Feed the world, first. Spend on diversions, second

The UN World Food Program's October 2008 update said that it is going to end need $6.7b to feed 97m people.  Thats $69 for every person at risk.





Where could that money have come from?   How about all that money NASA spends on space exploration.   A scientist by education, it strikes me as exhorbitant that we should spend such extremely large sums of money on achieving things that should matter less than saving lives.  The space program to land a man on the money cost, at today's money, cost $145bn.  The money alone spent by the US on this program would have funded the World Food Program or 20+ years.






If the world was one household, then would there be any disposable income, whilst it's children were dying?  And if the world was a prosperous, healthy and happy village would non-essential spending be accepted in that village, whilst it's children were dying?