Well, would you look at that?
Apparently, world hunger isn't really as bad as it sounds.
If you're a United Nations commie, at least.
The United Nations published this piece from George Kent who is a supposed expert in this field.
The argument is, basically, that people who rely on their job to put food on the table are more likely to take jobs that others aren't going to do.
Hungry people work harder.
Much of the hunger literature talks about how it is important to assure that people are well fed so that they can be more productive. That is nonsense. No one works harder than hungry people. Yes, people who are well nourished have greater capacity for productive physical activity, but well-nourished people are far less willing to do that work...
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.
I don't know who this "us" is that Kent is talking about, but he's really giving away the game here.
Communism relies on the working class and has no problem keeping people down in the name of equity.
As Jordan Peterson has discussed and shared many times, the world is coming out of poverty. And that's a good thing and a result of capitalism.
The ruling class is anti-capitalism because they don't want to alleviate poverty and hunger. Like all commies, the desire is to exploit hunger and poverty for the benefit of the ruling elites.
They're just giving away the game plan here.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
