Good point. If you have enough food, because, for instance, you make your own by farming and hunting, then you don't need more money to fight hunger, right? Al

Good point. If you have enough food, because, for instance, you make your own by farming and hunting, then you don't need more money to fight hunger, right? Also if you compare someone who has everything they need and want to someone who simply has a lot of money, is the first person necessarily less happy? What if we define poverty as "lack of food <add other points here like education>" instead of "lack of money"? What if we define poverty differently but still consider giving people money who need money as a good way to help them?