| |
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:02:57 PM |
Zero Population growth, limit the amout of children being born by choice, One child per couple world wide.
Problem is the corporations hate this no one to sell to, the rich lose out.
Wrong. They are actually the ones selling us this bullshit line of "Over population".
Why else do you think governments invented things like "fake feminism", why Roe vs Wade and the entire birth control/eugenics programs came into place?
Supply and demand is what makes corporations rich and powerful, not population. If anything population reduces their power. | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:07:38 PM |
Supply and demand is what makes corporations rich and powerful, not population. If anything population reduces their power.
How wrong you are...One of the key resources to growth in Economic theory is population... | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:18:51 PM | Not if it's in a monopoly, which is what Corporate America basically is, and so is this "Over Population" dribble, that is spit out by the likes of the UN d*ckheads.
You're trying to imagine a free market. And all I can say is, there is plenty of room for everyone.
See the Georgia Guidestones.
THE MESSAGE OF THE GEORGIA GUIDESTONES
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.
10.Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature. | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:24:55 PM | All this fuss about "over population" simply comes from the Eugenicists of the world who think they know everything.
It is all bonifide b.s.
And so is this fear mongering about "over population". Which is basically why homosexuality is getting such a strong push these days.
See "Crypto Eugenics" in their own words. | |
|
| Africans Challenge Bush Claim that GM Food Good for Them
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:28:30 PM | All:
Dharma's message about GMOs (genetically modified organism) is one that should be emphasized. The industry producing GMOs has grown substantially in recent years and the GMOS they make threatens many features of life wordwide.
The article is correct in that this is a business decision, from the "corporate person" entity, which has no face, but which does have more rights and fewer responsibilities than ordinary, real, flesh-and-bone Americans (or any other nationality).
I am very slow about searching for things on the internet so it was a surprise I was able to find so much so easily. Consider quotes from just 2:
For our brothers and sisters north of the 49th:
"Farmers are now using from six to 10 times more chemicals because what has happened is that we've developed a new super-weed from genetic engineering. There are about five companies, maybe there are more, but about four or five that sell GMO canola. So if you had 'farmer A' growing a GMO canola from a company over here and 'farmer B' was growing a canola from another company and 'farmer C' over here was growing Monsanto's, what has happened through cross-pollination is that you now have the three genes in one plant. So it´s now become a super-weed that takes different chemicals to kill. It has moved into grain fields and all other fields besides canola. And you'd be hard-pressed to find a field in western Canada that's not contaminated."
Note the "weed" they refer to is the canola, the crop that is raised on millions of acres. The herbicide contamination mentioned has very broad consequences. Being carried up the food chain to other animals is just one, including impacts to birds that migrate (in the western Hemisphere) from well inside the Arctic Circle to the tip of South America, plus soil contamination moving into the water supply used by humans, etc. And the contamination is 2-fold: the modified organism spreads uncontrolled out of the fields where they grow, carrying their herbicide resistance with them.
Here's another, illustrating not only the historical context in the Fertile Crescent, but the Bush administraion's illegal tampering with a sovereign country's laws:
"The (now former) American Administrator of the Iraqi CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) government, Paul Bremer,updated Iraq's intellectual property law to 'meet current internationally-recognized standards of protection. The updated law makes saving seeds for next year's harvest, practiced by 97% of Iraqi farmers in 2002, the standard farming practice for thousands of years across human civilizations, now illegal.
Instead, farmers will have to obtain a yearly license for genetically-modified seeds from American corporations. These GM seeds have typically been modified from IP developed over thousands of generations by indigenous farmers like the Iraqis, shared freely like agricultural 'open source.' Other IP provisions for technology in the law further integrate Iraq into the American IP economy."
And another take on the same issue:
"As part of sweeping "economic restructuring" implemented by the Bush Administration in Iraq, Iraqi farmers will no longer be permitted to save their seeds. Instead, they will be forced to buy seeds from US corporations -- including seeds the Iraqis themselves developed over hundreds of years. That is because in recent years, transnational corporations have patented and now own many seed varieties originated or developed by indigenous peoples. In a short time, Iraq will be living under the new American credo: Pay Monsanto, or starve."
There is tons of information on GMOs and American based multinational companies, and the Bush administration's collusion with them. And they hate us for our freedom.
Instead of helping world agriculture reduce poverty and therefore overpopulation, these actions will do the opposite. Such is the oligarchy.
David | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:32:47 PM | Ok. Both of you two above are correct, in some ways.
In terms of the strict population issue. There really are biophysical limits of population. If you take that analogy of the lilipad... one day there is one... next there are two... four... eight... sixteen...
What day is the pond HALF full? 29th day.
