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.
That's my subjective feeling of course, but certain actions will lead to certain results. So one had better like them.
Sure, the US could support (at least in the short term) a population the size of China's, or larger, but is that desirable? Is having the Denver metro area expand to the size of Los Angeles preferable? Will driving on I-25 or I-70 be that much more fun or practical then? Or if escaping to someplace such as Rocky Mountain National Park, how salubrious if those doing so as well, along with you, have increased by two, three or more times?
Think it can't happen? Consider the living arrangements of this family in Dharavi, India:
"Parapa, a semi-skilled electrician, lived with his parents, two brothers, their wives and two children in a room of 48 square feet. If half the family members slept on their sides, they could just about fit."
Atypical? Not at all. Their neighbors, a family of 12, live in a room of 90 square feet. Many people defecate in the open sewer as their toilets are 16 public latrines serving 3,000 people. This typical of Dharavi, which in an area of about 1 square mile contains 1 million inhabitants in such fashion. In fact about half of Mumbai's 14 million people live in such conditions: http://economist.com/world/asia/disp...ry_id=10311293
So, is that the preferred standard?
And dismissing this out of hand as some place over there and of no concern, consider to what extent it is already happening in your own neighborhood. Just how much more traffic do you deal with, how much less open space? How much more for fuel or groceries?
I believe this an estimate of the United Nations, but in any event the estimate that in this world of some 6 billion plus people that the SUSTAINABLE human population of this world something more like 2 billion.
My understanding that between the Pacific northwest states of Oregon and Washington that but 15% of the old growth forest remains. Many could care less or see no point, but anyone who has experienced it knows there a difference and that trees alone do not constitute and true forest. And even should one not care, we share this planet with many another species who do, as such places their rapidly dwindling homes.
Or for that matter that the rate of extinction of various species is far more rapid now than during any other time in history. And, as far as this planet is concerned, that doesn't necessarily preclude man.
So maybe not so much a question of whether we CAN do something but whether we SHOULD. At the moment all of this nothing more than a gigantic Ponzi scheme. Those that would carelessly deplete resources we, in many cases, have already over extended are playing no more than lip service to the notion of loving their children. For what do they bestow them?
In truth this world is a wondrous place. It really is a diverse garden that amply nourishes and supports us. Our error to be willfully ignorant enough to disregard such wealth and squander it instead in heedless pursuits which ultimately enrich none and result in a pitiful existence.
The single word so many overlook: balance.
The living conditions in India are due mainly to the extreme poverty that is going on there. And if its 6 billion or 2 billion the "sustainability" is possible. There is enough food on this planet for everyone to be fed, but the fact is we live in a society of entitlement and a "me first" mentality.
I figure that when you post as frequently as I do on an online forum, sooner or later you're bound to **** someone off, ..... can't make everyone happy-I stand by my original statement. My point wasn't really about fast food, it was about resource consumption in general, with the latest trends in fast food as an anecdotal example of what's going on in American society. Nobody has a crystal ball, knowing exactly what will happen in the future. I do think that whatever one thinks, it's good to have discussions like this now, thinking about the issues that will affect us down the road, rather than pretending nothing's wrong.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 12-30-2007 at 09:26 AM..
Reason: getting back on topic
The living conditions in India are due mainly to the extreme poverty that is going on there. And if its 6 billion or 2 billion the "sustainability" is possible. There is enough food on this planet for everyone to be fed, but the fact is we live in a society of entitlement and a "me first" mentality.
Roughly half of the world's current population goes to bed (if they have a bed) hungry every night. It's easy to say that is caused by things like tyrannical political regimes, economic inefficiencies, and a hundred other excuses. What people do not want to admit is that overpopulation is at the root of so many of those problems. Overpopulation destroys economic efficiency, democracy, free markets, and personal liberty. All of those things wind up going by the wayside when basic survival instinct overrides civility and order and a society descends into chaos.
The other thing that seemingly goes unnoticed is that even the world's currently pretty precarious food situation is being propped up by massive consumption of non-renewable resources to produce food. In addition to the massive amounts of petroleum consumed to plant, cultivate, harvest, transport and preserve food, much of our food supply depends on "artificial" fertilizers manufactured by a process that fixes nitrogen out the atmosphere which requires burning of large quantities of natural gas. The sad fact is that the "Green Revolution" that flourished after World War II--that arguably made the massive increase in world population since then possible--was almost entirely based on greatly increasing agricultural reliance on fossil fuels to effect greater food production. You might say that is the modern variation of "eating your seed corn." The result will likely be the same, too.
..... easy to say that is caused by things like tyrannical political regimes, economic inefficiencies, and a hundred other excuses......
There's an emerging school of thought that goes something like: Until recipients of foreign aid change their cultures they will never succeed at rising above their misery, and all efforts to help them will fail. Those are not the exact words, but that's the gist of it. Essentially, dirt poor starving masses of the world need to adopt the rule of law, justice, respect for property, modern accountable government, etc, or they will starve and die. The old ways of illiterate societies being run by tribal elders, witch doctors, mullahs, shamans and what not will keep these people locked in perpetual misery and death, and any money or effort we expend is a waste.
If the worst happens, as many predict, these societies will be the first to go. If I could shout one thing to those poor souls, it would be "IT'S THE CULTURE, STUPID!
Roughly half of the world's current population goes to bed (if they have a bed) hungry every night. It's easy to say that is caused by things like tyrannical political regimes, economic inefficiencies, and a hundred other excuses. What people do not want to admit is that overpopulation is at the root of so many of those problems. Overpopulation destroys economic efficiency, democracy, free markets, and personal liberty. All of those things wind up going by the wayside when basic survival instinct overrides civility and order and a society descends into chaos.
