you decide
(0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ...
Add to favorites 
Processing your request, Please wait....
Leave a comment ?
(0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ...Add to favorites 
May 21, 2011 at 7:11 pm
One with stupid people and hungry people.
May 21, 2011 at 7:34 pm
I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.
May 21, 2011 at 8:35 pm
Then go.
May 21, 2011 at 10:15 pm
Today you suffering will end!
Oh, wait, nevermind.
May 21, 2011 at 7:43 pm
Unless you think that you can save a person from starvation for $14.40, the comparison is irrelevant.
May 21, 2011 at 7:44 pm
It’s too late to change it, the world’s ending today.
Any minute now.
May 21, 2011 at 9:06 pm
I have decided. It’s a pretty shitty place some of the time. But that thought process has no control over what may or may not be true.
Sucks, don’t it.
May 21, 2011 at 9:10 pm
What a lame poster. As if that amount of money could have kept that number of people from starving to death. Or even feed them for one day.
May 21, 2011 at 9:26 pm
So spend it on science researching more resilient crops, water filters or education for girls.
Buying them meals is not the only thing that helps against starvation.
May 21, 2011 at 9:51 pm
No one is starving due to a lack of farming technique. Most of the starving people in Africa are in an area once known as the Breadbasket of Africa. But they can’t farm because their countries are messed up by civil war and corrupt governments and anyone who goes out in the fields gets gunned down by one side or the other.
I know everyone is the West has been trained to think that money can solve everything, but this is one of the cases where throwing cash at a problem won’t help.
May 21, 2011 at 9:56 pm
I forgot that every starving person is located in Africa.
I guess that’s another thing we in the West have been trained to think.
May 21, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Seriously, though.
My point was that the money could be used on things that have more long-lasting effects than straight-up food packs (and just giving food to people of Africa (as an example) inhibits local trade and can actually hurt farmers that has to compete with free food).
Throwing money at a problem is one thing, using that money on things that have been proven to work is another. More resilient crops can help people that can actually harvest. Clean water helps is always a plus when you’re trying to survive and education for girls and women is something that improves the condition of an entire country in a multitude of ways.
If I were you I’d be more upset with people actually watching Sex and the City 2, even if they do so for free.
May 21, 2011 at 11:24 pm
Here’s a map. I’m not stereotyping. Statistically speaking, the problem of starvation is almost exclusive to Africa and couple of war-torn countries in Asia.
www.home-is-fun.com/public/2009/world_hunger_map.jpg
Political stability is prerequisite for addressing social issue.
May 22, 2011 at 1:46 am
Or buy them birth control.
May 22, 2011 at 8:04 am
“more resilient crops” what does that even mean and why is that a good thing and how would you come about making them?
May 22, 2011 at 11:29 am
lmgtfy.com/?q=more+resilient+crops
May 21, 2011 at 9:39 pm
288 million couldn’t feed 20 million for one day?
How much is your food bill a year, you dumb bitch?
May 21, 2011 at 9:56 pm
Millions of people starving to death have little to do with just raw money. It has to do more with politics. For some of the nastier parts of the world, a population without the basic necessities (food, fuel to prep food, clean drinking water) is easier to prey upon for the local power mongers (warlords, dictators, etc.).
Hell, if you want some depressing numbers, go look up how many school age children end up going hungry in the United States.
May 22, 2011 at 4:52 pm
I don’t see many starving children during my rambles across the US, most seem to eat to much.
May 21, 2011 at 9:46 pm
Look. We could send millions every year (and we do) to impoverished nations, they eat for a couple days, and then it’s gone and they’re starving again. They will not and can not change their lives in terms of education or trade skills, and even if we build schools for them to learn, there are no factories or businesses to work for. They will always be poor, hungry and needy, now and forever.
As far as movies grossing millions, hey it’s a goddam democracy. Make your own fucking movie.
May 21, 2011 at 9:58 pm
“Starving In The Jungle”?
May 21, 2011 at 11:55 pm
Wha?
May 21, 2011 at 10:19 pm
288 million spent on Sex in the City 2 is the real fucking crime here.
May 21, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Correction: 20 million black people in Africa which isn’t anyone’s problem but the motherfucking Africans.
288 million spent on Sex and the City is just 288 million Breyers won’t see in ice cream sales from the fat, stupid cunts who bought two seats each for their fat asses.
May 21, 2011 at 10:38 pm
What about the starving people in North America?
May 22, 2011 at 12:02 am
There’s a difference between being hungry and starving. There are hungry people in North America, but statistically speaking, nobody is starving.
May 22, 2011 at 12:10 am
Since when did you become my nit-picking stalker?
Shoo. I was talking to someone more interesting.
May 21, 2011 at 11:01 pm
Or guys could pull out and cum on the tits or the ass instead of inside the vagina, that’ll help starvation.
May 21, 2011 at 11:02 pm
I can’t believe you missed the most obvious joke.
May 22, 2011 at 12:40 am
Still got over six hours til that rapture offer expires….
May 22, 2011 at 5:25 am
This is how the world’s always been, and forever will it be.
Get used to it.