I think this is contempt for Americans and their diets? I've been called Thanos by folks at work. Some population control sounds great to me,but maybe something that doesn't cause a slow death and a strain on the insurance and medical fields. But I'm thinking about actual poor people in the third world that depend on GMO's,not USA government assistance poor. I've had a chance to step outside of this country a few times and have seen what poor really means.
I've been to dozens of countries on 4 separate continents - and I think that most 3rd world countries have better staple diets than we do here. The poor will always be the poor, with no clear winners on a poverty scale. Lots of factors for poverty, all of them outside of the discussion, but yet all relevant, at the same time. Until we collectively take responsibility for our irresponsible breeding habits, we'll continue to watch every other species slowly disappear, which will have a cascading effect on our own hijacking of natural selection (until we possibly become cannibalistic?).
Even though you're not wrong about my contempt for our local problems, by extrapolation, no population should ever "have to" depend on GMOs, because we shouldn't be that successful at thwarting the devices of nature. But we are, so we're having a contemporary conversation, built upon the foundation of a sickly, but thriving populace - the majority of whom, their sole functions seem to be to consume and make waste products, all whilst scoffing in the face of their own mortality.
It would be fantastic if employers and/or insurance companies were allowed to deny benefits and coverage to those who serially abuse themselves. Smoke cigarettes for 50 years, and now have emphysema or lung cancer? Out of pocket for you, mate. Alcoholic? No new liver for you. Much like denial of warranty, for people who try to perform their own modifications on purchased goods. I think we'd see a drastic difference in both the quality and cost of medical care, as well as individual discretion on when, and for what, it is received. (maybe stop covering births after two, would be smart)
To bring this full circle - those who can prove that they are interested in maintaining good health, should get first choice in treatment, only perhaps behind people with hereditary conditions. I don't always agree with the things that the "organic" crowd claim or recommend, but at least they show a desire to make every effort to keep their vessel clean.