Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Education Government Microsoft

Bill Gates' Donation of Thousands of Chickens Rejected by Bolivia (theverge.com) 317

HughPickens.com shares an article from The Verge: Bill Gates' philanthropic efforts are usually greeted with near-universal praise, but a recent attempt by the US billionaire to donate 100,000 chickens ruffled some feathers. The leftist government of Bolivia...has refused the donation, describing Gates' gift as "offensive." "He does not know Bolivia's reality to think we are living 500 years ago, in the middle of the jungle not knowing how to produce," said Cesar Cocarico [Bolivia's minister of land and rural development]... "Respectfully, he should stop talking about Bolivia, and once he knows more, apologize to us."
Gates' "Coop Dreams" initiative partnered with Heifer International, a group which fights poverty by delivering livestock and agricultural training, to deliver 100,000 chickens around the world, mostly to sub-Saharan Africa, as a way to improve the lives of people making $2 a day. In a blog post Gates noted that chickens are cheap and easy to take care, while selling flocks of chickens can be a profitable business, and raising chickens offers other benefits to children and families. "Our foundation is betting on chickens..." Gates writes, adding "if I were in their shoes, that's what I would do -- I would raise chickens."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bill Gates' Donation of Thousands of Chickens Rejected by Bolivia

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Happened in Africa with food aid. What do you think the effect on an agrarian economy would be if you came in and flooded the market with free food?

    • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @07:12AM (#52346339)

      What do you think the effect on an agrarian economy would be if you came in and flooded the market with free food?

      This would not "flood the market". 100,000 chickens is less than 0.1% of Bolivia's annual chicken production, and only a small portion of the 100K chickens would go to Bolivia. Most are going to Africa. Anyway, this is not about "more chickens", it is about chicken redistribution. It is not like crates of chickens are going to flown from America. The chickens will be purchased locally and given to a handful of the poorest families. The reason that BG is doing this is because there is actual data that shows it this program has helped similar families in the past.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 19, 2016 @07:40AM (#52346403)

        640,000 chickens should be enough for anyone.

  • by johnsnails ( 1715452 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @03:45AM (#52346009)
    #GATEGATE
  • by Lisandro ( 799651 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @03:47AM (#52346013)

    Bolivia already produces 115 million chickens a year. The country is not first world by any measure, but people are not starving to death on the streets either.

    • by dwywit ( 1109409 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:00AM (#52346041)

      Misguided and ill-informed on the part of BG or his advisors, sure - but well-intentioned, and the response was a bit ungracious. Perhaps something along the lines of "Thanks, but we don't really need them. Please send the chickens to country x, and we'd rather have some solar panels or well pumps, or how about some internet infrastructure for our schools?"

      That's probably a different scale of funding, but BG has $$$ to spare.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Firethorn ( 177587 )

        That's probably a different scale of funding, but BG has $$$ to spare.

        True, but Bill Gates has been trying to apply his business principles to his philanthropy. Okay, maybe not the best way to put it, but to put it roughly, he's been trying to utilize his time to determine where putting his money will be the most effective. Basically, he's a venture capitalist donator. Give him a good enough pitch and business plan and get money.

        Given the number of positive things I've heard about his donations, I figure that this is one of his rare screwups. Or, more accurately, it's a s

        • by Anonymous Coward

          It's Bolivia not Venezuela, you ignorant american!

          Also, those were probably GMO chickens he was trying to donate. Third world people usually don't take kindly to them.

          • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 19, 2016 @06:40AM (#52346301)

            The chickens don't just have GMOs but come with a "free" copy of Windows 10, which they also rejected.

          • Genetically modified chickens? Seriously? Speaking of ignorant.

          • ...those were probably GMO chickens he was trying to donate. Third world people usually don't take kindly to them.

            You mean those whose first exposure to Westerners has been hippie activists.

          • They would have been Bolivia grown chickens purchased to help local poor folks. But fuck the Bolivian government if they don't care to get free money for their chicken farmers and free food for the hungry under their pitiful governance.
            • The current chicken farmers probably don't want an outsider to come in and 'crash' their market by widely distributing breeding stock to the entire populace. That would be a game changer if it gave the whole population a respite in the form of enough chickens to start breeding them on their own, instead of only having enough of them to eat.

