The World is Not as Bad as You Might Think
Elite Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,420
Total Cats: 84
The exception are psychopaths. They are expert manipulators and know how to turn on the charm.
Last edited by JasonC SBB; Jul 28, 2013 at 01:59 PM.
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
From: Central Florida
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
From: Central Florida
The Whole World Is Getting Richer, and That's Good News - Businessweek
The Penn Tables provide GDP data for both 1960 and 2010, providing a 50 year window to view global economic progress. It has been considerable. Looking at absolute GDP, no country anywhere in the world for which we have data is smaller today than it was in 1960.
The countries that saw the size of their economies less than double since 1960 contain just 80 million people—a little more than 1 percent of the planet’s population. A further 1 billion people lived in countries where GDP climbed by somewhere between two- and fivefold.
That leaves 4.9 billion people—the considerable majority of the planet—living in countries where GDP has increased more than fivefold over 50 years. Those countries include India, with an economy nearly 10 times larger than it was in 1960, Indonesia (13 times), China (17 times), and Thailand (22 times larger than in 1960).
Emphasis added.
The countries that saw the size of their economies less than double since 1960 contain just 80 million people—a little more than 1 percent of the planet’s population. A further 1 billion people lived in countries where GDP climbed by somewhere between two- and fivefold.
That leaves 4.9 billion people—the considerable majority of the planet—living in countries where GDP has increased more than fivefold over 50 years. Those countries include India, with an economy nearly 10 times larger than it was in 1960, Indonesia (13 times), China (17 times), and Thailand (22 times larger than in 1960).
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Not only do our tax dollars help the "poor" here in America, they also go to promote capitalism in actual poor areas of the world. So we are able to feed the world, and jumpstart economies!
EXCLUSIVE: Dominican Republic scammers sell welfare food bought in NYC and shipped in barrels - NYPOST.com
Note: normally I'd post this in the random thread, but I love capitalism and I see it as a benefit to the Dominican people. I've been there and the island is poor and awful, and the food sucks to boot. It's good to see our food going to people who could actually benefit from it (they live in shanty town shacks), and are able to make money doing it.
EXCLUSIVE: Dominican Republic scammers sell welfare food bought in NYC and shipped in barrels - NYPOST.com
Note: normally I'd post this in the random thread, but I love capitalism and I see it as a benefit to the Dominican people. I've been there and the island is poor and awful, and the food sucks to boot. It's good to see our food going to people who could actually benefit from it (they live in shanty town shacks), and are able to make money doing it.
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Back on topic:
Is the McDonald's McDouble the 'cheapest, most nutritious and bountiful food that has ever existed in human history?' | Mail Online
**** McDonald's haters. I don't care how much money McDonald's makes, they employ thousands and thousands of people (including lots of blacks who have horrible employment statistics), and provide the cheapest, HEALTHIEST, food to poor communities. It's not liberals who help the poor, it's capitalists.
Is the McDonald's McDouble the 'cheapest, most nutritious and bountiful food that has ever existed in human history?' | Mail Online
At 390 calories, 23 grams of protein, 7-percent of the daily value of fiber, 20-percent of daily calcium and 19 grams of fat - with a typical price tag of about a buck - the McDouble, its advocates argue, is the most price-efficient food 'that has ever existed in human history.
...
For the average poor person, it isn’t a great option to take a trip to the farmers market to puzzle over esoteric lefty-foodie codes. (Is sustainable better than organic? What if I have to choose between fair trade and cruelty-free?) Produce may seem cheap to environmentally aware blond moms who spend $300 on their highlights every month, but if your object is to fill your belly, it is hugely expensive per calorie. Junk food costs as little as $1.76 per 1,000 calories, whereas fresh veggies and the like cost more than 10 times as much, found a 2007 University of Washington survey for the Journal of the American Dietetic Association. A 2,000-calorie day of meals would, if you stuck strictly to the good-for-you stuff, cost $36.32, said the study’s lead author, Adam Drewnowski.
...
For the average poor person, it isn’t a great option to take a trip to the farmers market to puzzle over esoteric lefty-foodie codes. (Is sustainable better than organic? What if I have to choose between fair trade and cruelty-free?) Produce may seem cheap to environmentally aware blond moms who spend $300 on their highlights every month, but if your object is to fill your belly, it is hugely expensive per calorie. Junk food costs as little as $1.76 per 1,000 calories, whereas fresh veggies and the like cost more than 10 times as much, found a 2007 University of Washington survey for the Journal of the American Dietetic Association. A 2,000-calorie day of meals would, if you stuck strictly to the good-for-you stuff, cost $36.32, said the study’s lead author, Adam Drewnowski.
Reply
0
0
Newb
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 22
Total Cats: 0
From: SoCal
I think this is a win. No more mad cow... (Assuming the donor cow didn't have it).....
