Approximately 35 million people are living with AIDS today, and only 13.6 people living with HIV are receiving treatment. Malaria deaths occur in 17 countries, 80% of which are children under the age of five.

In 2015, 57 million children of primary school age were out of school. More than half of them are in sub-Saharan Africa and a further one fifth in South and West Asia.

It's an important question, and the numbers are staggering. The World Bank estimates that 702 million people live in "extreme global poverty" which is defined as living on less than $1.90/day (USD).

he contrast between these peoples and the populations of rich nations is a stark one. In the poor nations of South Asia, the mortality rate among children under the age of 5 is more than 170 deaths per thousand, while in Sweden it is fewer than 10. In sub-Saharan Africa, life expectancy is 50 years, while in Japan it is 80.

Between now and tomorrow morning, 40,000 children will starve to death. The day after tomorrow, 40,000 more children will die, and so on throughout 1992. In a "world of plenty," the number of human beings dying or suffering from hunger, malnutrition, and hunger-related diseases is staggering. According to the World Bank, over 1 billion people—at least one quarter of the world's population—live in poverty. Over half of these people live in South Asia; most of the remainder in sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia.

Those who support aid to poor nations also counter the argument that aid to poor nations rarely accomplishes what it was intended to accomplish. As a result of aid, they point out, many countries have significantly reduced poverty and moved from dependence to self reliance. Aid has allowed Indonesia, for example, to reduce poverty from 58% to 17% in less than a generation. There are, unfortunately, instances in which the poor haven't benefitted from aid, but such cases only move us to find more effective ways to combat poverty in these countries, be it canceling debts, lowering trade restrictions, or improving distribution mechanisms for direct aid.

Yes, corruption exists everywhere, but it is not a justifiable excuse for ignoring the billions of people in developing countries that continue to suffer. In fact, experts have developed strategies of transparency that eligible countries must address before receiving aid. These strategies ensure that the aid coming from the United States goes directly to the people and programs that need it the most.

Today poverty remains as one of the biggest problems in the world, however, according to USAID the number of people living in poverty has been reduced by 50 percent in the last 20 years, smallpox has been eradicated worldwide and since 1990, 800 million people have gained access to improved water supplies and 750 million to improved sanitation. If the U.S. only allots 0.2 percent of the gross national income to foreign aid focused programs, there could be tremendous gains and millions more people would benefit if the U.S. allotted another 0.2 percent or more of the federal budget

In general, most Americans believe that 25 percent of the United States’ federal budget is allotted to foreign aid. In reality, only one percent of the budget goes to funding programs that provide aid and reduce poverty. To give a bit of perspective, $30 billion goes to foreign aid and $663 billion goes to military spending.

In the case of poverty, no action is too small to make a lasting impact. Food, water, and shelter are basic human needs and when teaching people that are living in poverty how to provide these basic needs for themselves, the solution is very simple.

A third of children under five in developing countries show evidence of long-term malnutrition. Malnutrition can cause low energy, diarrhea, anemia, hypothyroidism, poor vision, and pneumonia, as well as increased susceptibility to many other diseases. Prevalence of parasitic worm infection is very high in many poor regions. Malaria causes frequent sickness among children under 5, who average over 4 days of sickness with the disease per year.

People in poor countries report that they are on average less satisfied with their lives than people in rich countries. The average resident of a low-income country rated their satisfaction as 4.3 using a subjective 1-10 scale, while the average was 6.7 among residents of G8 countries. We interpret this as a large satisfaction gap.

Over the decade from 2010 to 2020, the continuation of the Bush-era tax cuts for only the super-wealthy (who make more then $250,000 per year) will cost about $700 billion. Considering all income levels, these cuts will cost about $3.7 trillion.56 Even just repealing the Bush-era tax cut on the extremely wealthy people would pay for about 40% of what is needed to end extreme poverty in the world.

In 2011, the US Gov’t will spend about $3.4 trillion. Ending world poverty would require about 5.1% of the current US federal budget.

To end extreme poverty worldwide in 20 years, Sachs calculated that the total cost per year would be about $175 billion. This represents less than one percent of the combined income of the richest countries in the world. In fact, this cost is 0.7% of the total income of the 30 countries who comprised the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2005 when Sachs wrote The End of Poverty.

The military budget in the USA is about $680 billion per year3. A large amount of other funding is directly connected to military spending in the states, bringing the total closer to $1 trillion per year4.Even if we assume the lesser of these numbers, annual defense spending in the US is about four times as much money as is needed to begin rapidly ending extreme poverty in the entire world. If some of the US military’s monstrous budget could be channelled towards humanitarian goals, then extreme poverty in our world could quickly become a thing of the past.

179 million infants in the least developed countries are not protected from diseases by routine immunization3.2 million children under the age of 15 currently live with HIV

What would it cost to end world hunger by 2030? World hunger can be eliminated with an additional $265 billion per year in additional resources.

The number of people suffering from hunger is greater than the population of the U.S., Canada and EU combined. WFP

That is, even in the wealthiest countries, the poor may not be in absolute poverty (the most basic of provisions may be obtainable for many) or their level of poverty may be a lot higher than those in developing countries

The data also does not reflect the recent global food crisis and rising cost of energy, which is feared will bring another 100 million into poverty.

A lack of material wealth does not necessarily mean that one is deprived. A strong economy in a developed nation doesn’t mean much when a significant percentage (even a majority) of the population is struggling to survive.

But new government data show schools in four more states have since put aside concerns and resumed buying the controversial product.

Pink slime

Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said the bill “invests in the health and nutrition of American children . . . by expanding their access to farmer’s markets and organic produce.

It’s a movement that is gradually reshaping the business of growing and supplying food to Americans.

Small farmers will be able to get up to 75% of their organic certification costs reimbursed, and some of them can obtain crop insurance

Predictably, the overwhelming bulk of its $290 billion would still go to powerful agribusiness interests in the form of subsidies for growing corn, soybeans, and cotton. But $2.3 billion was set aside this year for specialty crops, such as the eggplants, strawberries, or salad greens that are grown by exactly these small, mostly organic farmers. That’s a big bump-up from the $100 million that was earmarked for such things in the previous legislation

The rise of farmers’ markets — in city centers, college towns, and rural squares — is testament to a dramatic shift in American tastes. Consumers increasingly are seeking out the flavors of fresh, vine-ripened foods grown on local farms rather than those trucked to supermarkets from faraway lands. “This is not a fringe foodie culture,” says [Anthony] Flaccavento. “These are ordinary, middle-income folks who have become really engaged in food and really care about where their food comes from.