Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!cca!inmet!janw
From: janw@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: The Reason For Hunger
Message-ID: <28200625@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Feb-86 23:44:00 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.28200625
Posted: Tue Feb  4 23:44:00 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 10-Feb-86 22:03:11 EST
References: <358@ihnet.UUCP>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:ihnet:-35800:inmet:28200625:000:1024
Nf-From: inmet!janw    Feb  4 23:44:00 1986


[   Karl Dahlke ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad]
>>>The next episode of Frontline (PBS, February 4) examines poverty in America.
>>>[examiming reasons why some people refuse to recognize the existence
>>>of hunger: no mechanism for it; calls on everyone to see the show]

>>[janw: written *before* seeing the show: the reason for not  recog-
>>nizing  the  existence  of  hunger  is,  indeed, no mechanism for
>>hunger - and also no *hunger*.]

OK, now I saw it. There was no hunger, no trace  of  hunger,  and
nothing  remotely resembling hunger. It examined children growing
up in poverty. They were plump,  chubby,  active  children.   The
"family  with woefully inadequate food" Karl mentioned had *meat*
in their freezer. 

Poor people in this country have many  acute  problems  (some  of
them  studied  in  this program). Hunger is not one of them.  How
could it be? No mechanism. Hunger *cannot* exist in the midst  of
plenty, like the proverbial snowflake in hell.

The subject is really not worth discussing, it is so obvious.