If it is a per capita fifty times bigger problem, then that not many can afford it is not really an argument. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
If (say) 1% of people can afford to have a fish shipped to them then that is a much smaller problem than the 99% of people having Thai chicken fillets shipped to them. Which problem do you solve first? Which is actually a problem?
If producing luxury foods for one person wastes 50 times more resources than producing cheap factory food for one person, and 1% buy luxury foods while the rest eats factory food, then it's 50 to 99 - two big problems. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
