This is going to be short. It may make you feel uncomfortable. That's the point. It should make you think.
Would you allow your children to starve to death?
If your answer is no, then congratulations - you are more moral than God.
So then is it right to thank God for putting food on your table, while millions of people starve every day?
And when you offer a prayer of thanks for that food, are you not really saying: "Thank you God for choosing me, over them" ?
It seems that some people failed to grasp the points being made by this article. Allow me to clarify.
The issue is not purely that God doesn't help starving children. That fact alone is not sufficient for my argument.
Perhaps God chooses not to meddle in any earthly affairs so as not to interfere with nature and free will. (This is not the biblical view of God, but is a possible way of reconciling the problem of suffering nonetheless)
The problem begins when you claim that God does intervene, in other ways (for example by blessing you). Now you need to account for why God would help you but not those who need it more. And more specifically, if you are thanking God for blessing you, while ignoring the fact that many go hungry, what does that say about you? Were you more deserving than they?
Also consider natural disasters, which are responsible for the deaths of millions of people each year. Do you believe that God sometimes saves people from natural disasters? If so, why those people and not others? Even better, why not prevent the natural disasters in the first place? If God gets the credit for those saved from natural disasters, shouldn't he also take the blame for those who weren't so fortunate?
It's worth thinking about.