As someone else above said, it depends on who's starving and, more importantly, why they're starving; if it's because of overpopulation, and the result of them not starving will be to have more children who will then starve because there are too many people for the (slightly increased) resources, then giving aid to them will actually have increased the amount of human suffering in the world, which is entirely pointless.
I do see the point you're making, but...ouch. It is merely an accident of geography that makes you the one who is coldly calculating this rather than the one who doesn't give a fuck on account of how you're about to die from malnutrition.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
You're potentially treating a symptom, not the cause.