I have no difficulty in completely agreeing with Redford’s statement concerning Scott Pruitt. Like so many (the majority) of Trump’s Cabinet Appointees, he is a walking disaster bent on destroying the agency he is supposed to lead.
He doesn’t even attempt to hide his unbridled greed and corruption. Scott Pruitt needs to be fired, replaced, indicted and tried for crimes against the American people.
I just read where a sperm whale died on a beach near Barcelona, Spain. An autopsy was performed to determine the cause of death. The scientists concluded its death resulted from over 60 pounds of plastic waste in its stomach.
We are destroying our planet. It is as if we think we have a spare.
Spoiler alert: we don’t.
Food for all is a necessity. Food should not be a merchandise, to be bought and sold as jewels are bought and sold by those who have money to buy. Food is a human necessity, like water and air, and it should be available. — Pearl S. Buck
What do you think about this statement? Do you agree or disagree?
There is no question that food is a human necessity; it’s a necessity for all living beings. But there are arguments to be made on both sides of the question.
What would happen if food was freely made available to everyone on the planet? Would the results be good? Would the positive benefits of universal access to nutrition outweigh any negative impact?
What would be the largest positive impact of food being made available to all without cost? What would be the most detrimental impact of universal food for all?
There would definitely be some amazing positive results of everyone being fed. Yet, along with the good there would be some negative effects, as well.
You make the call. The decision is yours. Should food be available to all without cost? Why?