So there is something real to work on in terms of population GROWTH. What it seems to me is that the planet CURRENTLY has the capacity to support our population, but when is that day 29? We could provide for needs of all right now (that's food, water, basic medical care, education.) NEEDS. This is in no way saying that the planet can support all having cars, shopping malls, air conditioning (has a hard time supporting a few million with that stuff). I am looking at keeping all people alive and healthy (which we could easily be doing now while babies die in Africa and we spend trillions in US alone, on weapons... tangent). If we double the population, though... and then double that? At some point, if we don't stop GROWTH, many will die from starvation and in horrible situations.
IF, as an average, we have 1-2 children (some will have three and some will have none) and continue that, WHILE all becoming more reasoned with ecology and life style, we'd be ok. There is an argument pro homosexuality and pro birth control for the churches to contemplate, too (another tangent to talk with the pope about).
RIGHT NOW, we (corporations, individuals, etc) are NOT reasoned with ecology and biophysical limits of Earth, though. | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:38:13 PM | I believe that 2.1 is considered "replacement".
In Canada we are something like 1.4. Which basically means most of us will starve to death in our old age. Which also means we as a society will forfiet all of our rights for such protections. (Probably).
But then again, things might turn out like they did in the Soviet Union where all forms of birth control had to be banned (though a tad late) in order to regain replacement. | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:50:32 PM | If everyone lived like those in industrialized nations, we would all die (dolphins--analogy--too). If we all lived like those in India... the K of Earth (capacity of a habitat to support a number of individuals) would be WAY higher--for how long? I'd rather see the population balance (and distribution too) because those living in squalor and terrible conditions have a quality of life. Those with quantity of life (consumer products, money, etc) realize that quality of life for all is better than quantity for a few. Those who wear ICE need to understand that this is a good word for that. People in slavery in Africa in diamond mines to produce what? I'd rather BRAG about shopping at goodwill, really.
However, I don't think individuals are to blame and I don't think that affluence, per se, is the problem. Like I've said before... where is this four TRILLION (google a trillion and think about that) per year to the 'defense' department going?
If that makes sense? | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 9:57:36 PM | I think it does. And it appears we have some similiar beliefs.
Although because you believe in a certain "ideology" such as "ecofem" (which personally sounds strange), doesn't mean that industrialized nations will end, but it also doesn't mean it wont either. It's just inconclusive at this point in my opinion.
You're basically a communist in the most purest sense from what I can read. But the others who banner for "over population" and also claim to be communist ie the international bankers aren't including you , me or Pedro in their big plans to reduce population and basically have some sort of Nazi utopia. Which is exactly what the Georgia Guidestones advocate.
You have to remember that the term "Over population" comes from such organizations that used statements like "Birth control will ultimately lead to a purer race" as their founding principles.
Do you really believe that their brand of "feminism" in third world countries is there to help women, or rather to wipe out their populace so they can steal the goods? | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 10:00:25 PM | "Like I've said before... where is this four TRILLION (google a trillion and think about that) per year to the 'defense' department going?"
oh...
Haliburton, Carlyle Group, the Banking Cartels via interest and the Fed Reserve etc... | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/14/2005 10:12:21 PM | As with anything, there are as many kinds of 'ecofeminism' as there are people who understand that as part of their personal philosophy. The basic ideas that I believe are:
All forms of oppression serve to reinforce each other. We need to think about the big picture. (The as long as one is oppressed, all are, kind of idea.) The same mental framework creates racism, creates sexism... classism, oppression of children, of animals, of nature... etc. So all of those, to me, are all parts of one BIG issue. Which is exactly why it makes perfect sense to talk about ecofeminism and the logic of domination on a population thread.
As far as feminism in the third world... I could go on with that for a long time. Part of this is that there are cultures where a woman's only status literally comes from the number of children she has (and the man's from being able to produce many kids.) I believe birth control and abortion are completely different issues and when I say birth control I mean birth control. I need the 'pope' to admit that birth control is a good. Condoms are a GOOD--without doubt. Women need to have the ability to plan their family without being told that birth control is wrong. Education is part of that, but education is also a part of giving women an equal standing in all cultures. There are also issues of social security (who will care for me when I am elderly) and infant mortality... I could go on and on... like I said, this is one BIG issue. | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 8:44:28 AM | Personally I believe things like Christianity does the best service to all of those, buddhism also addresses those issues quite well. (As far as caring for the needs of others).
I also believe that autonomous choice in birth control is vital to the individual.
What you call "Education" I sometimes see as indoctrination or brainwashing for purposes of the "collective" or the "elites" but rarely for the individual. Power structures rarely work that way.
