Why the World Should Not Follow the Failed United States Model of Fighting Domestic Hunger.

Joel Berg,Angelica Gibson

doi:10.3390/ijerph19020814

Abstract

Many industrialized nations have followed the lead of the United States (US) in reducing workers’ wages and cutting government safety nets, while giving their populaces the false impression that non-governmental organizations can meet the food and basic survival needs of their low-income residents. The history of the last 50 years and the global COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate why that is a mistake, leading to vastly increased household food insecurity, poverty, and hunger. This paper takes a close look at US data to help to better understand the significant impact US federal government policy measures had on limiting hunger throughout the pandemic and how we can learn from these outcomes to finally end hunger in America and other developed nations. The top three policy prescriptions vital in ending household food insecurity in the US and industrialized countries are as follows: (1) to create jobs; raise wages; make high quality healthcare and prescription medicine free; and ensure that high quality childcare, education, transportation, and broad-band access are affordable to all; (2) to enact a comprehensive “Assets Empowerment Agenda” to help low-income people move from owing to owning in order to develop middle-class wealth; and (3) when the above two steps are inadequate, ensure a robust government safety net for struggling residents that provides cash, food, and housing assistance.

Highlights

Starting in the 1980s, residents of the United States (US) were told by the government and a compliant media [1] that the best way to address domestic hunger and poverty was through charity, one person at a time, one donated can of food at a time [2]
This paper argues that such an approach is a tragic, evidence-adverse mistake and that both history and current events prove that major societal problems such as food insecurity can only be solved with extensive, coordinated, society-wide action, led by the only entity capable of organizing such action: each country’s national government
It is imperative that the US government continues the anti-hunger legislative momentum built in response to the COVID-19 pandemic

Summary

Introduction

Starting in the 1980s, residents of the United States (US) were told by the government and a compliant media [1] that the best way to address domestic hunger and poverty was through charity, one person at a time, one donated can of food at a time [2]. The increasing public focus on limited charity papered over government policies that promoted low wages such as by outsourcing jobs overseas and reduced safety net programs such as by cutting funding for food aid. Even as evidence (such as rising rates of household food insecurity and poverty) mounted that nonprofit organizations (as non-government charities are generally called in the US) were inefficient and inadequate in addressing large, systematic problems such as food insecurity, industrialized democracies followed the US model by encouraging charitable responses by non-governmental organizations (NGOs)—such as food banks, food pantries, soup kitchens, food recue groups, mutual aid societies, and other non-governmental communal institutions—while reducing government protections and supports.

History of Hunger in the United States

A Reagan private reductions in social services

An Increase in Charitable Feeding Programs

Number

Charitable Food Bank Model’s Global Spread

Hunger in the US during COVID-19

Food Charity Versus the Social Safety Net

Key Solutions for Reducing Countries

Findings

Conclusions