Personal View site logo
The Population Bomb
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

  • 8 Replies sorted by
  • firstbasefirstbase

    Interesting. Clearly it's more a function of how the population uses resources than population density. Interestingly, the entire world's population would easily fit in the state of Texas with enough room for each man, woman and child to have a 32' x 32' lot.

  • kurthkurth

    Immediate short term solution is to rid ourselves of the few thousand who abuse their fair share. Long term solutions might not be required as mother nature has a plan.

    ...and of course we've got to take into account ehrlich's eugenicist roots -

    http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-population-control-holocaust

    ...as a youtube commentor said...perhaps ehrlich should volunteer for disembarkment considering his advanced age !

  • karlkarl

    @firstbase: If the entire world's population was assembled in Texas, the whole overpopulation problem would be solved within hours by "stand-your-ground" shooters.

    Even without shooting, and even if just meant as an assembly for a temporary event, the consequences would reduce the world's population significantly.

    In other news, even a harmless little "robot" found its violent end in the US, after having travelled through Canada and parts of Europe without harm.

  • kurthkurth

    @karl ..... remember we're all living in glass houses.

  • babypandababypanda

    Immediate short term solution is to rid ourselves of the few thousand who abuse their fair share

    they didn't start with a "fair share" to begin with

  • firstbasefirstbase

    My original point is that we're not overpopulated per se. It's more a function of inequitable wealth concentration. Before you start thinking I'm a socialist, I don't have a problem with a capitalistic system. Incentivizing the individual by rewarding individual effort and the associative risks is still the best way to "raise the tide of all boats." Hell, it worked very well for the first 150 years of America's grand experiment (until redistributionists began taxing excessively and meddling a bit too much). Rather than move toward a world socialism to attempt to create global equity through the destruction of the individual, we should put in place systems globally where the individual can eventually become self-sustaining, rather than complacent and beholden to the inefficient, politicized and capricious state. But what do I know?? Just one guys's humble opinion...

  • kurthkurth

    Hell, it worked very well for the first 150 years of America's grand experiment (until redistributionists began taxing excessively and meddling a bit too much)

    yeah....worked great ! They weren't called robber barons for nothing ! The laissez faire 19th century capitalist were the root of all of our problems, only now they go to davos.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    I don't have a problem with a capitalistic system. Incentivizing the individual by rewarding individual effort and the associative risks is still the best way to "raise the tide of all boats."

    It is not definition of capitalism :-)

    As for overpopulation. View on this thing depends mostly on energy, resources and food available. And all this things are very uneven in availability.

Add a Comment