Well, I guess I should start a thread in here SOME time... The blackout in NYC got me thinking more about something that's been on my mind for a while. Agree or disagree: Overpopulation is the single biggest social problem facing the world today.
Disagree. Pollution would be higher. I'm sure I could come up with more if I think about it for a while.
On tv last night, there was program on the poverty in Africa and asked for pledges. When you see children starving down to their skin and bones, unable to even blink to get the swarming flies away, it puts everything in perspective. All your problems and unhappiness is really nothing compared to their suffering. The poor in Africa don't even have the basic necessities that you or I take for granted. They wish they had a black out to complain about. That's petty when their only hierarchy of need is food and safety. While still looking out for number one, I think the biggest problem is those who are able to help are not opening their arms to help others.
agreed...very well said. how miniscule are my problems when juxtaposed to those in third world nations across the globe?
Aren't you a little touchy about this, RM95? And anyway, since when is it wrong to pray for anybody? One of my friends (my Sierra Club, Appalachian Trail hiking, bumper-sticker infested pick-up driving, alternative-lifestyle living friend) asks God to bless Saddam Hussein. Trader-Jorge is a piece of cake compared to Saddam! T_J can be abrasive; he admits to that. However, he doesn't deserve to be ganged up on by those who do. That is bullying, granted virtual, but still bullying. There is, afterall, a cadre of back-slapping liberals which patrols these virtual halls in search of upstart conservatives.
nope. most of the world's resources are being consumed (or should we say 'wasted') by only a fraction of the world's population, just as most of the world's pollution is produced by them. if we can use what we got more efficiently and judiciously, there'd be plenty to go around for everyone.
We Americans have absolutely no idea how fortunate we are. Not a clue. I know I don't. If I did, I wouldn't consume and waste so much electricity, water and food -- just to name a few. Because of some cosmic crapshoot, we were born here instead of on the African savannah or in an Iraqi ghetto. So we feel justified (even entitled) to do whatever we want to this world, regardless of the wide-reaching ramifications. Why should I drive a fuel-efficient car instead of an SUV? Or recycle? I'm an American. Overpopulation is a terrible problem that has to be dealt with. But at this point, the greatest threat to our planet is American consumerism and it's creeping influence on the rest of the world. If the billions in India or China woke up tomorrow living the "American lifestyle" -- complete with gas-guzzling SUVs, fast-food diet, credit card debt and sweatshop clothing -- the global infrastructure (and environment) would immediately collapse. Yet, because of globalization, that's exactly where we're headed. Shouldn't that tell us something?
Yeah, maybe a little. Someone starting a thread with the sole reason to embarrass you will do that to you. I may have made a horrible comment to you years ago, but I didn't start a thread to do it, did I? He'll be happy to have a fellow martyr.
I read somewhere one time where scientists calculated that the world is fertile enough to feed something like 15 billion people comfortably, were everything divided evenly and no one overindulged. I'm not sure what the population is right now, but when I read that article it was't all that far off, and at the rate we are populating would be over that number quite soon. Sure, we will improve technology over the years and harvest things more efficiently, but we are still going to reach a breaking point population-wise where they will be no possible way our resources can support the sheer number of people that need them. Unfortunately, I have no idea what the solution will be to this problem.
The world population right now is around 6 billion. By the way, I've never heard of any 'scientific' or 'expert' predictions which turned out to be accurate or even nearly accurate.
Mother Nature has her own agenda. There is not a number that can be picked as a limit or an ideal. Terra will always throw us for a loop when we least expect it. In my opinion, we are over-populated already. Austin certainly is. One of the worst things this administration is doing internationally is placing unrealistic restrictions on aid for birth control. In fairness, it is continuing policies begun by the Reagan/Bush Sr. administrations that were changed, for the better (in my opinion), by Clinton. I hope a new administration will return to reality regarding slowing the freight train of world overpopulation. We are headed for a wreck of global proportions.
Frankly, though I stand by the n substance of my last post the language is too imflammatory. I have edited it accordingly.
Post reworded to be less objectionable and personal. *********** There are a number of current arguments advanced against the instinctual feeling that something should be done immediately without making excuses to feed these people. Some argue that we should not supply these people with more money or food as they are getting food and money according to their marginal utility in the market economy. This is a total abomination of the technique of economic analysis and shows what happens when we apply market models or any other technique in a moral vacuum. Another rationalization and excuse for inaction is that if we give them food, it would just sap their motivation to work and weaken the development of personal responsibility. This is a sort of perversion of pop psychology and does have a certain naive appeal due to its legitimate application in other contexts.. Another obvious source of food for these people is government aid raised through taxes (theft to Libertarians). Those who use Libertarian analysis in a moral vacuum would call this an immoral "taking", a term favored by conservative legal types. It is also not parieto effcient to use terminology again from those who worship the market as a sort of idol. A different source of rationalizing why it should not be treated as the equivalent of war or an all out emergency to feed these people is the perversion of the idea of Christian charity in the service of conservatism and the idolatry of the market. It is argued that the only thing that can be done is to pray and hope that private charity given out of the goodness of the hearts of individual Christians might come forward one day before these people starve to death. The final argument is that we would like to, but we just don't have the food or money to do so. This argument, while also intuitive, is not backed by such facts as the billions that are spent to pay American wheat and corn producers not to produce as it will lead to falling prices. In a current real world example we choose to give $500-700 billion in unnecessary tax breaks mainly to the well off (a recent analysis puts Bill Gates' share at $83 million from just the dividend tax reduction ) and spend $600 billion for an unecessary war rather than feed these people. As they say a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money.
Well, unless you think that the food potential of the earth is somehow infinite, then the point still stands. We will eventually reach a time when there are literally more people than it is possible to feed. No amount of guilt-inducing infomercials will change that. The actual number and its accuracy according to this one source that I can't even remember is not entirely relevant. I suppose one might believe that we will continue to find ways to improve the agricultural efficiency, but unless something changes, I think the population is going to increase much faster than technology progresses in that area. By the way, are you referring to only population scientific predicitons, or scientific predictions in general? Because I'm pretty sure that if you mean any scientific or "expert" prediction, I could find plenty that were highly accurate.
Disagree. The biggest social problem facing the world today is the placation of tyrants and oppressive political systems.
I gotta hear this. I assume you are talking about the tyranny of Bush, DeLay, et al, but I'd like to hear how this is the biggest problem, and which tyrants and oppressive political systems you are talking about. China? North Korea? Iran? Egypt? Pakistan? India? Israel? Syria? Turkey? If our relationship with them is "placation" what should our relationship to them be? Diplomacy by ultimatum? Military action?
yeah, it tells us we better nuke them now, before they get SUVs, too but seriously, we need to address the population problem in conjunction with other actions, particularly energy conservation and a real commitment to the use of renewable sources.
