According to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), it would only take $30 billion a year to launch the necessary agricultural programs to completely solve global food insecurity.
----
Best,
I believe that to be a fallacious argument. You do not control world hunger by feeding more people which is why I do not (and never will) support any of those hunger programs I see on TV. You control world hunger by birth control and education.
Nature has a really cool way of shutting down the reproductive system of a woman who is very hungry. Feed all of those who are very hungry and you wake up the reproductive system resulting in more mouths to feed. At best, the scenario you cited would feed a few for a few years then the horrible cycle would ramp-up again with even more deaths.
I agree and disagree. I think it will take a joint effort. Birth control and education is a very important part of the puzzle, but you have to be able to hold your head up and not be so weak you can't walk to be able to learn. Teaching a village to be self sufficient and starting a sound agricultural program is the first step. Religion once again plays a huge role in the birth control issue. Until they are educated and can see beyond the archaic ideals of religion you will never be able to get them to use effective birth control.
I can't imagine that 30 billion would not be worth the effort to stop world hunger. Yes those that benefited from eating on a daily basis would be healthier and would probably reproduce. We are no where near a crisis when it comes to over population. Why not teach them and assist them in growing and producing their own foods and let them decide how many children they want to have? Once they have overcome hunger they could very well be capable of taking care of their own at that point.
When you are hungry, nothing else matters. When you have food, then you can began to think about other things and learn and grow in different directions.