Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As said upthread, poor people in the USA don't starve (or don't need to starve) as they do in third world or even second world countries.
Okay, a little background on the terms "first world," "second world," and "third world."
The terms originated in the West to differentiate the capitalist democracies (first worlds) from the communist countries (second world). All other nations were categorized under the umbrella term "third world." Often this latter group was run by right-wing military dictatorships backed by the US Government.
I'm old enough to remember when famine would hit certain parts of the world like Ethiopia. Mass famine used to hit India too. Today, unless perhaps you are a diehard orthodox communist, or an ingnorant hock from East Kentucky, it is widely acknowledge that mass famine has been extinguished from earth.
There are reasons for this. And the prediction of Malthus was proven false: that prediction being that planet earth would suffer mass starvation problems as the population increase of humans would exceed technological and scientific advancements to sustain us.
Trump is a businessman. Which is fine. But it does not give him a background in medicine, public health care, or sociology. Supposedly, one of the triumphs of capitalism (and democracy joined with it) is that it raises the standard of living for the overall population in a country, relative to that of state controlled economies.
So, we are looking at two major things that have helped eliminate mass starvation across the earth even as the human population of earth has risen exponentially.
1) Advancements in science and technology and particulaly in the area of agriculture.
2) The defeat of communism (its mostly defeated) and the evangelical spread of capitalism across planet earth, taking over India, infiltrating even communist China, and capitalist democracy overthrowing the right-wing military dictatorships of Latin America.
True... the right-wing military dictatorship of Brazil (which conservative white Brazilians right now today long for and have publicly stated ought be put back in place) grew the Brazilian economy something impressively during the 1970's. Brazil's economy grew at a rate of something like 10 to 13%. The wealth and prosperity never "trickled down" to the poor though. But the Brazilian right-wing dictatorship grew the Brazilian economy in similar fashion that Bill Clinton would grow the US economy: by debt. Both booms were based on mass building projects. The Brazilian government borrowed the money from banks and international lenders. The US Government joined with banks to run derivative schemes that basically were unsustainable and bilked investors from all over planet earth out of money (basically it was a debt driven scheme).
The democratically elected left-wing, yet still capitalist, President Lula of Brazil grew Brazil's economy something impressively during his time as President, and he lowered Brazilian national debt too. He also raised millions out of abject, or absolute poverty, in Brazil through his beefed up Bolsa Familia Program. Those poor people being given money through cash transfer programs by the Brazilian government spent that money domestically in Brazil in stores etc., thus helping the circular flow of the economy, thus arguably helping the Brazilian economy grow.
To paraphrase Jesus himself in one of his parables, money buried in the ground does not further prosperity nor multiply itself. Likewise, $7 billion more dollars buried in the bank account of a Brazilian billionaire, especially when banks approve loans so rarely (except for the rich), circulates cash flow in a circular economy less than that of the $7 billion spread out among the Brazilian mothers in the favelas (slums essentially).
Quote:
The stick thin, poor starving folks you see on TV have no government assistance and the literally don't eat.
No, they literally do eat. Humans are not angels or ghosts. If humans do not eat food and drink water they die.
And although the terms "third world" no longer are applicable to the modern political-economics of today's world. Russia and Brazil as "developing nations" would fall under the archaic term "third world."
Brazil and Russia both provide free government funded health care for all citizens. Russia does a much better job at this than Brazil. In fact, I think it is written into the Brazilian Constitution. Both provide government assistance. Russia exceeds the United States in its government support of its citizens.
It may come as a surprise to most Americans but Mexico even provides free public university education to citizens of Mexico.
Quote:
In most other developed countries, poor people are given assistance and many buy the most convenient forms of food they can for as cheaply as they can.
It is true that the United States mostly has relative poverty. Which is a different economics term from absolute poverty.
But given the large number of homeless people in the US sleeping under bridges, in abandoned buildings, under tunnels in the ground, the United States has some of its population living in absolute poverty. That being living on less than $1 a day, having no access to health care, education, and so on. Their basic needs (such as housing) are not met.
The United Kingdom does a superior job to the US reducing absolute poverty among its citizens.
The terms "relative poverty" and "absolute poverty" can be googled up.
While mass starvation has been wiped out on earth malnutrition has not. Major malnutrition problems exist in the developing countries. And wide spread absolute poverty too. But not mass starvation.
