World population explosion

[Boob Johnson]

The answer seems simple to me, HAVE LESS CHILDREN.

If the global birth rate can be kept under 2 then the global population should fall in a consistent manageable manner.

Sure there will be short term financial burdens as there will be an over abundance of older citizens that will require support through their twilight years but it should only be temporary.

If only it was that easy. I would imagine it would take an incalculable length of time to make that a reality, not saying that we shouldn't be striving towards that goal.

[riffer]

You know, while we're on the subject of Soylent Green:

I got a really bad reception the other day in the work lunchroom when I mused that a possible solution to some of these problems would be to convert the world's dead people to biofuels.

But I reckon it could be a goer. We just have to get over our cultural problems with it. It's the ultimate organ donation.

Or am I just sick?

[Dave Lobster]

You're still alive ain't ya Dave?

I can't get in KFC.. wrong colour..

[Boob Johnson]

I can't get in KFC.. wrong colour..

:slap:

[NinjaNanna]

If only it was that easy. I would imagine it would take an incalculable length of time to make that a reality, not saying that we shouldn't be striving towards that goal.

Why shouldn't it be that simple, unless you believe the world has already past the point of no return, then halting the population growth then reversing it should be all it takes.

[Boob Johnson]

Why shouldn't it be that simple, unless you believe the world has already past the point of no return, then halting the population growth then reversing it should be all it takes.

The devil is in the details

[Manxman]

Pffft. Wind the clock back however far you like and there will always have been comments that the world is overstocked with humans.

Funny though, cos we always seem to get by, either through technological innovation, farming efficiency or some other smart invention through the ages.

Isn't the problem around who is in charge? Unfortunately, the people who need food the most have dipshit leaders, who couldn't manage their way out of a wet paper bag and have no idea about providing for their people, or managing the population through improved sex education/contraception, etc.

Slightly off topic, but yesterday I came across an article that said back in 1972, Time Magazine (no less) was publishing articles about how the world's most eminent scientists were worried about - guess what - global cooling!!! and how we all were heading for imminent demise (flared trousers and all). Does the theme sound familiar? Oh, they also said that there was no proof that humans were the cause of this (one theory was that it was caused by comets - no shit ).

So, where's the proof the we're causing global warming? Hang on, that last sentence assumes that global warming is a fact... I say: who conclusively knows this, particularly given how scientists have sort of been wrong in the past (flat earth, global cooling, etc)? Heck, we went through a Little Ice Age between 1500 and 1800, where the Thames froze over for 2 months and ice was 11 inches thick. Methinks nature has more control over the planet than we give it credit for and has its own way of re-balancing things...

I'm a sceptic (did ya guess). After all, who really knows what is happening and what the real causes are. Maybe there aren't any and it's all a natural cycle...after all who caused the last Ice Age???? And the subsequent global warming (cos that's what it would have felt like, relatively, if you'd been living in an igloo in the middle of Edinburgh at the time)???

This ETS thing is fundamentally flawed in my opinion and simply another means of extracting $ out of taxpayers pockets into this, and other, government's pockets - thereby becoming the first global tax in history.

Dr /thingy/ was on telly the other day saying it was a rort and that it could cost NZ between 20 and 80 BILLION dollars in the next 30 years, depending on how quickly this government sign us up...and guess who's paying? You and me and our kids. Bloody good onya mate for challenging the assumptions that are put in front of us as fact.

Sure, live less wastefully, more responsibly and more socially. That's great, but you & I aren't going to change the world. Fact. There are problems closer to home on that front - just have a look at the side of the road next time you're a passenger in a car or on a bus/coach. The plastic bags, bottles, big mac packets parked up in the gutters and grass verges in good ol' 'clean, green' NZ is nowt short of a national disgrace (I'm really into the rant thing now, eh?). That's something we can change.

There aren't enough people who query and challenge these dangerous assumptions - and that's because the social 'climate' isn't right (although I believe the pendulum is swinging back) and it's simply too easy to accept the latest trend. For every doomsayer, there'll be one (only less vocal, cos it ain't fashionable) that says it isn't so.

