their citizens? What exactly is the developed man's burden, here? This is a tricky point.
abdullahkhalids 13y ago
If the developed world did not screw over the developing world in international trade agreements and prices...

ippisl 13y ago

the problem is that social solutions are much harder to implement than technological ones , and rarely do succeed. But i've seen better solutions to this problem .one example is letting bacteria grow basic food elements at 10x less cost, like pronutria claims.another example is making high quality chicken substitute from soybean,which,depending on proces could be much cheaper than chicken.

JonnieCache 13y ago

>We should be able to grow enough food for everyone as it is. We already grow more than enough food, and have for a long time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_waste http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_waste

jvm 13y ago

To be fair, technology has allowed crop yields to grow considerably which has been credited with decreasing world hunger. Lower food prices is clearly a good thing, even though I agree more buying power for the world's poor would be better.

leef 13y ago

The actual purpose of this project is to provide years-long space travelers with food. This makes sense. The bit about solving world hunger looks to be a side aspiration of the creator.

tomjen3 13y ago

The problem is that there economics is pretty simple, so there isn't much that can be invented here: you want the people who are currently starving to produce more stuff that others want to buy so that they can buy food for themselves and their family. Economic innovations won't help with that, but engineering ones might. Or just remove the trade barriers with Africa and start buying from them like we do with the Chinese.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]