Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cybvax0.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory,net.politics
Subject: Re: Extent of hunger in America
Message-ID: <784@cybvax0.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 17-Oct-85 13:01:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: cybvax0.784
Posted: Thu Oct 17 13:01:58 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Oct-85 08:49:49 EDT
References: <4056@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Reply-To: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Lines: 42
Xref: linus net.politics.theory:1314 net.politics:10903

In article <4056@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> josh@topaz.UUCP (J Storrs Hall) writes:
> Forget even that--dried dog food, for example, will provide you
> with a fully balanced diet of good healthy stuff for a few cents 
> a day.  I've eaten it, out of curiousity--it's palatable enough,
> if you're hungry.  We could provide, free for the asking, no questions,
> a full-time diet, and even deliver it to their homes, for all the 
> people Richard claims are hungry, for less than half of one percent
> of what we spend on socialist programs now.  Why does Richard not 
> espouse this?  Because he is *not interested in hunger per se*.
> He is interested instead in *using* hunger to further his political ends
> of increasing government control of the economy.  He is, in a word,
> EXPLOITING the hungry.

Actually, I've considered the "Purina human chow" idea for at least 10
years.  It should be delivered for free (or pennies) to anyone, perhaps
with some checks to prevent our subsidizing pets and home meat production.
A similar system of free or inexpensive clothing and shelter could also be
worked out.  These could greatly reduce expenses for a number of classes,
such as students.  Meals for prisoners would be more economical.  Etc.

But the problem in the US isn't just keeping people alive: heck, we're the
richest nation in the world.  Of course we can do that.  I perceive the
problem to be to keep our society integrated.  To keep class distinctions
small enough so that revolution, violence, and hatred cannot easily be
fomented in powerful (because they are large) underclasses.

Building class distinctions, such as "poor people eat [dogfood] human chow"
is a dangerous way to solve problems.  People raised on human chow won't
initially like regular food, and will find it embarrassing to eat with
others, because of the status-oriented desire to conceal "lowly" origins.
(A great deal is known about the psychology of food-sharing and learning to
eat new foods.  Their social importance should not be underestimated.)

We routinely laugh at comedies based on status and class distinctions,
but most people on the net are well sheltered from them (as compared to
many other people in many nations.)  I don't think fostering such
distinctions is a desirable goal, and I'm willing to be taxed more money
so that someone on welfare can buy the same foods I do in the same stores
to provide us with a basic and psychologically important common ground.
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh