All About Population Control
- Thread starter TheLastMohican
- Start date
hmmm! long live the condom!
well to be honest humans will never be able to control themselves as there will always be irresponsible people.
I don't think there will be an 'ideal' solution. Sometimes you have to make the least bad choice out of a bunch of terrible choices!
This the world we live in!
Slant please dont get into politics you scare me!
well to be honest humans will never be able to control themselves as there will always be irresponsible people.
I don't think there will be an 'ideal' solution. Sometimes you have to make the least bad choice out of a bunch of terrible choices!
This the world we live in!
Slant please dont get into politics you scare me!
awhhhhh!
hahah well Im Irish were fucked!
we still have those huge catholic farming families!
haven't said that the oll catholic church seems to be losing its influence on the country the last few years!
Here's a chart showing the population percentage increase per year for each nation. As you can see, Ireland would be safe for a while yet.
Good point, we wouldn't want to endanger any other species in the process. How to inflict massive casualties on humanity while leaving the environment unharmed?
swine flu? already done? vasectomys for all!or good oll fashioned hand to hand warfare!
Here's a chart showing the population percentage increase per year for each nation. As you can see, Ireland would be safe for a while yet.
well were one of the highest in western europe! thank God for those African countries!
:\
Why does population control have to involve murder? Do we want to seriously talk about a method that has been given serious thought? Dehumanizing others for being born into an impoverished country and being unable to transcend this nearly unbeatable poverty is probably not a good answer, nor is it a very creative answer.
**shrug**
Why does population control have to involve murder? Do we want to seriously talk about a method that has been given serious thought? Dehumanizing others for being born into an impoverished country and being unable to transcend this nearly unbeatable poverty is probably not a good answer, nor is it a very creative answer.
**shrug**
Sure, let's do that. That would be more productive than discussing morally objectionable plans that will never happen.So, semi-realistic solution #1: Stop exporting food to places that lack the resources and wealth to grow their own. Many third world countries have far exceeded their natural population capacity, and will continue to do so as long as we keep artificially increasing it. Two simple facts dominate this: we will never catch up, and we will have major problems ourselves if we keep trying. The industrial nations' populations are leveling off or declining, while the developing ones' are growing faster. That is unsustainable, and the longer we let it go, the bigger of a future calamity we are setting up for.
I think the criteria for elimination should also be the countries with the highest increase percentages as well as the longest expected life spans.
Fact is the highest percentage of increase is mainly located in a counrty where a significant part of the population also has a very short life expectancy due to disease and war.
From a Darwinian point of view, it may also be the country from which a more evolved humanoid immune system will emerge. Thereby increasing the survivability of the human race as a whole.
Well, Chopsifer, feel free to throw some creative ideas on the table. We all welcome new ideas, viewpoints etc. Come on! Jump in! Throw some wood on the fire!
Fact is the highest percentage of increase is mainly located in a counrty where a significant part of the population also has a very short life expectancy due to disease and war.
From a Darwinian point of view, it may also be the country from which a more evolved humanoid immune system will emerge. Thereby increasing the survivability of the human race as a whole.
Well, Chopsifer, feel free to throw some creative ideas on the table. We all welcome new ideas, viewpoints etc. Come on! Jump in! Throw some wood on the fire!
Actually, the Chinese have had to address this problem.
The population will take care of itself. Abortion should never be considered legal, used, and funded by a government just because someone did not and will not assume
RESPONSIBILITY.
To me it is a sickening thought. The government that follows that path will insult humanity as a whole. Don't know what causes that? Duh!
The population will take care of itself. Abortion should never be considered legal, used, and funded by a government just because someone did not and will not assume
RESPONSIBILITY.
To me it is a sickening thought. The government that follows that path will insult humanity as a whole. Don't know what causes that? Duh!
So, semi-realistic solution #1: Stop exporting food to places that lack the resources and wealth to grow their own. Many third world countries have far exceeded their natural population capacity, and will continue to do so as long as we keep artificially increasing it. Two simple facts dominate this: we will never catch up, and we will have major problems ourselves if we keep trying. The industrial nations' populations are leveling off or declining, while the developing ones' are growing faster. That is unsustainable, and the longer we let it go, the bigger of a future calamity we are setting up for.
But that future calamity will be hastened by such a denial of a basic necessity. Food riots (leading to the inevitable madmen, despots and ego-maniacal war mongering maniacs of whom there are countless examples in history, countless who will remain undocumented, and currently in authority as we live) , migration to more well off areas (which wouldn't be well received by the indigenous populations).
It's possible, but only if we batten down the hatched, fortify our borders and wait out the siege.
So, semi-realistic solution #1: Stop exporting food to places that lack the resources and wealth to grow their own. Many third world countries have far exceeded their natural population capacity, and will continue to do so as long as we keep artificially increasing it. Two simple facts dominate this: we will never catch up, and we will have major problems ourselves if we keep trying. The industrial nations' populations are leveling off or declining, while the developing ones' are growing faster. That is unsustainable, and the longer we let it go, the bigger of a future calamity we are setting up for.
Hm. I understand what you are saying and agree to a certain extent. I do think that we should perhaps scrap programs that result in large amounts of funds being distributed that keep third world countries in poverty. Yes, they do feed many people and they do help spread humanitarian efforts that have a great length of meaning, but they also don't seem to do very much to empower the impoverished to soar over economic hurdles.
I personally adhere to the thought that, since overpopulation is such an important global issue, industrial and postindustrial nations have a responsibility to plant seeds of economic growth and stability within these countries, starting with more funding for high quality, affordable education. It might seem like a broken windows theory, but I am of the belief that the quality and availability of education has a strong relationship with availability of economic success and longer, healthier lives. If longer, healthier lives are achieved, the population problem in undeveloped countries should eventually become more like those in industrial/post-industrial societies.
It might be the F and the J in me, but it feels to me (haha) like viewing anyone as expendable in problem solving situations is admitting that one is capable of doing a better job. If we can solve it effectively -and- minimize loss of life/suffering, I prefer that solution.
Sex is and will always remain the cheapest form of entertainment for the masses.
Therefore there will always be unintended pregnancies.
If there was any event where there was a lack of food in the US and people were fighting for it, I'd be safe. The mormons here have secret underground tunnels and plus they have those towers of grains they've been saving since the church started. If you're a mormon, they'll take care of you. And plus they have so many missionaries and men that I'm pretty sure the utah borders would be protected from attackers. If you're prepping for such a situation, that is one good reason (in fact the only reason) to live in utah and be mormon.
I too believe that education is the cure for the world ailments.
However now we run into the problem of culture, tradition, and in a few cases religion clashing with education.
How are we Post-Industrial and Industrial nations to strike an individual balance in these very rigid lifestyles in order to educate the young generations, without attracting the ire and possibly violent repercussions of those in charge? People as a whole are VERY resistant to change. The education course, while IMO the one most certain to spark a long lasting more permanent change, is also a very long one in the execution.
After all, the illiteracy rate in the US in 1952 was still like 2.5%. But just because someone can read, doesn't make them educated. 'Education' is something much more elaborate. It's the ability to compile, correlate, and interpret data. It's the ability to reach a conclusion on your own. It's a difficult thing to teach (and it seems that here in the US they've stopped trying to teach it all together).
So, while this is IMO the solution to the problem. The new problem arises in its execution. Maybe we could dedicate Antarctica to the purpose, build a ginormous teaching facility whereby each country is required to send a percentage of their children there to be educated? Fostering not only an understanding of the various cultures in the world but also establishing a basic and common foundation of education?
IDK, just throwing out random ideas to build on yours....