How is corrupt government NOT the problem. Here you have governments such as north korea investing more money into their nuclear program than into their own people or look your favorite middle eastern country. You can't tell me that people live in shacks and eat a slice of bread and water a week because of over population. To generalize it as "oh there is just to many people living on the planet, some are just gona have to die off" is a rather ignorance.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 12-30-2007 at 06:16 PM..
Reason: It's NORTH Korea, not South, that is trying to go nuke.
How is corrupt government NOT the problem. Here you have governments such as north korea investing more money into their nuclear program than into their own people or look your favorite middle eastern country. You can't tell me that people live in shacks and eat a slice of bread and water a week because of over population. To generalize it as "oh there is just to many people living on the planet, some are just gona have to die off" is a rather ignorance.
You missed my point: The stresses of overpopulation actually help breed corruption, economic inefficiency, destruction of democratic institutions, and civil unrest. While it is true that all of those things do nothing to make a society live better when resources are plentiful, lack of resources or too many people competing for inadequate resources almost always lead to the tyrannies I just described. I happen to think that democracy and freedom have survived as long and as well in the United States as they have because this country, until recently, had sufficient resources to comfortably support its population. People will do some pretty egregious things, including surrendering liberties, engaging in individual or mob violence (right up to and/or including nationalistic aggression and conquest), and perpetrating sickening acts of inhumanity or genocide when they don't have enough to eat or a warm place to sleep.
And, by the way, I resent being called "ignorant." I may be a lot of things, but I'm not that!
Last edited by Mike from back east; 12-30-2007 at 06:17 PM..
Reason: Fix quoted material
No offense intended. However I disagree. Its not overpopulation that encourages the corruption of the world today. I believe that its a matter of taking advantage of certain situations in a particular area where the people that live there are poor, don't have the education or freedoms to do anything about it. We live in a fairly advanced time where the technology avaliable to us can provide sustainable resources to the masses but the fact of the matter is absoulte power corupts absolutely and political regiemes that were once handy maybe 200, 300 years ago just don't work in modern society.
I agree that the consumption of fossil fuels is a BIG problem. I think there are going to be some major lifestyle changes happening in my generation-- and possibly as soon as 5-10 years. I just don't see how it's a doomsday scenario. For one-- what if people around the world-- especially right here in the US, would cut down on the amount of beef they eat? Isn't the majority of corn grown in this country (which takes a tremendous amount of oil, not to mention fertilizers and other chemicals, and water) fed to cattle? The amount of beef the average American eats is almost sickening. Back in the '90s the trend in fast food may have been towards healthier choices (or at least trying to pretend to be healthier). Now, it seems like the trend is towards more meat and cheese, more saturated fat than ever before! One day it's "The Baconator," the next day it's the "Cheesy Beefy." These commercials make me want to barf. Isn't Colorado a major corn and beef producing state? So much of our culture is about eating beef, steaks, and getting fat. I'm not saying we should all become vegetarians (I certainly am not!), but cutting back the amount of meat we eat could go a LONG way. Producing ethanol from corn is another HUGE waste of resources.
Second thing, and this also relates to Colorado, is why does everybody have to have a giant gas guzzling SUV? Most people who live in the core metro areas don't need one. Also, the trend of people living out in BFE, pretending they're living a "rural" lifestyle but then driving into Denver (or the nearest town) every single day for their job and for all the creature comforts will stop. I predict gasoline will hit $5.00 a gallon permanently within 5 years. As it climbs up to $5.00, even $10.00/gal, people will start changing their behavior. Once gasoline gets more and more expensive, and the need becomes more apparent, we will start seeing projects like FasTracks accelerating in pace like never before.
I totally agree with your post. "The Baconator" made me laugh too! How many ways can you put 5 lbs. of cow between two buns???
Personally I don't eat beef, fast food, and limit meat intake. I drive a 30 mpg. car and rarely stray more than 8 mi. from my house. But even so, I don't like buying gas for the car. I heard the other day that $4 a gallon gas is expected next summer. I honestly don't see how people drive gas guzzlers any more. I'm just hoping that the price for solar panels and hybrid cars comes down soon.
My mind is circling around thoughts that culture includes many characteristics, with some key ones being what we'd describe as corruption, poverty, ignorance, etc. Thus it is the culture of those backwards places that is killing them. Literally so.
....Personally I don't eat beef, fast food, and limit meat intake. I drive a 30 mpg. car and rarely stray more than 8 mi. from my house. But even so, I don't like buying gas for the car. I heard the other day that $4 a gallon gas is expected next summer. I honestly don't see how people drive gas guzzlers any more. I'm just hoping that the price for solar panels and hybrid cars comes down soon.
For health reasons, I certainly limit my red meat to less than a pound per week, or less. Best dietary training I ever had was attending Weight Watchers and it changed my life. Gist of the WW program is three-pronged:
1. Eat the right things (a balanced diet).
2. Eat in proper quantities (they give you a portion scale).
3. Eat foods prepared in the proper method (no fried foods).
They educate people and give you group and personal support.
When I want a good steak, I'll go to one of our local steak houses and get a smal filet of 5-7 ounces, baked potato, salad or veggies - NO appetizer, NO dessert. A reasonable and safe meal, even for dieters.
Gas will get higher, like it did during election years 2000 and 2004, and I have many years of gas records to prove it (it's a geek thing). Then there's the long-term oil issue of supply vs demand that is at work and will remain so until we develop other energy sources. One needs only to read "The Oil Factor" by Leeb to know where its all growing, and the book talks about a lot more than just oil as a finite resource that will be fought over in the decades ahead.
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.
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.