Brazil hit by obesity epidemic
AFP news agency 32,355 views
Plastic surgery--albeit something mostly the rich and middle-class do--is more popular in some Latin American countries than it is in the USA. As a side note, the Brazilian Government also will pay for the gender reassignment surgeries for poor Brazilians that are transsexuals. Government welfare.
--
--
Unlike most Americans the issue of "poverty" is not merely a "political" one born out of brain-dead recitation of some political religion.
For me it is a moral issue that involves the Satanic claim the earth is over-populated, and it is an issue of faith in scientific progress to meet the growing demands of man, and a practical issue of whether capitalism is worth a damn or ought be scrapped for communism. Because, if the evangelical spread of capitalism has proven to be a failure in improving the material life of those in Mexico, Brazil, India, Russia, China (which is semi-capitalist), and various countries of Africa then it needs to be scrapped and replaced by something more effective like communism.
The triumph of capitalism. The video looks at China, India, Brazil, and Mexico. As the video notes Africa has an obesity problem.
But there are also plenty of skinny, poor men in the United States. I know some. Skinny because they are too poor to eat frequent large meals like the fat American middle-class. Some (not all) of these poor men dress shabby too.
American TV does not project the reality of black urban poverty in particular. The image of reality would not sell because it is far less attractive, sometimes revolting. So, American TV presents on its hit TV shows an image of poor blacks living in a manner which is really the reality for the Black-American middle-class.
But there are also plenty of overweight black poor in the USA. And white too. And Latino too. For sone reason, particularly among the women.
The American middle-class is certainly overweight.
Of course, body build and genes play a part too. I can eat whatever I want and it would be hard for me to gain weight and fat. Both I only gain in small portions. But I have a very fast metabolism and I'm naturally "small boned" too.
I'm officially part of the American poor but I love like a king compared to the poor in developing countries (those countries often have poor infrastructure too). But even my apartment is not on par with TV "poor" on the sitcoms of the United States.
The anti-biotic revolution was a positive thing for mankind. The revolution humanity entered over a decade ago in which there are now more "fat" people on earth than skinny people is good too. But obesity is a bad thing. Especially as diabetes sets in. Maybe, being skinny is more preferable than that.
The poor tend to be overweight all over the world, depending on their national diet.
Dude, watch the news sometimes. Watch British Broadcasting Corp. They have a lot of stories from Africa, India, Southeast Asia. The poor there, especially Africa, are starving. Obesity is a problem in the US and Europe. The rest of the world looks fit or too thin.
The poor tend to be overweight all over the world, depending on their national diet.
This is not true at all. As a poor teenager in Ontario Canada I weighed so little from poor nutrition I lost my period. The is no "EBT" like program in Canada or other parts of the world like there is in the u.s. Heck! even our food banks are not government run. I'm sorry to say this but poor people starve to death everywhere else but the U.S.
Trump is a businessman. Which is fine. But it does not give him a background in medicine, public health care, or sociology. Supposedly, one of the triumphs of capitalism (and democracy joined with it) is that it raises the standard of living for the overall population in a country, relative to that of state controlled economies.
Brazil hit by obesity epidemic
AFP news agency 32,355 views
Plastic surgery--albeit something mostly the rich and middle-class do--is more popular in some Latin American countries than it is in the USA. As a side note, the Brazilian Government also will pay for the gender reassignment surgeries for poor Brazilians that are transsexuals. Government welfare.
I think Latin American women are just born to have a booty it doesn't matter what they eat
The poor people as obese/overweight is a developed world issue. You see it in the UK and Europe to. It is less pronounced since they have lower rates of overall obesity but there is an income and class issue.
And then we get to these middle-class Americans, particularly their women, that look like Holloween pumpkins.
And the rich in Brazil typically speak, read, and write in 3 languages. How many languages do dumb, rich, lazy Americans speak? Some of them can't even speak in English properly. Waiting as they are for the arrival of aliens from another planet to land on earth. It's like the United States has regressed into one big glob of idiots.
Dude, watch the news sometimes. Watch British Broadcasting Corp. They have a lot of stories from Africa, India, Southeast Asia. The poor there, especially Africa, are starving. Obesity is a problem in the US and Europe. The rest of the world looks fit or too thin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluebirdie
This is not true at all. As a poor teenager in Ontario Canada I weighed so little from poor nutrition I lost my period. The is no "EBT" like program in Canada or other parts of the world like there is in the u.s. Heck! even our food banks are not government run. I'm sorry to say this but poor people starve to death everywhere else but the U.S.
Geezus...read the thread title geniuses!
America IS NOT one of the FEW PLACES where you can find poor obese people.
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
