Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Oscarcharliezulu t1_ise0orp wrote

The downside of a extremely right wing government is that the poor have to fend for themselves. We need to shame the government there into helping its people more - they are one of the biggest military spenders in the world - so they have the money.

Edited - I meant ‘shame’ not ‘change’ the govt.

41

[deleted] OP t1_ise34is wrote

Canara Bank, a public bank forgave 15,651,866,700.00 United States Dollar of debts taken by the elite 1% and refused to reveal the names of the beneficiaries.

Also, they’ve increased the taxes on essentials such as bread, milk, etc and have added taxes on new categories such as House rent, etc.

The top 1% have been made much more richer by milking the lower and middle class

21

MexusRex t1_iseocs9 wrote

> We need to change the government there

I really hope you mean they need to change their government. Or is disastrous interventionist foreign policy back on the menu?

3

Oscarcharliezulu t1_iseyy7j wrote

Ah I meant ‘shame’ not change it was a autocomplete I didn’t notice

4

sekai_no_kami t1_ise30o8 wrote

We also have pretty problematic neighbours as well. Pakistan a well known refuge/breeding ground for terrorism, and China constantly land grabbing for over 60 years. This long northern border requires a decent standing army.

Unlike the US army for eg, where their border issues are basically migrants from mexico, not 2 nuclear nations vying to destabilize your country.

2

[deleted] OP t1_isecqf8 wrote

[deleted]

16

rigid_monkey t1_isfo9h1 wrote

and so are many other countries. what you said is definitely true, but a problem can have multiple reasons behind it

−6

Oscarcharliezulu t1_isezc6g wrote

China is in land disputes with every neighbour and then some. I think India is the biggest threat to China.- it has a chance to outgrow China economically and take over a lot nor its manufacturing

2

mrgodail t1_isgna3a wrote

Except China doesn't have land disputes with every neighbour as they've settled border disputes with a bunch of countries.

5

Oscarcharliezulu t1_isgo8we wrote

They sure settled it with Hong Kong. They forcefully occupied islands claimed by others as well. If it wasn’t for the West they’d have invaded Taiwan by now without a doubt.

−5

mrgodail t1_isgob2s wrote

Hong Kong was never a country, it was also never a border dispute.

4

Oscarcharliezulu t1_isgol47 wrote

I guess Hong Kong was last an British Empire land grab.

−3

paradoxbound t1_isjhtcj wrote

Hong Kong was returned to the empire it was carved from. Never mistakenly call China a country. It always has been an empire carved out of various nations.

3

Oscarcharliezulu t1_isn5od0 wrote

Exactly right. That’s also the way the British thought till the war of independence. And Ghandi and India moving away from the empire.

1

Mist_Rising t1_ishotdt wrote

All of the Chinese port cities were Chinese in name, they were 99 year loans the Europeans carved out of China.

Which I guess is slightly better than the usual method of European colonization, which didn't bother with figuratives.

0

YuviManBro t1_isgabp3 wrote

You realize food is given for free right? There is no documented Indian who will be refused a meal

−2

Oscarcharliezulu t1_isgmyx6 wrote

So why are they 107 on the list ? Is the rating itself or the way they do it not really representative?

8

YuviManBro t1_isgnb36 wrote

I don’t actually know, but I’ve heard that it’s because India is able to provide the calories easily but the micronutrients and general nutrition of the food is poor. Especially due to lower meat consumption without supplements like vegans/vegetarians in the west often eat

1

Oscarcharliezulu t1_isgo4ro wrote

You’ve made me think - the index might be based on a set of assumptions or metrics that some countries can’t or really just are different enough not to ever really match properly.

2

YuviManBro t1_isgptii wrote

Yeah that can be an issue but it's probably good enough right?

3

Mist_Rising t1_ishp833 wrote

The UN reports are all sorts of problematic. They're self reported mostly hence why you get crazy shit claims at times, and since they're self reported you get fudge too. Cooling the book style.

But most of all, they're usually built on "developed" world standards which means odd shit.

1

Oscarcharliezulu t1_isn6a32 wrote

I love the idea of the UN but then I watch a session and damn. How can they really get anything done when the perpetrators and their allies veto everything? Then it’s just loud noises.

1

Mist_Rising t1_isn77ht wrote

The UN isn't really meant to solve anything, it's meant to prevent WW3. The vetoing is thus deliberately designed to be there

1

sekai_no_kami t1_ise2pvy wrote

Time for the gov to reject this news

24

[deleted] OP t1_isfqrhz wrote

They already did. They said that the method was wrong so this entire result can’t be accepted . They do it for all the studies that expose them

10

SaffronBanditAmt t1_isgh2ut wrote

Isn't a bit weird that if supposedly, India has far worse hunger than its neighbour's, that India would be donating to them?