As far as their culture is concerned who are we to argue against their beliefs that having as many children as possible is a bad thing? I for one believe that Imperliast minded inviduals have been in those countries for centuries and have been trying to curcumvent their progress from despot to despot. Educating them in order to wipe out their race I don't think is in anyone's best interest. And just because it's packaged nicely doesn't mean that it liberates women from anything.
The Pope doesn't need to admit anything. If people want to follow that type of leadership shouldn't they be allowed? Just because you think it oppresses women (which it doesn't) doesn't mean others have to admit that condoms are good. I certainly know that pharmaceutical companies would certainly like for the pope to say condoms are good. Pharmaceutical companies by the way donate more money and "education" to feminism than anyone. Ironically they also contrubute to the environmentalism movement more than anyone so I personally see echofem as another one of their brainchilds. Especially given your statement of deciding what the pope needs and needs not do.
I think Catholicism is a joke and I do believe feminism will bring it to its knees in the next coming decades (which I believe replaces one evil for another). I have seen current day 2nd wave feminism as nothing more than another incantation of communism(in the Stalinist/or Totalist sense) with virtually no new imagination whatsoever and will be very destructive to the individual in the long term. Anyone can convince someone they are the proliteriat class so long as that anyone has enough control of the media.
I mean, look at what the tobacco industries did. Do you really think they gave a crap about "liberating women"? No. All they cared about was getting a new demographic hooked on their product so they used the same line of bull "You're oppressed and order to fight that oppression you need to smoke our product". Pppppffffffttttt Think about it, it's all a lie, just like the term "Over population". | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 11:11:44 AM | One only needs to look at the overwhelming evidence from many years of research done by rational scientists to discover that the phenomenon of world overpopulation is not a lie. Maintaining such a position in the face of reality is an example of the arrogance and ignorance that got us to this critical position in the first place. Even the simple example provided in this thread should cause rational people to think.
"Never argue with an idiot--[she/he] will drag you down to [her/his] level and beat you with experience."
David | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 2:27:05 PM | Humans are a plague on this planet. We really don't belong here. Could you imagine how beautiful the planet would be if there were no people? Look how we have systematically destroyed it. How many species have we eradicated? How many millions of forests have we destroyed to never have them grow back?
In all honesty this planet would be better off without people. | |
|
Dryad
|
Joined: 7/19/2005
Msg: 166 | |
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 2:56:16 PM | Overpopulation: where the population exceeds the carrying capacity of its habitat, resulting in increased mortality rates and potentially temporarily reduced birth rates.
Overpopulation is a function of the density of the individuals compared to the resources they need to survive. (i.e. It’s a ratio of population:resources. Let’s say water is the limiting resource. If the population is 10, but there’s only enough drinking water for 5 people, then that environment is overpopulated. If the population is 300 individuals but there’s sufficient water for 200, then it is not overpopulated.)
Not all countries populations are growing (i.e. most developed nations). However, populations in which raised mortality can be attributed to resource scarcity can be considered overpopulated (even if it is a distribution issue, because the reality is the resources aren’t getting to the population). And these situations do exist, even within some of the most developed nations.
When trying to tackle issues of overpopulation, it’s good to keep in mind exactly what detrimental impacts are trying to be prevented. There are cases where the proposed ‘solutions’ are as unethical and undesireable as the issues stemming from overpopulation.
-------------------------
Rather nice overview of population trends and basic demographics here (ah, this thread’s giving me flashbacks of teaching Human Geography):
http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/human_pop/human_pop.html
http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/pop_socio/pop_socio.html
To point out the consumption divide between rich and poor nations it’s interesting to do an ecological footprint (how large an area does your life style require). How many worlds would we need if everyone lived at your consumption rate?
http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.asp#
--------------------
Although the birth rate in Canada is only currently around 1.5 birth/women, which as you pointed out is below the replacement rate of 2.1 (Statistics Canada, 2003). Canada also has a net increase from migration, which places our growth rate at about replacement. Keep in mind there’s a lag effect of historically high birth rates, with current immigration rates, the moderate population forecasts expect to grow into the low 40 millions before stabilizing.
(http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/research-stats/demographics.pdf)
------------------------
Russia’s a bit of an interesting, and slightly unusual case study. Their population growth rate is very low partially due to the fact their death rate is also rising. However; immigration into the country is somewhat slowing the rate of decline. Pre-conception birth control is not banned there, but largely unavailable. The problems in Russia with alternative contraceptives are widely studied and fraught with issues of quality, availability and distribution are significant; available oral contraceptives are limited to imported high-dosage pills (many side effects); diaphragms were made in only one size; the quality of Russian-produced condoms was poor and the only two condom factories stopped production because they could not afford to import latex; the single factory producing IUDs shut down (1). Now, add to the fact that the medical systems funding is tied to numbers treated, and abortions give better funding then contraception prescriptions. Consequently, abortions are the leading form of birth control and actually outnumber live births (2). Additionally, the rate of infertility in childbearing-aged couples is 13% (US is 7%) partially due to complications from the abortion operation (10-20% complication rate), as well as increasing infertility due to STDs (3).