I'm more than happy to do my bit if someone can objectively and conclusively prove it to me...

[Laava]

Ever seen the Ben Elton movie, "Stark". Was basically when the worlds resources became unable to cope and some millionaire sets off into space in a Star Ark, hence the name, and sets off nukes on earth so he can come back and repopulate. Good idea really, coined the term Total Toxic Overload which was the basic premise for the movie. Shot in Aussie too so lots of "yeah,nah!"

[Mikkel]

be a good start getting rid of all the zuki riders......... then honda........... then yamaha........... Leaving the kwakas to rule the world..

Amen brother! I have 2 - I'll live for 200 years!


As for over-population - I'm sure mother earth is going to sort us out if we get out of line.

Truth be told, it's not so much a matter of 'how many people can this planet sustain' as 'how many people can this planet sustain with a lifestyle that matches ours'...

[Dargor]

Funny though, cos we always seem to get by, either through technological innovation, farming efficiency or some other smart invention through the ages.

Thats true, but it would be alot better to improving our max-population through science before we step over it and have it impact on everybodys quality of life.

Isn't the problem around who is in charge? Unfortunately, the people who need food the most have dipshit leaders, who couldn't manage their way out of a wet paper bag and have no idea about providing for their people, or managing the population through improved sex education/contraception, et

Yes and that is unfortunate, but why would those contries change when we with our prosperity dont even have a stance on the issue.

So, where's the proof the we're causing global warming?

Here and here Or are you some amazing scientist with a good reputation who wants to argue that.

-snip-
particularly given how scientists have sort of been wrong in the past (flat earth, global cooling, etc)?

People believe whatever they want, good scientist will work out the truth though. Like the scientist back in the 6th century BC who worked out that the earth was round.

I'm a sceptic (did ya guess). After all, who really knows what is happening and what the real causes are. Maybe there aren't any and it's all a natural cycle...after all

Maybe some of it is but some of it sure is us and we should be doing something about it, for future generations.
You should watch this it might help you make up your mind.

Dr /thingy/ was on telly the other day saying it was a rort and that it could cost NZ between 20 and 80 BILLION dollars in the next 30 years, depending on how quickly this government sign us up...and guess who's paying? You and me and our kids.

Oh so now you care about our kids, when its there money where talking about not the state of the earth!.

Sure, live less wastefully, more responsibly and more socially. That's great, but you & I aren't going to change the world. Fact.

False i think thats a one of those assumptions that you hate so much, what you do does change the world, and what changes the world lots is what everyone does and guess what, you and i are included in everyone!

There are problems closer to home on that front - just have a look at the side of the road next time you're a passenger in a car or on a bus/coach. The plastic bags, bottles, big mac packets parked up in the gutters and grass verges in good ol' 'clean, green' NZ is nowt short of a national disgrace (I'm really into the rant thing now, eh?). That's something we can change.

There you go, you already know how you could help change the world.

There aren't enough people who query and challenge these dangerous assumptions

Your quite right, and there are even less who challenge their disbelief for what they think to be assumptions. Perhaps we should kill them to help solve the problem.


--------------
A commic to describe how i feel about having responded to that post.

[Manxman]

Thats true, but it would be alot better to improving our max-population through science before we step over it and have it impact on everybodys quality of life. What "max population"? What scientist derived this figure? Based on what? Someone's theory? Who affirms that theory is right or wrong? Other scientific theorists?

Yes and that is unfortunate, but why would those contries change when we with our prosperity dont even have a stance on the issue. Our prosperity? Aren't there many in this country who cannot even feed their own families...so why should we tax those people even more to assist others who can't feed their families somewhere else.
Here and here Or are you some amazing scientist with a good reputation who wants to argue that. I once managed to get a Pepsi bottle to produce a fountain when I dropped a Mentos in, but otherwise nope. However, there are plenty out there, whose message isn't being listened to because it isn't fashionable right now. Give it time however...until then I remain a growing sceptic, who is annoyed at the torrent of force-fed doomsaying being shoved down my throat, without valid, contrary opinion being voiced. Did I mention Time Magazine in 1972...

People believe whatever they want You got that right, good scientist will work out the truth though. Like the scientist back in the 6th century BC who worked out that the earth was round. Right with ya there...and do you know how much convincing the establishment took to persuade them that their previously unquestioning viewpoint was wrong...

Maybe some of it is but some of it sure is us Really? OK, you convinced me... and we should be doing something about it, for future generations.
You should watch this it might help you make up your mind. Thanks, I did...and remain even less convinced. What forms his basis for assuming that the bottom right box will result in CATASTROPHIC consequences????? Why can't it be something considerably less? Does it HAVE to be so disastrous...? I will however, continue to live as unwastefully as possible. Do we really think that the NZ (you know, this fantastic, beautiful, but contextually very, very small country at the bottom of the south Pacific) stance on ETS will make a difference to whatever it is people think might be happening on a world scale - whilst taxing its population like a wounded bull in the meantime). I'd prefer not to be on the bleeding edge on this one.

Oh so now you care about our kids, when its there money where talking about not the state of the earth!. You lost me here. Of course I care about my kids...

False i think thats a one of those assumptions that you hate so much, what you do does change the world, and what changes the world lots is what everyone does and guess what, you and i are included in everyone! Of course were included with everyone, but again I remain unconvinced that we, in NZ can make any semblance of change (aside from not throwing our litter out of our car windows and treating the side of the road as our collective waste bin. If (if) this is happening, then larger countries must have pressure exerted on them at inter govt level. So what did dear old Helen just do...he signed a free trade deal with China whilst muttering (but not very loudly, so as not to be heard) something about Tibet and global warming. There's hypocracy right there in action for ya. "I care enough to tax my own people, but don't want to upset my big industrial behemoth neighbour on the same issue..."

There you go, you already know how you could help change the world. Yep, changing the world in a much more realistic and 'local' kind of way . BTW, part of my point is: who really knows? Bottom line... n.o-o.n.e r.e.a.l.l.y k.n.o.w.s.

Your quite right, and there are even less who challenge their disbelief for what they think to be assumptions. Perhaps we should kill them to help solve the problem. If you insist.


--------------
A commic to describe how i feel about having responded to that post.

1234567890

[Zuki Bandit]

I reckon all the Subaru, Evo and Skyline drivers should go. Geez that would just about half NZ's population!!!

[Maki]

No need for any culling. Just make it so that no couple can have more than one child until the worlds population reaches a sustainable level. Of course I understand that kind of idea is far too radical for people to accept. Most would prefer to continue on our present course of disease, famine, war, pollution and destruction of our beautiful planet.

[NinjaNanna]

No need for any culling. Just make it so that no couple can have more than one child until the worlds population reaches a sustainable level. Of course I understand that kind of idea is far too radical for people to accept. Most would prefer to continue on our present course of disease, famine, war, pollution and destruction of our beautiful planet.

China did that and it turned into a major problem for them, at present there are sfa chinese girls as so many of them were killed at birth because their culture demanded boys.

Personally I think a tax would be the best way to go:

1. Tax subsidy for "couples" with less then 2 children
2. Tax Nuetral for 2 children
3. Tax on more than 2 children

Seems fair enough to me, incentive and choice rolled into a policy that aims to adjust the problem of global population growth.

[MisterD]

China did that and it turned into a major problem for them, at present there are sfa chinese girls as so many of them were killed at birth because their culture demanded boys.

Personally I think a tax would be the best way to go:

1. Tax subsidy for "couples" with less then 2 children
2. Tax Nuetral for 2 children
3. Tax on more than 2 children

Seems fair enough to me, incentive and choice rolled into a policy that aims to adjust the problem of global population growth.

Now there's a quick way to a society that can't afford to pay for itself...it's a big enough problem that the middle (tax paying) classes aren't replacing themselves already.

The solution is to shut the doors on Africa and don't let anyone out until they've learnt to govern themselves.