Sell the Vatican feed the world??

Post Reply New Topic

What is the difference between a velocity and a displacement?
What is the difference between an income and a heap of cash?

For Catholics, I think that renting out the items to museums would be unthinkable. However, they could budget more of their income towards such initiatives as you mention.

What's the difference between a heap of cash and a heap of food?

Believe it or not, having a buttload of money doesn't mean that you can cure the worlds' ills. Part of our problem, as a society, is that we think that throwing money at a problem will solve it. This goes with the idea of treating the symptoms, not the disease.

Moreover, even if a heap of cash were able to feed the hungry for some time, what happens when, say, the Ogallala aquifer runs out?

How about this? Sell the Vatican to finance Mars colonial expeditions, use Mars for farming, and bring the food back here. Or research turning space stations into colonies, move our cities into space, and leave Earth for farming and natural resources.

I'd like to ammend this proposition:

- The buyers must be museums, collectors, or other parties with a resolve and ability to maintain the artifacts.
- The money should go to sustainable developmental agencies that are verifiably efficient in administration.
- A portion of the sales should go to compensating victims of Priest sex crimes.

Although, I like ruveyn's idea of dismantling the Church, with one qualification: turn the Vatican into the "European Museum of Roman Catholicism".

If you're going to spend money on changing an environment to produce food the Sahara Desert, Antarctica and the oceans of Earth have a far better capability and availability than Mars for producing food. Shipping food on an interplanetary basis is so impractical it is insane.

But I like Mars...

Actually, I was going to point out the possible farming of Antarctica. I do agree that interplanetary shipping or space colony shipping would be a nightmare, but it's a lot cooler than farming Antarctica.

Of course, to farm in the ocean, you really don't need to do anything to the ocean or build any absurd structures. Seaweed farming, yo. I'm not sure what the production would be vs. building the weird structures and farming say, wheat, but the option is already there.

I think the main point to take away from my posts is this: You need to increase food production to solve the problem of a lack of food. This is why starvation was such a problem for the Confederacy during the American Civil War.

Oh, and one last thing: Don't be blaming the Vatican for not solving world hunger. How many of you have a backyard? How many of you plant carrots or tomatoes or lettuce? How many of you raise chickens, or edible worms (which can be raised in an apartment)? How many of any of those do you send off to Africa to feed the hungry? I thought so. The problem can't be fixed by one single person doing something major. It needs to be fixed by a large number of people doing little things to make a small amount of progress. It's the little things that change the world, but everyone seems to focus on "large things" and give them credit.

Along the same lines of the title of this thread: Sell Microsoft.