(1. http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1273/MR1273.ch3.pdf ).
(2. http://www.rand.org/publications/IP/IP162/ ).
(3. http://www.lib.washington.edu/researchaward/award_recipients/geasey_project.pdf )
PS: Hey Dan, glad to see you around and about… thought I’d lost my debating partner…
even though we almost never see eye to eye :) cheers  | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 7:52:21 PM |
Humans are a plague on this planet. We really don't belong here. Could you imagine how beautiful the planet would be if there were no people? Look how we have systematically destroyed it. How many species have we eradicated? How many millions of forests have we destroyed to never have them grow back?
In all honesty this planet would be better off without people.
Well, there's always suicide. If you want to do your part that is.  | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 7:58:07 PM |
PS: Hey Dan, glad to see you around and about… thought I’d lost my debating partner…
even though we almost never see eye to eye :) cheers
Nope. I changed my name and my profile without realizing that I could change my name within the profile I had. To bad wishe I had known. Thus I was unable to contact you because you limit the age of males able to talk to you so I am blocked from your message thingy. I tried to change my age but it won't let me. Since Im not here to meet women romantically I didn't care about my profile at all in the first place.
And yes, it's good to see you too.
P.S. Over population is a scam promoted by globalists who are scum bags and want to rule the world for their own purposes. Many of them are racists, but most of them are just greedy warmongers and just simply care about power and maintaining that power in their own family.
 | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 8:26:31 PM |
" Why else do you think governments invented things like "fake feminism",
why Roe vs Wade and the entire birth control/eugenics programs came into place?
And so is this fear mongering about "over population".
Which is basically why homosexuality is getting such a strong push these days. ...
Personally I believe things like Christianity does the best service to all of those... "
~ hey blueeyeslove, ... how's that campaign against "feminazi's" ? ~  | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/15/2005 8:34:24 PM |
~ hey blueeyeslove, ... how's that campaign against "feminazi's" ? ~
I don't know. It seems like they do enough to discredit themselves along the way without any help from me.
"We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."
Margaret Sanger's December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon's Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.
I bet she's a hoot at raves.  | |
|
Dryad
|
Joined: 7/19/2005
Msg: 171 | |
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/16/2005 5:15:19 AM |
Over population is a scam promoted by globalists who are scum bags and want to rule the world for their own purposes
Ouch, watch the shrapnel as you poison the well.
As a scumbag globalist, I may just decide to be hurt by that remark. :)
To paraphrase Dan Akroyd in dragnet; just the facts sir.
(there are elements of your arguement that would be better served)
Ah, there was a great link Late posted somewhere though that’s a great read, I’ll just have to find it… | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/16/2005 7:04:50 AM | | Well you can be my guest Dan. Don't make a mess though, remember, someone has to clean it up. | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/16/2005 8:55:56 AM | Thank you, dryad, for the links. Please carefully read her post with links.
Dan Lynch, please look at the figures in this link (e.g., graph of world population through time):
http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/human_pop/human_pop.html
I'm not sure I understand why you believe population is not an issue. We simply cannot continue to double the world's population. I can understand having problems with proposed programs to address the population issue, though.
Ecofeminism, like I mentioned before, is very diverse. I think many would object to characterization in simplistic terms. The same with people working on population issues. My comment about the Pope was more a poke at Dallasguy99 (we have an ongoing dynamic.) However, the Pope does have the ability to influence many people. I believe condoms are good for reasons including: they prevent pregnancy (and presumably abortion, as well), reduce transmission of diseases (there many orphans in developing countries due to HIV...), and other reasons. Assuming a goal of the Pope and church is to reduce human suffering, I believe the church should officially say that that condoms are ok (since they reduce suffering for reasons listed above).
After you review the information Dryad presented, you will be able to debate the issue on factual grounds. The Earth is finite and has biophysical limits. At what point would you consider population an important issue? | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/16/2005 9:54:04 AM | There are absolutely no orphans due to HIV. None, anywhere, ever.
Maybe orphans from the flue, or pnemunia but not HIV. | |
|
| world population is too high
Posted: 9/16/2005 10:11:38 AM |
Ouch, watch the shrapnel as you poison the well.
As a scumbag globalist, I may just decide to be hurt by that remark. :)
LOL!
I don't think you have the stomach to be placed in the venue as the people I am referring to.
 | |
|
Home
login 
