you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 41 points 1 day ago (3 children)

We have enough food, buty ou'd basically have to achieve world peace and make tons of countries get rid of their massive inequality. Hardly "easy"...

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 day ago

    Also, there's enough food for everyone to eat healthy, but not for everyone to eat like the average American. Even if nobody was starving, I still think people wouldn't be that thrilled that some get to eat like kings while others must live off rice and beans.

    That's basically where we're at with money. You get $30,000 a year, and I get $100,000,000. Why are you angry? Neither of us are starving!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] -2 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    I would definitely call it "easy" in those exact words, it is more effort to combat easy than it is to just be easy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 18 hours ago

    I feel like you two have different definitions of easy. Yes, the theory is easy. But in practice you have to deal with people (ugh) and those are definitely the difficult part in this equation.

  • source
  • parent