How we can fight world hunger

Discussion in 'Economy' started by BoredDead, Nov 4, 2012.

  1. BoredDead
    Offline

    BoredDead Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Washington (state)
    Ratings:
    +3
    A proposal for a 5% luxury tax for world hunger charities

    Around the world, there are many people facing starvation. A 2010 statistic places the number or people facing hunger at 925 million, which is a terrible situation that the United States must face. Charities around the world see this problem, and do their best to fight it, but it’s not enough. Millions of people are still starving and millions need help. This problem, like any problem, can be solved with enough effort, and here is what I believe is a realistic solution to this problem through a good economic plan.

    This plan is to create a 5% luxury tax in the United States, and give the proceeds to world hunger charities, with one important restriction: they may only be allowed to fight world hunger with resources bought in the United States.

    Two problems exist with this plan. One is that we don't produce enough food to feed the world’s hungry, and another is creating new taxes hurts our economy and costs jobs. How the first problem is going to be solved is that charities will increase demand for food production, which will cause the agricultural industry to supply more food. One may expect a temporary rise in food prices.

    How the second problem will be solved is by each charity buying mass amounts of food in the economy causing the agriculture to expand, which means more jobs. The creation of these agricultural jobs (as well as charity jobs), will equal the jobs lost due to raising taxes on luxury goods (like expensive cars, video games, diamonds, TVs, basically anything for entertainment or anything luxurious)

    So the net result, I theorize, which I believe is a worthy trade, will be less production of some luxuries nations don't need, for feeding of the hungry in needy places around the world, with no job loss.

    Additional problems people have brought up:

    Dangerous people seizing the food and attacking the distributors


    Well this can be solved by charities hiring security in dangerous territories

    The population becoming lazy due to no longer needing to search for food

    This has been brought up and is ridiculous to me, as people won't be happy with just having enough food to survive. They will always want money and will search for ways to get it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  2. LibertyLemming
    Offline

    LibertyLemming VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Messages:
    1,988
    Thanks Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +167
    check the sig
     
  3. BoredDead
    Offline

    BoredDead Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Washington (state)
    Ratings:
    +3
    Well technically taxing is bad, but in reality you have to balance that with the good you can do with the money from those taxes. For instance people should have the right to have all of their income but more importantly people should have the right not to starve to death. Easy choice really.
     
  4. LibertyLemming
    Offline

    LibertyLemming VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Messages:
    1,988
    Thanks Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +167
    I agree but literally nothing should be done for people if it involves robbing others of their property. The only time I would even be able to justify taxation on labor would be to defend the entire country against an attack that would ruin everyone's liberty.
     
  5. william the wie
    Offline

    william the wie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,274
    Thanks Received:
    673
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,604
    Wouldn't be a hell of a lot simpler to create a food surplus by abolishing the ethanol subsidy?
     
  6. BoredDead
    Offline

    BoredDead Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Washington (state)
    Ratings:
    +3
    That wouldn't create a food surplus, as the price of corn would go down and demand would rise or the ethanol corn wouldn't be produced, thus negating the corn not going to ethanol. Also the food would not reach those who need it in Africa.
     
  7. AquaAthena
    Offline

    AquaAthena INTJ/ INFJ

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    15,453
    Thanks Received:
    11,061
    Trophy Points:
    2,265
    Location:
    ♥ TEXAS ♥ in Spirit
    Ratings:
    +12,342

    Birth control measures for all.
     
  8. BoredDead
    Offline

    BoredDead Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Washington (state)
    Ratings:
    +3
    Then if nothing but defense is worth taxing for your probably against welfare, NASA, publicly funded scientific research, education and public roads, of which I am sorry, but I cannot value your opinion very highly then. Unless part of this is somehow false...
     
  9. william the wie
    Offline

    william the wie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,274
    Thanks Received:
    673
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,604
    Africa's problem is sucky logistics not a lack of food and farmers would simply plant something else. But the scale of logistical infrastructure problems is massive. Mozambique for example has the world's largest coal reserves and does not have the rail system and harbors to get the coal to market. So, unless roads, rails and harbors are built you can't get the food in and if they are built no charity is necessary.
     
  10. BoredDead
    Offline

    BoredDead Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Washington (state)
    Ratings:
    +3
    So there is no hunger in poverty stricken citys or anywhere we can drive a supply truck? And the reasons listed at the World Food Programme are not the real reasons for starvation or they ignored the greatest cause of hunger?
     

Share This Page