There is nothing really saying that in the wikipedia page. Just because a country has surplus at one point doesn’t mean it will fill the belly of someone at the other side of the world.
Sorry but this seems like a massive simplification.
The implication is that these surplus food could be given to other countries. But that means local farmers are out-competed (same reason why giving clothes to poor countries are discouraged because it out-competes local clothes manufacturers). Hence, when I said world hunger is solved, but it is not because of free market. But blaming free market alone is even an oversimplification; there is a more practical solution which I am sure will get a bigger pushback from majority of the world.
Personally, I wouldn’t want to try to save world hunger.
How about fighting kids with diabetes?
Do the kids have hammers too?
No, they have diabetes.
We already solved world hunger but due to complex reasons
free market, there are still starving people.How are those surprlus “solving world hunger”?
There is nothing really saying that in the wikipedia page. Just because a country has surplus at one point doesn’t mean it will fill the belly of someone at the other side of the world.
Sorry but this seems like a massive simplification.
The implication is that these surplus food could be given to other countries. But that means local farmers are out-competed (same reason why giving clothes to poor countries are discouraged because it out-competes local clothes manufacturers). Hence, when I said world hunger is solved, but it is not because of
free market. But blaming free market alone is even an oversimplification; there is a more practical solution which I am sure will get a bigger pushback from majority of the world.Also: this is food. It rots. It’s simply not possible to move surplus food to other countries that easily, even if it was a good idea (which it isnt)
The EU did give surplus food to Africa. But then again, it caused the local farmers to complain because of competition.
“I can fix him uwu”