Someone on Facebook shared some photo by 'Global Equality' that reads:

"The world spent $1735 billion on war in 2012. It would take approximately $135 billion to totally eradicate poverty."

OK, let me start by saying the overall gist of the message is spot on. Mindless invasions, war, and conflict ruin millions of lives and billions of dollars when precious resources can be benefitted elsewhere.

But that last line...

What fuzzy math are they using to arrive at (only) $135 billion to "totally eradicate" global poverty? And isn't that already being spent, and then some? How do they define poverty, as the poverty line in the US means something totally different than poverty in Ethiopia. And what would this money be spent on? Even leftwing icon John Lennon once made a statement that once 'aid' money runs out, you'd still be back at square one with poverty again (teach a man to fish, and so on...).

I know it's one of those dopey social networking site images that basically anyone can create and throw it out there, backup facts be damned. But I just found that figure amusing.

Math is hard.

The U.S. spent over $80 billion on food stamps alone in 2012.

In the bell curve of life someone always has to be on the shittty end, all you can do is work your ass off to make sure it's not you.

(02-06-2013 02:49 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  In the bell curve of life someone always has to be on the shittty end,

Exacto-mundo.

Give every one a million dollars, and two million is the new middle class and one million is poverty.

You want to eliminate poverty? Let me tell you how:

Encourage cheap energy production. If this is oil, coal or nuclear, so be it.

Quote:approximately $135 billion to totally eradicate poverty

For the day?