I agree

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

WTF's world.

You oughta see the view from the other side!

That is the point LL. To many people equals to much shit.

My worldview is to limit all the shit we are causing that the natural world can not deal with.

Originally Posted by WTF

Even so, that doesn't mean forceful measures must be taken. "Government propaganda, taxes, giving every sexually active human being access to modern contraception and backup abortion, and, especially, giving women absolutely equal rights and opportunities with men might very well get the global population shrinkage required if a collapse is to be avoided," Ehrlich said.



In fact, providing free, reliable birth control to women could prevent between 41 percent and 71 percent of abortions in the United States, according to a study detailed in the Oct. 4, 2012, issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology.



.

[WTF]

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/diam...d08_index.html

Among the developing countries that are seeking to increase per capita consumption rates at home, China stands out. It has the world's fastest growing economy, and there are 1.3 billion Chinese, four times the United States population. The world is already running out of resources, and it will do so even sooner if China achieves American-level consumption rates. Already, China is competing with us for oil and metals on world markets.
Per capita consumption rates in China are still about 11 times below ours, but let's suppose they rise to our level. Let's also make things easy by imagining that nothing else happens to increase world consumption — that is, no other country increases its consumption, all national populations (including China's) remain unchanged and immigration ceases. China's catching up alone would roughly double world consumption rates. Oil consumption would increase by 106 percent, for instance, and world metal consumption by 94 percent.
If India as well as China were to catch up, world consumption rates would triple. If the whole developing world were suddenly to catch up, world rates would increase elevenfold. It would be as if the world population ballooned to 72 billion people (retaining present consumption rates).
Some optimists claim that we could support a world with nine billion people. But I haven't met anyone crazy enough to claim that we could support 72 billion. Yet we often promise developing countries that if they will only adopt good policies — for example, institute honest government and a free-market economy — they, too, will be able to enjoy a first-world lifestyle. This promise is impossible, a cruel hoax: we are having difficulty supporting a first-world lifestyle even now for only one billion people.

[joe bloe]

Obviously there is a limit to the number of people the Earth can support without devastating the environment and creating a quality of life that no one would want.

The current trend towards global wealth redistribution is counter productive in the area of population control, at least in the short term. Nature has a brutal way of preventing overpopulation in third world countries, mainly famine and disease. Without foreign aid from the first world, the third world's population would probably never get out of control.

First world countries are already controlling their population growth extremely well, probably too well. Without immigration from third world countries, Europe's population would be shrinking. The same is true for Japan and other first world countries.

My guess is the advances we've made in our ability to produce food, and consequently prevent mass starvation will continue and possibly accelerate. Like population growth, growth in technology is also exponential. With advances in medicine, food production and cheap energy production, the Earth may be able to support a population that far exceeds the current one.

Ray Kurzweil predicts an explosion in technology that will transform the way we live, in ways we can not imagine. He predicts an increase in "intelligence and intellectual capability" that exceeds the current level a billion fold. He says it will happen by 2045. Kurzweil's prediction may be a long shot, but if he's right, population control will probably be a non-issue in the next generation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cc5gIj3jz44

[Whirlaway]

........

[WTF]

well then joe, we should not worry about entitlement reform...since Ray Kurzwiel predicts a technology boom. Do you agree with that? Medical care will just be so cheap and great you know. Don't you find it strange how we pick and choose what we consider crisis or potential crisis?

[CuteOldGuy]

So, we should deem anything a crisis that WPF deems a crisis.

Hypocrisy, thy name is WPF.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by WTF

well then joe, we should not worry about entitlement reform...since Ray Kurzwiel predicts a technology boom. Do you agree with that? Medical care will just be so cheap and great you know. Don't you find it strange how we pick and choose what we consider crisis or potential crisis?

Kurzweil's prediction is one possible future. It's far from guaranteed. We need to proceed based on the assumption that we won't get bailed out by technology. If we do, it's icing on the cake. We shouldn't count on it. Hoping to win the lottery is a poor way to plan for retirement.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

That is the point LL. ToO many people equals toO much shit.

Only if you sit around and whine about it ... like you do.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

So, we should deem anything a crisis that WPF deems a crisis.

Hypocrisy, thy name is WPF.

That is not what I said asshole.

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Kurzweil's prediction is one possible future. It's far from guaranteed. We need to proceed based on the assumption that we won't get bailed out by technology. If we do, it's icing on the cake. We shouldn't count on it. Hoping to win the lottery is a poor way to plan for retirement.

I agree totally.

While I hope there will be advances where the rest of the world can consume as we do and there be no dire output from that input, I highly doubt it.

It is not really population control as much as it is a consumption problem.

Per capita consumption rates in China are still about 11 times below ours...If India as well as China were to catch up, world consumption rates would triple. If the whole developing world were suddenly to catch up, world rates would increase elevenfold. It would be as if the world population ballooned to 72 billion people (retaining present consumption rates).


What I find strange is that some on here think entitlement reform is needd (Count me as one of those) but I also believe that the world's limited resources are a major problem too.

Not sure if you agree with that or not.

The good thing is , we will not see really bad results from our inactions in our life time, we are the slow boiling frog but we will die of old age before the heat gets us!

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Only if you sit around and whine about it ... like you do.

It is more a consumption problem than a population problem.

Per capita consumption rates in China are still about 11 times below ours...If India as well as China were to catch up, world consumption rates would triple. If the whole developing world were suddenly to catch up, world rates would increase elevenfold. It would be as if the world population ballooned to 72 billion people (retaining present consumption rates).

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

It is more a consumption problem than a population problem.

Yes, we do have solutions, by way of examples and history...

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Yes, we do have solutions, by way of examples and history...

LOL, but that was China 50 years ago.

Like I said, it is a consumption problem.

It is a math problem just like entitlements is a math problem. Simple math really.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

LOL, but that was China 50 years ago.

Like I said, it is a consumption problem.

It is a math problem just like entitlements is a math problem. Simple math really.

2 + 2 = 4 is "simple math" .... and "entitlements" are not just a "math problem" ....


.. it used to be a "math problem" ... until the first, second, third generations became "entitled" to receive assistance from the U.S. government. Now it is an addiction.....

.. just like gas guzzling jacked up 4x4 trucks, high-performance sports cars, and the obsession with "keeping up with the Joneses in the neighborhood" ... for a newer model vehicle that will make "us" look hotter and show off "our" relative "wealth" ....

The slogan: "The one who dies with the most toys wins" is the motto of this generation.

History will repeat itself:

[i'va biggen]

LL knows shit!!!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

LL knows shit!!!

Yes, which is why I knocked you off so quickly ... smell alone does it.