None, both of them are good to keep a steady balance in the world because if we cure them there will be a problem of over population.
Can the decision be postponed? I'm pretty sure I want to eliminate cancer, just not yet.
A world without hunger is a dead world within a few generations
but cancer only kills and really matters to responsible humans like the japanese who have equalized their population problem.
if you feed the hungy the poor and the weak populate far more and contribute even less to society
>Sees phrase that dates back to the french revolution
>Blames it on 2007 puzzle game
Cancer because that's actually a threat to people in developed countries and I don't really care what happens in developing countries
Cancer. Fuck cancer
Cancer, no doubt about it. As harsh as it sounds, fixing hunger in 3rd world countries instantly would just population bomb and increase suffering. Of course I'm not saying that hunger and starvation is a good thing, but to fix it you need to increase the development level of the society steadily through a long time instead of just distributing food to people that wouldn't have the infrastructure to support them anyway.
Cancer, because there is no sure way that cancer will ever be cured outside of deus ex machina, feeding the world is just a logistical problem
Once the world is fed, and lives to old age, everyone still dies of cancer
>if you don't care about niggers on africa you are trying to fit in
You made this too easy.
>Cancer, because there is no sure way that cancer will ever be cured outside of deus ex machina
I'm pretty sure medicine will eventually get the cure. If it can't be cured completely, we'll at least get better at treating it.
Of course we'll all be dead by then.
Curing cancer would save more money and lives, but I don't know how our current infrastructure could deal with it
>people can't make stupid jokes without being spammed by reaction images and cries of BAIT
Every time I see that pic I think of this
If you want to get better, stop associating yourself with people who are as low or lower than you. Not saying to cut that completely and be an asshole, just to diversify who you know and hang out with.
That's the best advice I can give.
There is a board for people like you, fucking stay there.
The Venture Brothers. It's LITERALLY the best thing ever, watch it when you get a chance. There's a new season coming out in 2 weeks but it's story driven so I highly recommend watching the whole series beforehand, although first few episodes might seem bad,
David Bowie is a
shapeshifting sovereign of Guild of Calamitous Intent, organization uniting supervillains
Cancer. You can do something about hunger, but you sometimes can't do anything about cancer, especially if you're poor.
You can plant/raise food, catch/hunt, forage, and so on.
You sometimes can't fight cancer.
There is a website for people like you, fucking stay there.
"Not being blantently racist makes you a Tumblr tier SJW
Nice try /pol/tard
Eliminating hunger advances the human race so much further than curing cancer. Cancer affects a relatively small number of people and very little resources go to combatting it.
If we removed hunger, we would free up so much land that is utilized in food production, deaths and illnesses from food poisoning would disappear, obesity would be gone, and there would be a huge influx of workers for more important industries
Cancer. It kills a lot of good people. World hunger being fixed would be more likely to lead the world into overpopulation imo.
Also it mostly just affects third world shitholes and homeless people.
Cancer, because myself and the ones I love will never have to worry about starving.
Other people not eating is hardly my problem.
That's assuming ending world hunger means we don't need food or water anymore, I imagined it meaning there's a sufficient amount for everyone on Earth.
Also, you'd have a TON of people out of jobs. Think about how much commerce is just food.
>we'll never get a proper saints row three that finishes up Dex's story
not having a job wouldn't matter anymore though
the most pressing need after diet would be shelter and if food production was globally gone, there would be so much land available for housing development meaning it would be cheap as shit, plus lots of new laborers to build those houses
>Was never a huge motorhead fan
>Poke fun at coworkers who were worked up for it
>Bowie dies shortly after
so then the people who want stuff would go out and earn it and the people who don't want it bad enough will sit and stir, the difference from now being that they won't starve to death.
Just curious if anyone knows, is Wilfred actually any good? I'm intrigued by it, but don't know if it's worth the time and my cancer is killing me so I don't want to waste time.
their would be retaliation either way, if some fucker decided to cure cancer and let humanity continue to be shackled by hunger, nature's most long battled foe, obviously the afflicted and sympathizers of the afflicted would be pissed
Reading this thread has made me realize that /v/ completely screwed up my perception of the word cancer. It's as though it has no real meaning anymore.
We would not disappear. 4chan isn't cancer. Its a disease. You may cure us, but we will come back. They want to stop us from coexisting, but we mean no harm. We simply live out our lives. If that hurts our host, so be it. But we will never die out, if you stomp us.
We will live
We will always, come back.
Yes you would. There would just be enough food to go around for everyone to eat.
So effectively it would only solve the problem of famine, since most places on earth already have enough food to feed all their citizens.
Know you're joking but still furious
No, you are though.
Even if its the worst case scenario and you don't think you're joking, you're joking.
11/10 for perseverance and commitment to the role you're playing.
Thinking about why has the /pol/ problem of leaking onto other boards gotten so much worse in the last 2 months. Obliviously we've had problems since the stupid gamergate fiasco but lately it has gotten so much worse.
I'm not joking.
If anything, hunger will not be saved because it could right now be saved if resources were managed efficiently, and they're not, meaning, it's a politic problem, and it really doesn't benefit the people in control that more poor "subhumans" keep reproducing, rather than starve.
People who follow plant-based diets have shown to be way less prone to cancer and other sickness.
If your the fucking president you can do both.
Ok well as I understand the conclusion of 4chan is trivializing everything with a greentext or a witty response. Deny the facts all you want, if you consume animals you are a piece of shit. Bye.
Is it hard to type while simultaneously listening to your Depeche Mode vinyls and drinking kale shakes from a mason jar?
Do the hemp bracelets make typing all day easier on your wrists.
Studying media at your college would be difficult otherwise I imagine. Thankfully, your dad pays for it.
Have you reached the point where your skin is transparent yet?
Consider the following:
People who are faggot vegetarians/vegans have to keep close track of what they eat
These people are going to keep track of vitamins and minerals they consume
They are healthy by necessity because their diet is unnatural as fuck, not because their choice to consume plants is healthier on its own.
I know this is bait but if everyone became a vegan several hanitats would begin to go to shit and we would do even more damage to the world.