              Just my conjecture, not anything known for certain.

              But the President of Bolivia is just being a politician and grandstanding against the Big Bad Westerner.

        • by Firethorn ( 177587 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @05:56AM (#52346237) Homepage Journal

          Oh, because apparently people were confused.

          I know this took place in Bolivia, but I'm using Venezuela as an example of where officials are willing to cut their own country's throat to save some face.

          • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @07:03AM (#52346333)

            I know this took place in Bolivia, but I'm using Venezuela as an example of where officials are willing to cut their own country's throat to save some face.

            Bolivia is another country where appearances matter more than reality to the government. Bolivia as a whole is not as poor as many countries in Africa, but there are still some very poor people who would benefit from this gift. Instead of refusing it out of pride, maybe Morales should let the individual families decide for themselves.

            Disclaimer: I am a non-poor American, and I have chickens (six leghorn laying hens). Chickens are very easy to care for, and mine live mostly on table scraps, garden waste, and bugs.

            • Here's the thing... Do you think anyone n that country that would have been a recipient of a chicken would have refused them? If so, the Government did not act in the best interests of those people. If they were the majority, you could seriously claim that the Government was not acting in the best interests of its people (it total).

              • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

                by Anonymous Coward

                You are ignorant as **. If they produce 150 million chickens a year as claimed, even the poorest of them should be able to spare a few cents, buy a few chicks and raise them at home if thats what they want.

                The reason they don't do it already is because like in most countries, the population is mostly urban and raising chickens in cities is an unsanitary hell and a huge health hazard. Don't just believe my words, get a dozen of chicks and try raising them in your house and give us your thoughts after a year.

            • Disclaimer: I am a non-poor American, and I have chickens (six leghorn laying hens). Chickens are very easy to care for, and mine live mostly on table scraps, garden waste, and bugs.

              This is interesting to me. I've been considering getting some chickens, but other family members who have them say they're actually quite expensive to feed, and argue that the resulting eggs, while good, are far more expensive than those from the grocery store. What's your take?

              • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @02:03PM (#52347881)

                This is interesting to me. I've been considering getting some chickens, but other family members who have them say they're actually quite expensive to feed, and argue that the resulting eggs, while good, are far more expensive than those from the grocery store. What's your take?

                You are NOT going to save money unless you consider your time to be worthless. You can't compete with factory farms. You should just think of it as more of a hobby. Here are some benefits:

                1. You will have fresh eggs everyday. More in the summer but a few even in the winter. Roughly 300 eggs/year/hen.
                2. Your kids will learn that food doesn't come from factories, and they will learn responsibility.
                3. You will know that your eggs came from humanely treated chickens, and not from a warehouse of hens crammed into battery cages. Go visit a factory farm. The stench alone will make you never want to eat store-bought eggs again.
                4. They will eat almost anything, including watermelon rinds, apple cores, carrot peels, etc. and convert all of that into protein nodules. You will still need to supplement that with some commercial feed.
                5. The eggs taste much better, especially if they have access to a lot of insects and worms. I use a pitchfork to turn over part of the compost heap so they can get to the wrigglers.
                6. When the zombie apocalypse comes you can feed the human corpses to your chickens, or if you prefer, you can let the bodies decompose and feed the maggots to your hens. You will survive while others starve.

        • Given the number of positive things I've heard about his donations,

          That's odd, everything I've heard about his donations has been negative. When he gives health care, it's to strengthen big pharma. You can't get it unless your nation agrees to give strong IP protection to them. When he gives education, it's to create more IT professionals, but it doesn't really improve general education, and usually it actually harms it by drawing attention (and funding) away from initiatives which are actually meaningful. So what positive things have you been hearing about the donations of the Gates foundation?

          • Though I'm totally not a Microsoft fan, this is pure bunk. There is general agreement that Gates runs the best of all the Silicon Valley philanthropy campaigns. I'm sure the antivax conspiratariat isn't pleased, though.

            • From what i've read about the Gates foundation i'd argue the same. Think what you want about Microsoft, the guy seems really committed to make the world a better place. I just believe his efforts in Bolivia are misinformed, to say the least.

