http://www.freerice.com/index.php

Me – Completely agree with this, although I used to think it a lot more. But as someone once told me – it does make a difference to that one person for that one week. It just might save their life – either through food or hope.
I don’t know the answer.

K – Instead of just giving handouts to the poor, we need to figure out why people are poor in the first place.

Me – Definitely agree with this. This is a very good answer and does help me understand things in a broader perspective.

So is socialist capitalism the answer?

I do feel bad when I spend a lot of money on myself, whether it is a $10 lunch or a $600 camera. I stop to think is what I am buying is really necessary and think of what else could be done with the money. I could donate it to some charity or help out the homeless more. But me giving a couple bucks to a homeless guy or $20 to a charity isn’t going to change anything. Sounds horrible, but it is what I really believe.

Yes, $20 can help a poor person get food for a week or so. But after that week, then what? They are back in the same situation.

Instead of just giving handouts to the poor, we need to figure out why people are poor in the first place. This is a question for political theorists and economists and I have to say I don’t know what the answer is. I would need to delve deeper into development theory to provide any kind of educated answer but I do tend to lean towards dependency theory and the need for some kind of monstrous structural change in the way the world economy works. What this change is, I have no idea but I’m sure other people out there have thoughts, which I would be very interested to hear.

So I think that while handouts are fine to help the poor live more comfortable lives right now, we need to think in larger terms if we really want to end hunger and poverty on a large scale. You asked if we should just give our extra money to the poor so we all live mediocre lives and I say that is fine as long as it is part of a larger struggle to end the root cause of poverty. But giving money to poor people and doing nothing else is not sustainable, since, as you say, the economy would shrink and weaken and eventually we would all be on the brink of starvation.

In sum, I don’t feel toooo bad about spending money on myself compared to how bad I feel when I realize that I haven’t theorized more about how to end poverty in a real way.

(Yes, I know this is a question related to my comment and not the blog).

And what would happen to the people in Krisland? They’d have food right and we would have less.

But, what if this method applied on a much larger scale? Where is the stopping point? Do we just have no “extras” in life so that others can afford to eat? Or should the question be framed differently?

And will people start to take advantage if they are getting everything given to them? And what happens to the economy in other countries? What if people aren’t going to the movies, aren’t eating out? Would the whole economy collapse?

I thought you would have a good answer to this.

(I’m about to start reading, “Living High, Letting Die,” so I’ll keep you Ms Blogger updated on that book as you might be interested).

Should we become this socialist republic of sorts where everyone rich gives their money to the poor so everyone has a mediocre life. Or is that even the question?

Is the question simply, should I make a sandwich for lunch or should I go out. Think how much money can be saved by this. How can this be justified? By helping one person who was born into a society of pure poverty can change the world. Think: Martin Luther King, Ghandi – these individuals changed things. So you could be helping that one person who will change things for good. Sometimes it only takes one. What say you?

Here’s a question for blog readers. How can we justify going out for lunch and spending just $10 when so many people are literally starving? How can you justify that to yourself? Do you even think about it, or does it never even cross your mind? What does that say about you – either way? Ignorance is better than being aware and still spending the lunch money.