Reply
0
0
Don't you want to complain about how the prices are exorbitant and not only is it not fair to the poor that only the rich can afford mushy, slimey, man-made beef because you don't understand how great capitalism is and that eventually everyone benefits from the system as the rich fund the innovation and eventually lead to competition, efficiency, and low-prices so it can be mass marketed and afforded to the most amount of people at the lowest possible price point but that you think the rich hate the poor and want them all to die of mad cow disease?
do i win an award for that long-*** sentence?
do i win an award for that long-*** sentence?
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
From: Central Florida
Banker Saves 20,000 From Nepal to Uganda With Her Profits - Bloomberg
rleete - This quote is for you:
New Zealand-born Audette Exel lives a double life. In New York, London, Bermuda and Sydney, she’s a company director and the owner and head of Isis (Asia Pacific) Pty, which advises companies on mergers and raises money for fund managers such as New York-based Aquiline Capital Partners LLC.
In the dirt-poor Himalayan foothills and civil war-ravaged East African bush, Exel is better known as the caftan-wearing founder and chief fundraiser of the Isis Foundation, which she says provides life-saving health care and education for 20,000 people a year in two of the world’s most impoverished nations, Nepal and Uganda.
In the dirt-poor Himalayan foothills and civil war-ravaged East African bush, Exel is better known as the caftan-wearing founder and chief fundraiser of the Isis Foundation, which she says provides life-saving health care and education for 20,000 people a year in two of the world’s most impoverished nations, Nepal and Uganda.
rleete - This quote is for you:
Originally Posted by Bloomberg article
Both Exel’s corporate contacts and aid workers suspected she had ulterior motives when she founded the charity in 1998, she says. “The businesspeople thought we must be a tax structure,” she says. “The nonprofit community thought we were money launderers.”
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
From: Central Florida
On the other hand, if they could scale it up and make it cost effective, it could have huge benefits for low income individuals while also greatly reducing the amount of land and feedstock necessary to provide billions of people with beef protein. In addition, you theoretically cut down on the brutality of slaughterhouses (if that's important to a person) and the methane emissions of millions of cows (if that's important to a person).
Given the choice, I would always prefer a big, juicy, burger made with locally raised, grass-fed beef. But for billions of people in Africa and parts of Asia, cheap "petri-beef" could dramatically improve their lives.
Reply
0
0
I think labelling would be fair and I think you should have every right to avoid eating it if that is your preference.
On the other hand, if they could scale it up and make it cost effective, it could have huge benefits for low income individuals while also greatly reducing the amount of land and feedstock necessary to provide billions of people with beef protein. In addition, you theoretically cut down on the brutality of slaughterhouses (if that's important to a person) and the methane emissions of millions of cows (if that's important to a person).
Given the choice, I would always prefer a big, juicy, burger made with locally raised, grass-fed beef. But for billions of people in Africa and parts of Asia, cheap "petri-beef" could dramatically improve their lives.
On the other hand, if they could scale it up and make it cost effective, it could have huge benefits for low income individuals while also greatly reducing the amount of land and feedstock necessary to provide billions of people with beef protein. In addition, you theoretically cut down on the brutality of slaughterhouses (if that's important to a person) and the methane emissions of millions of cows (if that's important to a person).
Given the choice, I would always prefer a big, juicy, burger made with locally raised, grass-fed beef. But for billions of people in Africa and parts of Asia, cheap "petri-beef" could dramatically improve their lives.
Golden rice was the same concept. It provides a staple for the diet of billions at high yield/low cost.
Reply
0
0
I think labelling would be fair and I think you should have every right to avoid eating it if that is your preference.
On the other hand, if they could scale it up and make it cost effective, it could have huge benefits for low income individuals while also greatly reducing the amount of land and feedstock necessary to provide billions of people with beef protein. In addition, you theoretically cut down on the brutality of slaughterhouses (if that's important to a person) and the methane emissions of millions of cows (if that's important to a person).
Given the choice, I would always prefer a big, juicy, burger made with locally raised, grass-fed beef. But for billions of people in Africa and parts of Asia, cheap "petri-beef" could dramatically improve their lives.
On the other hand, if they could scale it up and make it cost effective, it could have huge benefits for low income individuals while also greatly reducing the amount of land and feedstock necessary to provide billions of people with beef protein. In addition, you theoretically cut down on the brutality of slaughterhouses (if that's important to a person) and the methane emissions of millions of cows (if that's important to a person).
Given the choice, I would always prefer a big, juicy, burger made with locally raised, grass-fed beef. But for billions of people in Africa and parts of Asia, cheap "petri-beef" could dramatically improve their lives.
Reply
0
0
Newb
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 19
Total Cats: -2
From: Concord, NC
I agree with the improving lives, plus and this is my opinion but globally we really should work on finding a more sustainable non weather sensitive way to produce food. Im thankful I live in the USA where I can get food whenever, where as some people can only eat a little bit a day while they hope that their harvest of whatever they are growing is good that season.
Reply
0
0
