1mo ago

Ending world hunger costs less than 1% of military spending

news.un.org Ending world hunger costs less than 1% of military spending

Ending hunger by 2030 would cost just $93 billion a year — well under one per cent of the $21.9 trillion spent on military budgets over the past decade, according to UN estimates.

Crossposted from https://reddthat.com/post/54512944

Ending hunger by 2030 would cost just $93 billion a year — less than one per cent of the $21.9 trillion spent on military budgets over the past decade, according to the UN World Food Programme (WFP).

6 comments

The money isnt the problem, its the want. Collectively we dont want to end world hunger. The countries experiencing hunger already have population growth rates higher than their infrastructure can sustain and handle. Pumping food into those countries would only worsen the problem.
Then you have the emissions growth at a time where emissions are already to high. Then the threat of migration. Ending world hunger is a meme that would cause more suffering than it would prevent.
- I want to end world hunger. And declining birth rates come with social progress, education and security.

If you stop funding your army, then soon you will fund enemy's army while starving.
We better compare ending hunger costs to UN costs.
- Calm down sun tzu. I think the military can drop a few percentage points in funding to feed people. No idea why you're bringing in the UN like it's some kind of gotcha.
- "I must be the oppressor or I will become the oppressed" is some fucked up logic I hope you are never on the receiving end of.
- The demand narrative of the military is historically linked to the idea of land ownership.

6 comments