Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Reservoirs don't mean a thing in the face of a population they were never intended to support.
I don't know what a work of fiction has to give in place of the truth.
Physical Geography - Twelfth Edition by Diane H. Carlson, Charles C. Plummer. If you are at all worried about the future of the Earth, this text book will give you the eye-opening truth about where we are headed.
Its fictional but could quite possibly be where we're heading.
Its fictional but could quite possibly be where we're heading.
There were very good reasons the US population was not centered in many of the areas that are now booming. Either the area had no water, had bad weather, could have flooded etc etc. Georgia is booming as is Florida, both states are having water issues.
Like I said, this is when "Advancement in technology" comes into play. Remember computers back when they first came out and how much they cost? Look at computers today. Catch my drift?
Some might argue that "the human mind is the ultimate resource" and have faith that scientists and engineers will find solutions population problems, however, the point is that:
Lower population = more resources per capita = higher standard of living (regardless of your current state of technology). That's the Malthusian view, as I understand it.
The other story may have inspired the recent movie Idiocracy, which actually had a profound and very politically-incorrect premise that was squandered on a dumb movie. The Marching Morons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
China is roughly almost the size of the U.S, a little bigger. They have A LOT more people than we do, so how are they doing it?
Mandatory abortions and a one-child limit. And Mexico has an extremely high reproduction rate and they are doing it by exporting millions of their excess populations.
It's kind of ridiculous that Americans limited family size to what they could afford and went for a more stable population growth rate, only to allow itself to be overwhemed by impoverished third world fast breeders.
A few years ago the court took 6 neglected children from their 22 year old Mexican mother. That obviously not an "immigrant" family coming here to better themselves -- they come because for one their own country doesn't want them and because they are irresponsible when it comes to starting a family.
This is silly, I wonder if people 100 years ago thought 100 million people in a country was too much?
The midwest is bleeding population and places like Minnesota and Iowa offer thousands of square miles of endless farmland. The Great Lakes are a HUGE freshwater source. Same with the Mississippi River.
All this overpopulation hogwash comes from those out west where the ecosystems WERE NOT made to handle large amounts of population, animal or human. The west is a desert, and piling millions upon millions of people into land not suited for habitation is bound to cause problems.
Have you been to Mexico City any time lately? Is that quality? Miles and miles and miles of sprawling slums, terrible air pollution, filthy water. And beggars on the sidewalks begging with their toddlers and infants -- and a big pregnant belly.
It's fine for those who want big families and who can support them to have many children. That's not what we're facing with third world breeding habits. Over half of hispanic births are to unwed young mothers who will never support them without government programs.
Some might argue that "the human mind is the ultimate resource" and have faith that scientists and engineers will find solutions population problems, however, the point is that:
Lower population = more resources per capita = higher standard of living (regardless of your current state of technology). That's the Malthusian view, as I understand it.
I hate to pull an "nvxplorer" but, are you saying we should cut off all immigration at once?
Mandatory abortions and a one-child limit. And Mexico has an extremely high reproduction rate and they are doing it by exporting millions of their excess populations.
It's kind of ridiculous that Americans limited family size to what they could afford and went for a more stable population growth rate, only to allow itself to be overwhemed by impoverished third world fast breeders.
A few years ago the court took 6 neglected children from their 22 year old Mexican mother. That obviously not an "immigrant" family coming here to better themselves -- they come because for one their own country doesn't want them and because they are irresponsible when it comes to starting a family.
I wouldn't call 2.1 children per couple a "high reproduction rate". As far as I know their reproduction rate is almost the same as ours.
China is roughly almost the size of the U.S, a little bigger. They have A LOT more people than we do, so how are they doing it?
The Chinese people, in their villages, basically govern themselves. They are primarily concerned with their own survival - and not the rest of their country.
They are still living, in the small villages, the same way they have, for a 1000 years.
The other story may have inspired the recent movie Idiocracy, which actually had a profound and very politically-incorrect premise that was squandered on a dumb movie. The Marching Morons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It was Sophomore English required reading. Usually those books suck
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.