If rich countries eat less, poor countries could eat more

First, my Opponent cited an article by "anne collins" who's website sells a weight loss diet program.. Hardly an unbiased source. The consensus, with which my opponent agrees, says Americans are "overweight" or "obese." This contention is really worth analyzing. There are news articles upon news articles with wild statistics about Obesity in America, but what are they basing these figures on? For the most part they are using the BMI, or Body Mass Index, which is an arbitrary measure depending on a person's height. According to this index, lets be clear, Lebron James is overweight. Now, I challenge anyone to call him unhappy, or unproductive. You can read the following about the flaws in this methodology: http://calorielab.com... "Personally, I am against foreign aid, but it would allow poor countries to eat more." Short term, foreign aid can slow down a famine, but it cannot eliminate persistent hunger. That would require an organic change in the local economy. "That wouldn't be foreign aid. That would be investing." I am defining "foreign aid" as money or other resources given by rich governments to poor governments for the purpose of economic development or disaster relief. I agree that in the second case, foreign aid makes a positive impact, but not in the first. "Eating less double cheeseburgers makes one more healthy." What if all someone eats in double cheesburgers? """ Eating is one of the most important health factors. http://www.connecticutcenterforhealth.com...... It's listed first. """ The above site mentions the following -> "According to government and university studies, at least 95% of all Americans have at least one nutrient deficiency in their diet. We rely heavily on convenience or manufactured foods which do not support good health. We do not eat nearly enough vegetables and fruits, and consume an extremely high amount of fat, animal products, and refined carbohydrates such as flour and sugar." Apparently studies show that Americans should not be eating "less" but eating "better," which as I've said before is generally more expensive and time consuming. "The person could easily only eat one hamburger, paying less for hamburgers." Is your contention that people are going to save their extra hamburger money to donate to foreign charities? I could argue that eating less hamburgers (and fast food in general) will directly affect a significant portion of the US economy, leaving less tax revenue for the government to give as "foreign aid." "Does this look muscular to you?" I said the "social ideal." Do you know anyone who would choose that person as a mate? First, he has a hormonal imbalance.. (other people probably eat the same amount and don't look that different from me or you). "In conclusion, there are some people who should spend less on fast food." Note that my Opponent does not say less on "food", but less on "fast food". "This would decrease the cost of health care." This relies on the population being healthier, not on them eating "less" food, which is as I have demonstrated are not the same thing. "This decrease would allow for more spending in foreign aid." There is nothing stopping an increase in foreign aid, even without a decrease in health-care costs. Foreign aid is a completely separate issue, and will be dealt with separately by the government and the people. Most likely the people will just be happy to have the extra money in their pocket for their own entertainment. "Everybody wins, if America just stopped being fat." I will assume you meant if America just "ate less" as that was the original contention. The people who are fat now may win. The people who are healthy, are unaffected, except they no longer are able to gloat over the misery of the first group. The people who are anorexic die of starvation trying to compete with all those from the second group who have lost weight. Of course, all the above paragraph is speculation, which is exactly what my Opponent has been doing throughout his argument, and why any sensible person should vote Con. Anyway, now that the rounds are over, anyone who would like to join this argument could do so at http://arg.umentum.com...