man v food - not entertaining, what has society come to?

It's difficult being veggie when you don't cook all of your own meals and it would be a nuissance and extra cost to other people to have to do something different to you. When I do cook for myself, it is usually a veggie meal. When/if i live on my own I probably will be almost completely vegetarian.

I'm sure people over here wouldn't think much about long term investment if they were dealing with starvation in the short term either.

Especially if they had a government that gave them no assurance their investments would be protected, they had no capital for easy food production like the western world, and a weak dried up landscape that isn't at all conducive for food growth. They have no chance of competing.

People don't need computers to survive.

People need food in order to not die a slow and painful death.

While we (arguably) don't steal food from them, we could easily help them to not starve, but we would rather shut out eyes and overeat instead.

Off you go then. Stop shutting your eyes and get out there and do something. If you're that bothered of course.

I'm not working yet, but when I finish university I plan on using almost all of my disposable income on charities.

Perhaps they're hungry in the short term because they rarely consider the benefits of long term investments. I isn't really that difficult to thunk 2-3 years down the line, particularly if you're starving. Immiediate problems like that tend to focus the mind somewhat, its only when you've acquired a lot of things does investment become tricky because most corners of the market have been covered.

They need government from the ground up, quite literally. If they could distribute land resources fairly they'd then demand a government to defend their property. If this is too difficult then tough, it isn't the West's problem.

You still seem to be committed to this idea that the solution to Africa's problems is as simple as telling the Africans to stop being such short term thinkers and start planting more seeds. I'm sure the thousands of charity workers currently in Africa would collectively facepalm at such a suggestion.

It is the West's problem for many reasons. It was the West's colonialism that helped mess up Africa in the first place. Not to mention the fact that British companies are disproportionately responsible for selling them the weapons that are exacerbating the instability. We are also meant to be committed to human rights. A more cynical view is that we would like them to better establish themselves so we can trade with them.

You seem to think there is some sort of pan-African collective conscience, or that such a thing is even possible. The areas we are talking about are largely in the hands of disparate armed tribes, there is absolutely no prospect of an uncorrupt state suddenly rising up and having the capability to protect everyone's private property.

I'm sure the charities would collectively facepalm such a solution, this is because they have a vested interest in seeing these problems play out over decades: it keeps them in jobs you see. If starvation is the problem then the cultivation of more food is the solution, these things aren't difficult to think through if you're prepared to ignore the left-wing dogma for just a minute.

If British colonialism is responsible for African poverty why aren't the U.S, Australia, Canada and New Zealand suffering from extreme deprivation too? They began life as British colonies afterall, indeed the Queen is still head of state in Canada, Australia and New Zealand so according to you they should all be dirt poor and fighting tooth and nail over their scarce resources. It hasn't happened though because they freely decided to replicate the British model of parliamentary democracy, the Africans could have done this too, if they wanted.

That's just ridiculous. Charities are deliberately keeping people in poverty because they want to keep their jobs, I mean, really? Do you seriously think that's what's happening?

Err, the countries you're talking about are pretty much still run by the descendents of the colonialists. The situation in Africa is obviously not the same. Also, that was just one of about five possible reasons the situation in Africa should concern the West I came up with off the top of my head.

You said that the charities would "collectively facepalm" the idea of growing more food in response to the problem of a lack of food. To me this suggests that they're not serious about solving the underlying problems, I can only conclude that they'd rather not solve the problem and continue picking up a wage packet. What other reason is there?

Hong Kong isn't run by the descendents of the colonists and they're doing ok.

That's one of the naivest statements I've come across on TSR.

We'll see how well you fare when you're out in the real world!

ehh no because that cow or pig has been raised in America or has been imported to America by the request of that specific restaurant where most of the people go because they need some food, not because they are starving.

Listen I don't mean to sound harsh but your argument is really weak. We all get the fact that you just don't like the damn programme which is absolutely fine because each individual is entitled to their own opinion. But please stop repeating the same old starving people argument as it is not relevant or necessary in this instance.

I knew you'd give some bull**** excuse about why you're not a vegetarian.

But we'll go with it: it's ok for animals to die because it's a "nuisance and extra cost to other people to do something different"? But it's NOT ok for them to die for people's pleasure UNLESS that pleasure is being pretty much the main reason for 99% of meat eaters' choice to eat meat?

You don't seem very consistent here.

What makes me laugh is that that show is on TV then American people wonder why the world laughs at them for being the fattest people on the planet.

Frankly I find it disgusting that you used a computer to make this thread, in full knowledge of the fact that millions of people around the world are too poor or remote to have access to such electronic facilities. I wonder what they'd say if they saw you using such a useful resource for such frivolous purposes.

I don't like the program, it's not funny or entertaining, but attacking it on the basis that hungry people might not like it either is silly. It's not like he's physically snatching food out of the hands of African children.

I didn't use a computer to post this thread . . .

Did you use one to post that comment? in full knowledge that millions of people don't have a computer>

The fact that it's a childlike interpretation of Africa's problems, wilfully ignorant of numerous factors that keep it in such a poor state.

Good for them. Hong Kong and the entirety of Africa are hardly comparable models of post-colonialist society.

Well you are obviously a vegetarian or a vegan !!