Well, since he had those children 45 years ago, it would hardly be practical to retroactively apply the policy.
Overpopulation
- Thread starter Leifer
- Start date
Well, since he had those children 45 years ago, it would hardly be practical to retroactively apply the policy.
farbot
New Member
....takes the machette out of the cupboard... "Kids, would you mind coming over? Not you Ted Jr., you can go and survi...I mean play on the swing."
Charlie Primero
Active Member
MikeC
Closed Account
What makes you think ther is a "correct" population??
Depending upon how we are prepared to exploit the planet and what level of wealth you are prepared to let people have...or withold from them.....there are various levels of supportable populations - I think anything up to 20 billion gets mentioned every now and then (if you are eitehr prepared to allow massive starvation, or fairly draconian land-use laws, GMO, nuclear power, etc), and even 100 billion here!!
If you want everyone to have the same level of wealth & energy use as Americans do now then I imagine it is probably somewhat less.
Depending upon how we are prepared to exploit the planet and what level of wealth you are prepared to let people have...or withold from them.....there are various levels of supportable populations - I think anything up to 20 billion gets mentioned every now and then (if you are eitehr prepared to allow massive starvation, or fairly draconian land-use laws, GMO, nuclear power, etc), and even 100 billion here!!
If you want everyone to have the same level of wealth & energy use as Americans do now then I imagine it is probably somewhat less.
I don't think there's an ideal number. But we can tell when there are too many. If forced to pick, I'd say 10 billion would be the upper end. I'd have no problem with it being lower, but it's not a pressing issue. The first step is to reduce the rate of growth. I'm not in favor of any coercive measures to do this.
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
Over-population is a myth.
Robert Kunzig of National Geographic is on Krys Boyd’s Think right now discussing his article, “Population Seven Billion.” He said he did the calculations, and the entire world could fit in Texas if each person were alloted the same average square feet of living space as in New York City.
Robert Kunzig of National Geographic is on Krys Boyd’s Think right now discussing his article, “Population Seven Billion.” He said he did the calculations, and the entire world could fit in Texas if each person were alloted the same average square feet of living space as in New York City.
cheeple
Member
Pack em and Stack em into small "sustainable" communities sounds like Agenda 21
MikeC
Closed Account
I don't think a single community of all the world's population in Texas sounds anything like "small "sustainable" communities" at all.
Perhaps you could explain how that works in relation to the actual programme??
Perhaps you could explain how that works in relation to the actual programme??
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
I took the argument at face value. Population, (cause) not resources used of said population (effect). If you want to argue resources, I would say that free clean energy is being suppressed and that there IS enough resources required for the entire population to live. Whether we are all in one spot, or spread out. The logistics are always less expensive when you are distributing to a smaller area so this would actually help the problem, if there indeed ever actually is one.
You really need to actually demonstrate that free clean energy is being suppressed before you started basing your arguments on that premise. I really don't see any evidence that it is being suppressed, and far less that it actually exists.
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
It exists.
[h=4] The One Mainstream TV Show To Help You Get Off The Grid – Episode 009 [/h] Aug 13th, 2010 | By Off The Grid Radio
On today’s edition of Off the Grid Radio, Solutions From Science founder Bill Heid and Brian Brawdy broadcast from a mobile unit powered exclusively by wind and solar power. Also, an endorsement of a mainstream TV show that will actually help you prepare for the challenges of ‘off grid’ living.
Listen Now!
[h=4] The One Mainstream TV Show To Help You Get Off The Grid – Episode 009 [/h] Aug 13th, 2010 | By Off The Grid Radio
On today’s edition of Off the Grid Radio, Solutions From Science founder Bill Heid and Brian Brawdy broadcast from a mobile unit powered exclusively by wind and solar power. Also, an endorsement of a mainstream TV show that will actually help you prepare for the challenges of ‘off grid’ living.Listen Now!
Last edited by a moderator:
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
Well, if we packed all those people into Texas, then I think Texas would be over populated in the sense of my own personal comfort and space preferences. I am interpreting overpopulation as literal though. Too many people on the planet, not enough room. All the Texas example demonstrates is that there can't be too many people on the planet because there is still plenty of room for everyone. I am not saying to all group together... I am saying that we can fit the entire population of the world into Texas. Now if we colonized space and the population grew, and then everyone decided to move back to earth and there was no room, then perhaps there would be an overpopulation problem on the planet.
The problem IS grouping together. Cities are like ant colonies. Cities have more population than anywhere else. Do I think the city is overpopulated? Yes! The planet? No! Cities take up less than 1% of the entire mass of land on the planet. The reason cities are overpopulated is because society is forced to use money as an essential means to acquire basic goods to live, and the city is where the majority of commerce (and therefore money) is.
The problem IS grouping together. Cities are like ant colonies. Cities have more population than anywhere else. Do I think the city is overpopulated? Yes! The planet? No! Cities take up less than 1% of the entire mass of land on the planet. The reason cities are overpopulated is because society is forced to use money as an essential means to acquire basic goods to live, and the city is where the majority of commerce (and therefore money) is.
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
Water is a renewable resource. You can even take it out of the air.
Don't worry about mass solutions. Think about the problem with individual solutions, that can affect the masses if they CHOOSE to do them. Jay provided a good example of this.
