Yes, all of those resources should be included in calculations on population densities. In fact, it's called the "Population Footprint", I think. I.e., the population of NYC does NOT grow their own vegetables and meat, therefor those supplies must be grown outside the city ...which would be considered IN the NYC footprint. Ditto for waste, garbage, etc. As I understand it, man's biggest problem is going to be fresh water supplies. That's one thing that is NOT renewable, but is in very short supply all over the world. Fresh water will be the "killer" for us, not oil or energy. Baron Max
Baron: So there is of course a problem. When I say it is realized, what in the world are they thinking? Haven't people been denying this in this thread? That it is realized, that they ARE thinking. What in the world are they thinking......
of course it does, pay attention to whats bee said. the obvious insight is that on planet with LIMITED RESOURCES, you cannot double and treble the demand via overpopulation of humans if someone offered the sick reponse that that's cool cause e have extincted and are extinctiing countless othe species, well believe it or not, this planet is not just for humans, but consitrs of a interelation ofecosystems all forming a very intelligent dynamic balance we propaganderized modern humans are soooo cut off from thenatrual world in rhe concret power suckin cities, we have lost CONTACT with Nature
Your "ACTUA" evidence is pretty weak. The extinction of species is hardly a new thing and hardly the exclusive domain of humans and industry (think dinosaurs). I understand the problem. My point, however, is that overpopulation is not a problem existing today, it is only a projected problem for the future. We are nowhere near the resource limitations as indicated by their market prices. I have no doubt that if current trends continue we will eventually hit a limit, but the facts don't support the conclusion that we are near it right now. -Dale
In my personal experience (4 years at poverty income) the US definition of "poverty" is actually a very comfortable life, even without taking advantage of any government programs. The same is not true of poverty in other countries. -Dale
Go ahead and chant your aphorisms and slogans if they make you feel good. I will keep paying attention to the evidence. -Dale
Well, I sorta' agree with that statement ...except for the vague term "near". But even while your basic argument is somewhat true, there is, right now, much REAL starvation in the world. I.e., the wealth is NOT distributed evenly, and therefor, in some/many parts of the world, over-population is ALREADY a major problem. So unless the more wealthy nations bring those starving people into their own nations, then there will STILL be great over-population problems in the present world ...not to even mention in the "near" future. Baron Max
i rea this just comin from your regular rant against black people in New Orleans and poor Blcak people in general. does your compassion only happen for people in other 'exotic' locations like, cant you make connections. seeee a fukin pattern? dont answer, i already know!
Where was I talking or implying anything about compassion? ...for anyone? You seem to think that ye're quite good at reading between the lines ...it's too bad ye're not actually reading the lines that were written!! Try it sometime, you might actually learn something, tho' it's doubtful. Baron Max
Agreed, "near" is vague, which is problematic since we (or at least I) don't know how much advance warning the increase in prices would give. Therefore I see nothing wrong with taking a long-term view and addressing the issue now before it actually becomes a problem. What I dispute is only the idea that the world is already overpopulated and therefore technology, science, and the west is inherently evil. As you correctly point out, this is not a matter of global overpopulation but a matter of distribution. My personal solution would be to really push the industrial and economic development of 3rd world countries. Not only would that really help the distribution issues you mentioned as infrastructure develops, but it should also reduce the birth rate and population growth rate of these areas. -Dale
In July 2004, Hispanics numbered 41.3 million out of a national population of nearly 293.7 million. They have the fastest growth rate among the nation's major racial and ethnic groups. In the 1990s, they accounted for 40 percent of the country's population increase. From 2000 to 2004, that figure grew to 49 percent. The census report does not include local details, but previous figures have shown Hispanics accounting for about a third of the Washington area's growth from 2000 to 2003 and making up 9 percent of the regional population. The Brookings Institution has dubbed Washington an area of Hispanic "hyper-growth" and noted that the District has a higher share of prosperous Hispanics than the rest of the country. Over the past two decades, the Hispanic population has swelled largely because of immigrants. Although immigration continues at a fast pace, the mix changed this decade, and new immigrants are now outnumbered by babies born in the United States and overwhelmingly likely to remain here. One in five children under 18 is Hispanic, according to the census figures. "It's due to the settling of immigrants having children here," said Jeffrey S. Passel of the Pew Hispanic Institute. But, he said, "over half of Hispanic adults are immigrants. It takes time for that to play itself out, but by the time today's children grow up, that will have changed." The future of those young people has become the topic of a debate among advocates and scholars, with some noting that Hispanics already have lower average education levels than other Americans and that their children could face a future at the bottom. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/08/AR2005060802381.html
A "solution" is not worth a fuck ...UNLESS... you can provide some good, workable methods of achieving the goal. And I doubt that most sub-Sharan tribes would be able to utilize high-speed computers to grow more food for their starving tribe. ...maybe beat them into plowshares? Please, I'm not trying to be condescending, I'm trying to point out that your idea(s) have probably all been tried or are being tried ...some of them being tried for years and years, with little or not satisfactory results. Baron Max
because i know your views off by heart, and tey are very very ugly, and racist this threa i started is not about what you mean at all. it is lookin at the human SPECIES...! and when you look at the larger picture and not blame parts of it, yo see it is how we are with each other that is cusing all this overpopulation involved is understanding Ecology, and how all species and ecosystems are interelated. how x doing whatever over here will effect y doin shit over there etc etc yto dig this huge problem u gottta GO TO!!!!!!!! LOse you fragmented racist, reductive, and materialistic indoctrination, or u will not understand it, and create yet more conflict
Good heavens, J.B., haven't you learned not to respond to anything the Duendy posts? If not, please take this moment to reinforce that basic principle of debating at the sciforums. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max
Hello, all. Just had to toss out my two cents worth on this one. First of all, we most certainly have BOTH an over-population problem AND a distribution problem. While there is, in theory, enough food to go around if we just share and play nice, history tells us that isn't likely to happen. Further, even if it did, the balance between the carrying capacity of the land and the mouths needing to be supported from/on it, is very precarious. Climate events, which have become increasingly intense over recent years could easily and quickly destroy what possible balance there is. So I have some suggestions for possible ways to address these things. 1. stop rewarding people for increasing their brood beyond 2. 2. stop quibbling over abortion and veiw it as both NOT YOUR BUSINESS unless it is your body or your signficants, and help public funds pay for such things too. For those into the dollar aspect, you'll save money and food and space, for those with religious or philosophical oppositions, live with it and let God sort it out. 3. Quit making people live who should be allowed to die... and I mean people of any age who are in vegetative states. And quit having 80 year old women with breast cancer (my grandmother was one) go through painful and expensive treatments... make 'em as comfortable as possible, but do NOTHING to prolong life in that circumstance.... and I could list a number more. 4. Equip homes/appartments/condos with black water and grey water systems to promote more efficient water treatment and reuse. While you're at it, equip them all with solar and/or wind power systems to help offset usage. 5. encourage Earth Friendly practices, like not allowing pavement to cover every inch of ground, allowing 'unsightly' clotheslines to be an option for laundry, planting home gardens, composting and rain barrels. oh... and one more thing while I"m rolling... everybody gets 3 'free' kills in their lifetime. Catch is that you can't start using your free kills until you are over 25... and it will be in the interest of EVERYONE to NOT be on anyone else's list. so there you have it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
We're on the way to sorting out our overpopulation problem--just wait til the seas start rising, and all the major rivers of Asia dry up because the snow cover of the Himalayan mountains is gone.