I think Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka all are asking to be bailed out while India donating something like $4.5 billion. Pretty weird for a country that's apparently 107th in hunger to donate so much to a country thats ~65th in hunger. Raises many questions about these rankings, or at least, it should be raising many eyebrows on the methodology (or lack thereof).

−4

[deleted] OP t1_isghkrt wrote

Bangladesh has higher GDP per capita than India. They just don’t have a large population.

In India there is wealth disparity. The top 1% are extremely rich while the bottom of the socio economic strata earn less than $100 per month.

Sri Lanka is indeed more developed in term of quality of life. Acute food shortage now won’t change the fact that many many Indians still suffer from poverty and hunger.

Millionaire celebrities in politics and news media live in a bubble.

They’ve increased taxes on Wheat, Roti, Parathas, Milk and bread cause they only care about the upper class and the well to do families

10

SaffronBanditAmt t1_isgogc7 wrote

Isn't income tax limited to only the top ~3-5% of Indian earners? Aren't subsidies given to farmers regularly, in an antiquated practice that many say, actually places too much power in the hands of the producers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/23/world/asia/india-farmers-protest-subsidies.html

"At the heart of the dispute lies the subsidy system that the government, economists and even many farmers agree is broken."

​

​

>Bangladesh has higher GDP per capita than India. They just don’t have a large population.

That means less people to take care off, and less mouths to feed. Yet they still head to the IMF for bailouts more often than India does?

​

>Sri Lanka is indeed more developed in term of quality of life. Acute food shortage now won’t change the fact that many many Indians still suffer from poverty and hunger.

Isn't there some irony that a much more developed country needs donations from one of the most hungry country on the planet? Even more irony that unbelievably deprived country agreed and provided aid.

−6

[deleted] OP t1_isgpvqj wrote

Why did they forgive the loans of the top wealthy people and when an RTI was filed they didn’t want to reveal who the beneficiaries were.

15,651,866,700.00 United States Dollar worth of loans by rich individuals from public Canara Bank was written off.

Where’s the balance sheet of PM cares fund ? It’s a public donation fund.

8

[deleted] OP t1_isghn7v wrote

The answer is wealth disparity.

The top 1% own most of the wealth in India.

The public banks also give massive loans to rich businessmen who donate well.

They also secretly forgive the loans.

Thereby stealing from the common man and enriching the top 1%

India donates cause the production is more but most people don’t have the wealth to purchase it.

10

HouseOfSteak t1_isf0jwa wrote

And watch as this gets drowned out so that the powers that be can push sectarian-nationalistic ideals.

In fact, it probably won't get drowned out, they'll probably just blame the 'other' for not feeding their own people.

13

hb_biyani9 t1_isuxmcv wrote

bro the survey was from only 3000 people and India's a country with 1.3 billion people 💀

6

zomangel t1_ise6b6j wrote

Serious question: is a higher or lower score better?

5

HouseOfSteak t1_isezeto wrote

Just remember this:

Being #1 in Hunger is not #1 in Food Security.

0

explodingtuna t1_ise7vov wrote

Closer to 1 (the most hungry country) is worse, I believe. So this would make India the 107th most hungry country, behind Pakistan and Nepal, if I'm understanding this correctly.

−14

themiracy t1_ise9j7f wrote

I think it’s the other way around. You can see a map here:

https://www.globalhungerindex.org

Most of developed Europe and US/CAN/AUS are excluded. A few other countries just don’t have scores. The India score is among the worst however, not the best.

11

paradoxbound t1_isji2uc wrote

Lots of BJP fud and misdirection in this thread

3

Proregressive t1_isektm7 wrote

It's easy to be malnourished when eating eggs and meat is a revolutionary act for some. Individually it's not a problem as people can watch their nutrition, but there's no way uneducated laborers as a whole know what a properly balanced vegetarian diet is. That's why their child height is among the lowest in the world.

1

HouseOfSteak t1_isf0b6s wrote

It's also easy to be malnurished when you're poor as fuck (and 1/6 of them are illiterate which doesn't help) and can't afford eggs or meat even if you wanted to.

11

star-heels1969 t1_isgep1j wrote

I saw the issue with the government of India in an earlier story today when a govt. official of India said that " we will never abandon ruzzia". There ya go.

1

Asleep_Fish_472 t1_ise0uyi wrote

They can thank their “friend” Russia for that

−18

CRimson9943 t1_ised6wb wrote

The world does not revolve around Ukraine or Russia, actually you be surprised how insignificant Ukraine is when you came to this side of globe

9

Asleep_Fish_472 t1_isepqr4 wrote

ukraine is the largest supplier of grain to "that side of the world". Sorry, globalization strikes again.

−5

CRimson9943 t1_iseqvwa wrote

Actually no, the main importer of Ukraine grains are middle eastern countries, like Egypt.

And even they were able to recover from their food shortage very fastly by importing from other countries, and agriculture is sure important but it's not best card play to gain influence in international stage

11