          • by ScentCone ( 795499 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @09:48AM (#52346761)

            That's odd, everything I've heard about his donations has been negative.

            That's called confirmation bias. You hate him, so you only seek, find, remember, and pass along information that allows you to feel good about that position. Maybe you should check with someone who doesn't have malaria, but otherwise would. Or someone in a developing country that has unprecedented education opportunities they'd otherwise have missed out on. They'd question your priorities. Ask someone in Cameroon, who literally went from rural village life to being a well paid consultant in a rapidly growing tech-centric urban economy if they'd rather the Gates Foundation had closed up shop. I know, you think it's either apocryphal, or that whatever strings are attached are too onerous. Having had just such a formerly impoverished rural boy from Cameroon move in as the young man next door, and watch him, over the course of just a few years, buy three houses in the neighborhood for his extended family (the children of which rotate through schools in Europe and trips back to Africa to further broaden their horizons), I think your smug disdain for the Gates Foundation is a bit of Shakespearean protesting too much. What's the problem, really? Just frustrated that it's not the Clinton Foundation that my Cameroonian friend praises for wildly improving the lives of nearly everyone in his large family?

            • by Jiro ( 131519 )

              Maybe you should check with someone who doesn't have malaria, but otherwise would.

              Maybe you should check in with someone who dies because he can't afford medication, because Bill Gates conditioned his aid on IP protections for drugs.

              It's not as if there are people dying on only one side of the comparison here. The negative aspects of Gates' donations result in people dying who are every bit as real as the people with malaria.

              • Maybe you should check in with someone who dies because he can't afford medication, because Bill Gates conditioned his aid on IP protections for drugs.

                Maybe you should consider the people who don't die because the drugs exist in the first place, which in most cases wouldn't happen without the private sector spending billions on the highly regulated, generally money-losing, years-long process of putting new drugs into the hands of doctors. I know, you think that all of the companies that spend that money should do it as a donation, and they should instead earn money selling t-shirts at their bar performances, just like musicians who shouldn't be allowed t

    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:08AM (#52346053)

      Exactly. I've spent a lot of time in the poorest Latin American countries (Guatemala, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Bolivia), and if there's one thing the region has in abundance, it's fucking chickens. The things are everywhere. Offering chickens demonstrates an utter lack of any kind understanding of the region. It would not be so bad, except that the countries are also full of holier than thou aid workers who cruise around in land rovers and try to tell farmers how to farm... except the aid workers aren't farmers and don't know how to farm, especially given local climates.

      If you ask Bolivians, they'll tell you the first thing they need is transpotation infrastructure so that they can trade these scads of chickens they have. Spend some time there and you'll see they're right.

      • Well, I know every Hollywood movie I see that portrays one of those countries always shows a bunch of chickens running around in the poor areas. I haven't been there so i don't know myself.

        But I do know that transportation infrastructure is generally the realm of government and not foreigners taking pity on the people subject to those governments. So why don't the government accept the chickens, run a state chicken farm using prison labor and resell the chickens to foreign countries for profit that goes to

        • It would behoove them to grow/make and export something that isn't ubiquitous and nonseasonal.
        • Because there's really no chicken fertility crisis, so if they'd wanted 100,000 more chickens they'd have bred them already.

          • It costs money to breed chickens. A meat chicken is harvested after 2 months. Breeding can't happen before 6 months. So if you're living month-to-month, where does the extra 4 months of feed plus the lost revenue from the meat come from? Bolivian food-stamps? They don't exist.
      • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @08:45AM (#52346573)
        The stuff most aid organizations provide (food, clean water, medicine) aren't really what poor countries need. It's literally putting the cart before the horse, and can even be counter-productive by making life harder or impossible for domestic producers of those things, and allowing these countries' population to grow beyond their ability to self-sustain themselves.

        These countries need to develop their own economy first.That's why UN assistance for developing nations [undp.org] focuses on building infrastructure, increasing the number of citizens participating in the economy (education and gender equality), figuring out ways to exploit natural resources, facilitating trade and economic development, and helping set up government programs to help support all these things. Once you get the economic ball rolling, they can grow their own food, clean their own water, build their own hospitals. These things are the result of development. Giving people the end product instead of the means to produce the end product is exactly what the aphorism "give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, feed him for life" tells us not to do.
        • by lgw ( 121541 )

          So, then, buying some chickens from local farmers and giving them to some poorer folks, so that they can participate in the economy themselves, that would be good, right? This isn't about handing out Chicken McNuggets, it's about letting a few new families become chicken farmers.

          There are plenty of aid organizations focused on the exact things you describe: education in skills directly useful in the community, making it safe for girls to go to school, helping people get a small capital stake to move beyond

      • except the aid workers aren't farmers and don't know how to farm, especially given local climates

        Yeah, the local habit of chopping down all the rain forest for one-shot, poor use of the acreage for farming - that's a sure sign that native farming instincts are wildly superior to the methods used in more advanced economies, where far, far more food is produced per acre, with far less energy used.

      • If you ask Bolivians, they'll tell you the first thing they need is transpotation infrastructure...

        So what's your plan, give money to the government so 95% of it can be absorbed by corruption? No. Chickens is where it's at.

    • by quenda ( 644621 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:27AM (#52346083)

      Outside the cities, much of the country is dirt poor. If the government will not allow aid distribution, Gates should do a covert air-drop to impoverished villages.
      However, to reduce the environmental risks of yet another introduced species escaping and going feral, a native American fowl could be dropped instead. I suggest turkeys.

      • Chickens can go feral, but only under ideal conditions. Natural selection takes care of them otherwise: They are too domesticated. There's a lot of them on Kauai, but only because the island has almost no predators. Just think of the energy cost of laying an egg on most days - domestic birds have been bred to do that, no wild bird does. Besides, chickens have already been farmed for a very long time in all parts of the world - I'm sure a few have already escaped.

        • There's a lot of them on Kauai, but only because the island has almost no predators.

          The Polynesians brought chickens to Hawaii, and all of the islands used to have feral chickens. But introduced mongooses wiped them out on all the other major islands. Kauai has no mongooses, so they survive there. Mongooses cannot kill an adult chicken, but they eat the eggs and young.

          Just think of the energy cost of laying an egg on most days.

          Feral chickens quickly revert to laying far fewer eggs. The feral chickens on Kauai only lay a few clutches per year, when they are ready to brood.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Thank you Les Nessman :-)

      • I swear to god, I thought turkeys could fly [youtube.com] ....
    • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

      He would have been better donating them to Venezuela, with the on-going problems and food riots it might have helped a bit. There's also the possibility that it would have simply intensified the problem.

    • Maybe Emperor Gates and Cesar would sit down with one of Bolivia's products, a Peace Blunt? Apologies to Cheech and Chong.
    • Clueless rich white guy doesn't know that Bolivia has chickens.

  • Translation (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mentil ( 1748130 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @03:48AM (#52346017)

    Keeping our citizens at the brink of starvation is how we maintain power. Increasing access to food weakens our political position.

    • pretty disgusting act by the bolivian government. Whether they like to admit it or not Bolivia still has a very high rate of people living a long way below the poverty line.
  • by Elentar ( 168685 ) <slashdot@NoSPAm.ultraviolet.us> on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:16AM (#52346059)

    Well, I'm sure they really would have taken them, but the customs paperwork is just SO unpleasant, you know? And there is the matter of the 17% import duty on livestock, and there needs to be proof that someone will feed and house the chickens so that they don't become a burden on society. We can't have foreign chickens just coming into the country whenever they want.

  • by drmaxx ( 692834 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:22AM (#52346073)
    Not sure if chickens are the right thing to deliver, but Bolivia certainly does not know how to feed their population properly: https://www.wfp.org/stories/10... [wfp.org] or http://www.unicef.org/bolivia/... [unicef.org] I am always baffled, when pride is willing to kill people.
    • by Dutch Gun ( 899105 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @04:30AM (#52346091)

      It's a lot less baffling if you understand that the prideful people in power who are refusing the gifts are not the same folks that are going hungry.

      • Bolivia has plenty of chickens. This is a tiny amount for them; furthermore, just about anybody can afford to buy some chicks and start on their own. If he wanted to help the poor with chickens he'd provide education on raising them and maybe some chicken feed... It's incredibly ignorant to think that giving any group of people on earth free chickens is going to greatly benefit them.

        Next we'll hear about Gates giving poor Hindus cows or drilling water wells in the Amazon or providing winter coats to north

    • Read a bit about Evo Morales. That will make it easier to understand.

      That said, offering a measly 100,000 chickens to fight hunger in Bolivia is naive at best. The country already produces over 300,000 per day.

      • The idea isn't for the chickens to be eaten, it's to bootstrap a chicken farm for the person in their local area. So you'd probably get 10 hens and 2 cocks and some training on how to feed and farm them for meat, how to get the hens fertilized and laying, then how to hatch and raise the chicks. It's an attempt to get a self-sufficient cycle going. How good an idea or how feasible it might be is left to your discernment.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          The problem here is that the cycle is already going. Bolivia has many problems, but lack of chickens isn't one of them. Every Bolivian can, in principle afford to buy some live chickens and start breeding, there's a chicken surplus, and chicken-based dishes are really popular in Bolivia. The trouble stems for the fact that the same surplus makes for low margins, lack of good infrastructure hampers trade in some areas, and a measly 100k chickens isn't going to do very much. The number is dwarfed by the total

      • by puto ( 533470 )
        As someone who is a Colombian citizen, who has worked in 9 latin American countries since the 80s you have no idea on how things work south of the border. Bolivia might be producing a metric shit ton of chickens, but they are either being exporting, or sold at prices that poor people cannot afford. Chicken is considered a luxury. even in middle class households. This is just a petty bureacrat trying to weasel into a cash donation because of his faux outrage. Just because he and his pals can afford chick
  • The leftist government of Bolivia, "He [Bill Gates] does not know Bolivia's reality to think we are living 500 years ago, in the middle of the jungle not knowing how to produce..."

    Silly Bill Gates, maybe he should give them 100,000 fertilized eggs instead?

  • by Iamthecheese ( 1264298 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @05:33AM (#52346209)
    The theory (I'll call this The Theory) goes like this: If you give free food to Africa, you'll price out African farmers who will starve because they have nothing else to do. And then the people will starve when you stop donating food.

    That complaint seriously misses the point. Let me tell you why: African farmers don't need to farm. They need to do something that pays for what they need. Any work will do, really. As long as an unskilled person can do it. So there are three possibilities here: Industrialization is impossible for African nations (so there can't be other work) OR there isn't enough investment to drive industry (so the farmers can't get other work) OR technological unemployment now makes unskilled work insufficiently profitable to support a person.

    Now African farmers are already doing something otherwise (effectively entirely) done by machine in first world countries. A farm in Europe requires far, far less human labor. A European farmer's job is more in the line of managing machines, scheduling planting, organizing finances, and so forth. You won't see him on his knees weeding a patch of land. You won't see him with a scythe in his hand at harvest time. You won't even see him helping a pig give birth or tending a sick cow* An EU farm averages "...an average size of 16.1 hectares per agricultural holding. [europa.eu] An average EU farm has less than one person see here. [europa.eu] 12 million farms, 10 million farmers.

    If the above theory about farmers going out of work is to be believed then it's impossible for farming to make up a significant percentage of employment. Otherwise the complaint would be invalid. So the farming singularity has not arrived in Africa. I'm going to beg the question that a strong industrial economy and a service economy also haven't, I think it's obvious. This leaves the third possible support for The Theory completely without support. In Africa unskilled labor can still pay what passes for a living wage. On to the first possibility.

    The statistics here [africaneco...utlook.org] tell us that Africa has averaged a 3 to 6 percent increase in GDP for the last decade. This is despite AIDS, Malaria, pants-on-head retarded or just evil actions by African politicians, revolutionary wars, and otherwise being the unwashed asshole of the world. More to the point, this increase represents industrialization. For evidence see this [africantra...mation.org] economic diversification report.

    It may not be enough [un.org] yet, or even certain [uneca.org] but it is happening.

