this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2026
144 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
785 readers
694 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Do you think we could end global hunger by throwing 200-600 billion USD at it? I feel like even if you could distribute it to all the poorest citizens of a country, $100 per person is not enough to permanently ward off food insecurity.
I was going based off the findings that in the West at least, after about $80-90k, increased wealth no longer translates to increased subjective well-being. Then, boosting the median American worker's income (~45k) up to that level.
At minimum, it could be used to build the infrastructure necessary in the places that need it to transport and/or grow food to address root problems.