Gina, socialism is communal ownership such as roads, hospitals, schools, and taking money away from one lot of people to give to others who "need" it: <Why is it "socialist" to alleviate famine? >
Taking my money by force to give it to hungry people is socialism. If they can't run their lives, that's not somebody else's problem. Those who think it is, and forcibly take OPM to provide the food are socialists.
Most people think that level of socialism is okay. But a lot don't.
There were plenty of potatoes in the world then too.
<There's plenty of food in the world. If it's not getting to hungry people, it's because the channels are blocked by dictators or armies, not because ethanol is being burned by an SUV.>
Economics, taxes, private property = a never-ending lot of fun, with nature sometimes conducting genocidal operations. You obviously don't understand the way the ethanol industry, economics and the political controls work, not to mention border controls and import regulations.
The price of food has been zooming. People increasingly can't afford it. In general, I agree with you that hunger is primarily a political problem with governments stopping people getting food [Zimbabwe, Darfur etc]. If capitalism was let loose, there would be food for all.
Mqurice |
