Is the UN right Any Forums? Is world hunger actually a good thing?

Is the UN right Any Forums? Is world hunger actually a good thing?

Attached: 7D84AF59-167A-4B05-A605-0DED0E150722.jpg (1170x1091, 335.46K)

Other urls found in this thread:

un.org/en/chronicle/article/benefits-world-hunger
un-ilibrary.org/content/journals/15643913/45/3/15/read
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>less niggers

If we wouldn't feed them, yes. Unfortunately, 'humanitarian help' is extending this problem without actually solving it.

If the land can't provide enough food or other goods for self-sustainment for a population, it is retarded to live there. Either the population moves elswhere or reduces in size enough so it can live from its own soil and crops.

...

Inspect elements always trick me, that's why I also like tracking the source.

"Hungry people are productive. Especially those that do manual labor"

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

LOL. WTF. WTF. LOL. LOL. LOL. WTF. WHY? WHO WOULD WRITE THIS?? IS THIS A COLLEGE STUDENTS HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT? (The website. Is it relevant at all.?)

Attached: 1656551625163.jpg (279x279, 16.27K)

un.org/en/chronicle/article/benefits-world-hunger

From their perspective, sure. Hungry people are easy to control.

Sauce pls

How to say you’re evil without saying you’re evil.

Only liberals would ever create an article saying suffering has benefits. What the fuck is wrong with these people? Granted, I think all African niggers should starve, but I want it to be done with, not continued over several generations.

As much as I want to seethe at the Globhono UN, this is clearly satirical. The author is an activist against world hunger and has written a book called "the quiet genocide" about hunger.

It's a satirical article. It's written like "A Modest Proposal".

Attached: Retard.jpg (742x745, 73.61K)

>More importantly, how many of us would sell our services so cheaply if it were not for the threat of hunger? When we sell our services cheaply, we enrich others, those who own the factories, the machines and the lands, and ultimately own the people who work for them. For those who depend on the availability of cheap labour, hunger is the foundation of their wealth.
lol
>For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets. No wonder people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.
lmao

un-ilibrary.org/content/journals/15643913/45/3/15/read

>george """kent"""
>look up wikipedia
>no early life section
every. fucking. time.

Attached: 1657051786676.jpg (837x1024, 38.75K)

That's my assumption as well. Although given that this is clown world, I still have some doubt.

Can you come up with another article put out by the UN that's satire?

Looking the writer up, he has a very long history of talking about the importance of developed nations helping feed poor nations and producing less food waste, so it seems like it is just satire.

I hate leftist economists. They are so fucking retarded.
If the wages offered for farming are not attractive to labourers than the wages either rise or other more efficient methods of farming are found improving productivity.

Scarcity = control

>For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets. No wonder people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.

Holy shit. No subtlety to this at all.