Last edited by a moderator:
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
Forgive me, but I would really like for you to find something that we agree with, because I have been itching to say "I'm with stupid". I just said it though didn't I. 
I just could not help it! I like your name though. That was a pretty smart reply coming from someone named "stupid" and that makes it funny.
I just could not help it! I like your name though. That was a pretty smart reply coming from someone named "stupid" and that makes it funny.
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
This is not ancient times. Try clicking two hundred dollar bills together instead and see who will sell you irrigation equipment or sell you some firewood.
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
Which brings us back to the problem. The need for money. If people did not NEED money then EVERYONE would be able to afford necessities!
cheeple
Member
Are you talking about some sort of Zeitgeist resource based economy?
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
No. I like money. I am just saying that since people are forced to use it to survive, that prices get raised artificially. The "cost of living" is not getting any cheaper, Cheeple. It all boils down to property tax in my opinion. Once you have purchased something, then you should not be required to continue to pay for it. How long can you run on a treadmill before you fall off? You can only hope that someone set the speed nice and low for you when you are born.
cheeple
Member
I couldnt agree more, there is no such thing as true home ownership in America, anyone who thinks they own their house outright should try not paying their property taxes and see how much they own their home. Plus theirs no such thing as "Cost of living increase" thats the dollar losing value but your on the level so you know that already, and it's only gonna get worse......
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
No I never said that. I just wrote a lengthy explanation and it all got erased by hitting a key accidentally, and undo wont work.
Basically, if I have an apple tree, I won't need to buy apples. If I pay property tax, I'm still buying apples. As soon as I don't pay for the property tax, then the apples are gone.
By the way, the only "SERVICE" that the property tax pays for is education. Look it up. Do you think you are getting your money's worth?
There is no creature known to man, besides man itself... that requires money to survive.
Charlie Primero
Active Member
Overpopulation could be a myth that needs debunking.
Anytime we see a meme being promoted as a priori, we should pause and skeptically evaluate the premise.
Such investigation is especially important when the meme is being employed to support coersion.
Charlie Primero
Active Member
I disagree. I see the Cost of Living getting cheaper. Due to advances in technology and commerce, each human requres far less hours of work per day to acquire life essentials than in years past. The is one reason why the Overpopulation meme is suspect.
cheeple
Member
Charlie, the cost of living is getting cheaper? so cheap in fact people can work less? Dude where do you live? that's preposterous, Food and Energy is through the roof atleast here in California, i was gonna buy cheese whiz at Safeway yesterday $5.25! I spent $9.00 on bologne and salami, $6.99 for Almond Milk, $4.00 for a loaf of Bread, Gas is $4.25 per gallon.
Charlie Primero
Active Member
We are talking about two different "costs". What you describe is not an increase in cost. It is an increase in currency devaluation.
A loaf of bread is not four times more difficult to produce than when the price was $1.00. It merely takes four times more currency units to acquire the same loaf of bread because the currency units are each worth less. That's called Price Inflation, a tax the wealthy impose on the poor.
The cost I am referring to is the amount of human time and labor required to gather the resources necessary for a human to exist. Advances in technology and commerce have driven those way down. Fair market innovations have always tended to do that, and always will. Fear-mongers pushing the Overpopulation meme ignore that.
cheeple
Member
OooOOhhh, ok, I'm not used to talking to people who understand price rising on goods and services is actually the dollar losing value...... I dig it.
cheeple
Member
SD, Thought you'd like this video regarding Property Taxes and the Karl Marx Communist Manifesto;
MikeC
Closed Account
I can't comment on that without being a bit unkind!!
Taking that argument at face falue is a serious error.
According to it the world would not be overpopulated until you couldn't fit another person onto any land area of the planet. New York has a population density of 26,403 people per square mile (10,194/km²) according to Wiki. the Earth's land surface area is somewhere between about 149-150 million square miles according to this site, so overpopulation will only be reached when there are something like 4 TRILLION people on the planet.
I guess they would all be eating seafood........
I agree that there is POTENTIALLY enough energy, and certainly enough food at he moment - that is why I do not think 7 billion is an unsustainable population. Even Agenda 21 does nto say 7 billion is unsustainable.
Logistics are not always less expensive if distributing to a smaller area - logistics are cheaper when less of them is required, which usually means having the consumer close to the supplier, and hence a distributed population closer to its required resources.
scombrid
Senior Member.
SeriouslyDebatable
Active Member
People pay for things in currency, not in labor. The fact is that minimum wage has barely gone up compared to the devaluation of the currency. Rent has gone up too.
Mat
Member
Here's Robert Christian's book (along with some other stuff)
https://www.metabunk.org/files/Common Sense Renewed.pdf
Sample:
He talks about "a few generations of single child families", so I guess he does want some significant reduction. I think it would still take well over 100 years to get down to 0.5 billion though. As China demonstrates, having a single child policy does not actually reverse population growth, as the existing population tends to both have children and then not die for 50 years.
I think the Guidestones precepts are profoundly benign, it saddens me how conspiracy theorists misinterpret them... or don't read all of them
Last edited by a moderator:
Charlie Primero
Active Member
The cost I am referring to is the amount of human time and labor required to gather the resources necessary for a human to exist. Advances in technology and commerce have driven those way down. Fair market innovations have always tended to do that, and always will.
Fear-mongers pushing the Overpopulation meme ignore that.
Similar threads
