• Tetsuo@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        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.

        • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          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.

          • Microw@piefed.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            23 hours ago

            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)

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    the amount of food thrown in the trash by one single grocery store every day is absolutely obscene. multiply that by thousands of stores and restaurants, and it’s tons upon tons of food wasted. there’s not even an easy solution. companies that have tried to donate ended up getting sued by the people they donated to

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      companies that have tried to donate ended up getting sued by the people they donated to

      That’s a false narrative that companies are using as an excuse.

      As long as they’re acting in good faith and with full transparency, Good Samaritan laws make them immune to lawsuits and not liable for any ill effects.

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        that makes it even worse. bottom line is they don’t want to do anything without some kind of expectation of ROI

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          that makes it even worse

          My point exactly

          bottom line is they don’t want to do anything without some kind of expectation of ROI

          Which is why they need to be compelled by law.

          Some countries have Good Samaritan laws that protects people who honestly want to do their best to help someone from being penalized for it.

          Other countries have “duty to act” laws penalizing those who choose not to help in a clear emergency.

          Other countries have BOTH. That’s what’s needed when people are starving, corporate profits are booming and more food is wasted than eaten.

    • baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      A reciprocal relationship with a pig farm sounds like it could work. I know that Vegas casinos do that, courtesy of Mike Rowe.

    • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I almost started writing a comment about how its actually a hard to solve problem but then i read your whole comment…