From: andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Andrew Hackard)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Shouldn't we feed the poor?
Date: 2 Oct 92 05:03:52 GMT
Organization: Attack of the Quayle Potatoes

forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>From article <459n3yr.ray@netcom.com>, by ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer):
>> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes ...
>>>From article <hy4n7rm.ray@netcom.com>, by ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer):
>>>> Wealth is finite; there is not enough wealth in the world to save everybody
>>>> who can be saved.

>>>In fact, there is.   

My goodness.  Suzanne's found the fabled lost Arizona silver mines.

>>>Simple food and water is not expensive unless people like you hoard it.
 
There's a difference between "expensive" and "unavailable" that Somalians
would gladly explain to you, I'm sure.

>> Pardon me, but you clearly know nothing about the exigencies of living
>> in the real world.  

>I know the real world far better than you do!  

I nominate this for funniest talk.abortion post of September 1992.

>You live in nothing but a sick fantasy.

As long as we're quoting Tom Lehrer this month:

"I could tell you things about Peter Pan, and the Wizard of Oz -- *there's*
a dirty old man!"

>> First off, wealth is finite (wealth is not money).

>Garbage.  The creativity of human beings to supply their own needs and
>the needs of others is limitless.

Wealth is not creativity, either.  It's great to be able to solve a problem
when the resources are available.  It's much harder when you don't have 
anything to work with.

>> Second, nobody lives on just food and water 

>That certainly seems adequate to me!  That's what _I_ live on.   What
>do _you_ eat, rocks and nails?

When the occasion suits.  :-)

I believe his point was that little things such as shelter are important,
too.  Perhaps protection from predators?

>> (as even a moments reflection would have shown).  Third, medical care 
>> is expensive.  

>Which is very unnecessary.  It is far more expensive than it needs to be.

Well, how expensive DOES it need to be?

>> Fourth, before medical care the life expectancy of the average person 
>> was about 35.

>No, Ray, that was the average life expectancy before the modern age
>of the wonderous techniques of FARMING.   

I don't believe Ray could mean that, as I doubt we have reliable estimates.
Humans have been farmers for a LONG time.

>There is no reason we can't share our overabundant crops and farming 
>techniques with the rest of the world.

Parts of the rest of the world won't accept them, due to politics or
whatever.  Besides, you can't farm with no able-bodied people to work
the soil.

>> Now, if you really think there is enough wealth to save everyone and
>> cure all disease, 

>We have the wealth NOW to feed everyone on the planet, AND care for
>babies in neonatal intensive care wards.   The age of AIDS has
>taught us that no matter how many diseases we cure, there will
>always be newly invented ones right behind them.  But that is no
>reason not to feed people NOW.   Unless of course you're hoarding
>resources.

Fine, Suzanne.  You start.  When you cut back to one meal -- and a small
one, mind -- every day and donate the rest of your larder to the needy of
Tuscon, then I'll grant you might have a point.

>> then I suggest you look to your own pocketbook and see how far it goes.
 
>> In the future please spare me the mindless drivel and warrantless insults.

>If the shoe fits, you bet I will point it out!

Courtesy of Mixed Metaphors 'R' Us.

--
--Andrew Hackard                                 If I spoke for UT, this post
  andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu                        would make even less sense.

                Steve Chaney Memorial Anti-Roman Catholic .sig
        "Gettin' ecstatic and sorta dramatic and doin' The Vatican Rag!"
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism