When farmers are paid to not grow food, in order to keep the price of food up, is feeding the world and humanity truly the goal? This of course is done because in a monetary system, scarcity and lack thereof is the source of profit.
Acting in a manor to provide abundance and plenty for everyone would be counterproductive from a profit making point of view. Doctors need sick people to make a living, pharmaceutical companies would perish if they actually found cures, they make billions on donations alone, people foolishly provide these institutions support and money believing they are the standard and top of their fields to provide solutions, people cling to their blind faith so superstitiously.
Crime would all be confined to the mentally insane rather than the desperate if food was readily available, charging us for air is not possible because there is plenty, however if that could also be controlled like food and water and land, then transforming our basic human needs into a source of exploitation and slavery. But the police, and the lawyers, and the judges need crime for without they would have no steady stream of income. It is never questioned why a system has to be maintained by force, could it be because it is not natural.
When genetic alteration gives patent ownership to food crops opening farmers to lawsuits and forcing them to settle and go out of business starve and those very companies say their products should be purchased in order to feed the very hungry they themselves caused?
Be wary of those who have the solution to hunger and poverty because often they are the cause of it and their solution is just more control. A cause created to necessitate a solution. How convenient that a solution be available, a key for a lock, are not keys and locks made by the same manufacturer.