    Going back to africaneconomicoutlook.org [africaneco...utlook.org] if we look at table 10, foreign direct investment we see that the middle objection to food exports to Africa is quite strong. Africa has averaged 51 billion dollars per year of direct foreign investment. For a whole continent that's shockingly small. As shown by continual growth through massive problems... problems that are going away one by one, Africa is at the cusp of a new era. All that needs to be done is entice a rational amount of foreign investment (say, 400 billion dollars per year) by parties interested in money, not power (actual economic investment, not strings-attached economic manipulation) and it will industrialize at a clip only seen so far in China's rise to power.

    If that happens:
    1. The Theory's complaint will be rendered moot very quickly by African farmers reaching par for productivity.
    2. Food can be freely given on the basis that the vast majority of
    • In terms of resource wealth Africa by all rights should be one of the most powerful continents on the planet, its economic output should be putting the US to shame the way the US currently puts most smaller African nations to shame.

      The problem is it's also been brutally colonized and had its economy, environment, and even borders completely fucked up by that. Africa's not going to get unfucked until a few more border rearrangements happen and the lines on the map actually line up with ethnic/tribal boundari

      • If the blame is colonization, then how do you account for the many African countries which were worse off before becoming a colony, better off while they were colonies and suddenly took a massive turn for the worse after they gained independence?

        Wouldn't that indicate colonization was a positive benefit to those countries, not the cause of all their problems? Or are you one of those people who don't let facts get in the way of your professor's ideology?

        BTW, the United States and Canada were both colonies fo

      • I was going to make an opposing case.

        Africa land is poor, because it didn't have glaciers crushing and moving the land etc. fertilizing it dozens of times. Lush forests are amazing but sustain on thin humus on top of worthless soil.
        Huge stretches are water poor.
        It's huge, like twice it looks like due to Mercator projection bias on maps.

        I'm sure it might turn out a lot better, still.
        I don't know about drawing borders on ethnical boundaries. No idea what the many cultures there think. Ethnical or tribal bound

  • by MrKaos ( 858439 ) on Sunday June 19, 2016 @05:47AM (#52346231) Journal

    Look at least he is not trying to give them Windows 10, that would really be insulting.

  • Come on, Bill. Your best response was NO response but instead you had to make a snarky, self-important blog post. You've never been hungry or poor in your whole life, even before Microsoft and therefore have no standing to dole out criticism.
    • You are dumb. He wasn't giving them the chickens to eat. The idea is that small numbers would be distributed to poor rural people who would them breed them and raise them for income. Obviously the Bolivian governmental official doesn't want the competition to the established large chicken producers.
    • by Scutter ( 18425 )

      So, your opinion is that the 0.1 percenter who has done more humanitarian work with his money that you could possibly dream of while you sit behind a keyboard and bitch about it should keep his mouth shut? I think I'd rather have him talk about his projects and why he stands behind his decisions. Honestly, I wish you'd make up your mind. You either want the billionaires to share their riches or you don't. You can't demand that they share and then complain when they do. I don't think he should have to a

  • Hopefully they didn't click the Red Cross to say thanks but no thanks for your chickens because they will probably get delivered anyway...
  • I doubt that raise chickens in the altiplano is a good idea. The most poor population in Bolivia are the altiplano over 3000 m. about sea level. If they did a real field check of the plan they would be donating Llamas or Alpacas and Tools needed for fiber produce.

    • by PPH ( 736903 )

      I don't think chickens would be bothered by the altitude. Otherwise how would they be able to fly?

      -- Bill Gates

  • He does not know Bolivia's reality

    If Bill Gates knows nothing of Bolivia, it is probably from using Bing.

    I'd hazard a guess that it is Bolivia's government he knows little about, more so than Bolivia itself.
  • Texas produces 5 billion chickens a year, and it could still use a gift of 100,000 chickens to poor and unemployed who could get some income out of raising them. As if often happens, pride and politics are getting in the way of helping some people :(.

  • To buy a chicken you need to spend anything from 4 to 12 hours in a line. A donation like that would help, but sadly i think it would be rejected by the government as well.

    We desperately need food and medicines and countries have tried to help, but the government doesn't allow it

  • "With God as my witness, I thought chickens could fly"

A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other invention, with the possible exceptions of handguns and Tequilla. -- Mitch Ratcliffe

Working...