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.
We have heard about every explanation for why the global economy has been on a rapid decline in the last couple of years, or the last few decades in some countries. This is coupled with civil chaos from infuriated people. The effect is rise in crime, fragmentation and social decay.
What many fail to realize is that eventually societies reach a limit of how many workers they need and can support. Before the industrial revolution thousands of workers were needed to complete megaprojects, and afterward it took hundreds of them. Now due to our technology, advanced engineering and expertise, it can take less than a hundred workers to finish monumental feats.
However, the population keeps on growing and growing. They are also living longer. What is left for the rest of the people when all essential jobs are already filled to the brim? Not everyone can be an athlete, entertainer or artist. There really is nothing left when industries produce in vast quantities, beyond any sort of demand. Innovation creates a short-lived period of expansion and then regulates itself, a good example is the computer industry in the 90s and electronics industry in the 80s.
The reason we haven't noticed this trend is because on the last century the focus was on two world wars, but we have passed that stage.
The government and the banks can pump trillions into the economy, but the net effect is the same: rapid short-term consumption and artificial expansion that isn't sustained because they were unnecessary to begin with. This is the fate of the world as long as more people join the ranks of the unemployed.
We have heard about every explanation for why the global economy has been on a rapid decline in the last couple of years, or the last few decades in some countries. This is coupled with civil chaos from infuriated people. The effect is rise in crime, fragmentation and social decay.
What many fail to realize is that eventually societies reach a limit of how many workers they need and can support. Before the industrial revolution thousands of workers were needed to complete megaprojects, and afterward it took hundreds of them. Now due to our technology, advanced engineering and expertise, it can take less than a hundred workers to finish monumental feats.
However, the population keeps on growing and growing. They are also living longer. What is left for the rest of the people when all essential jobs are already filled to the brim? Not everyone can be an athlete, entertainer or artist. There really is nothing left when industries produce in vast quantities, beyond any sort of demand. Innovation creates a short-lived period of expansion and then regulates itself, a good example is the computer industry in the 90s and electronics industry in the 80s.
The reason we haven't noticed this trend is because on the last century the focus was on two world wars, but we have passed that stage.
The government and the banks can pump trillions into the economy, but the net effect is the same: rapid short-term consumption and artificial expansion that isn't sustained because they were unnecessary to begin with. This is the fate of the world as long as more people join the ranks of the unemployed.
Congratulations, Mr. Dulles. You are joining a long and distinguished line of thinkers who have been proclaiming that people are the problem, dating back to when the population went from 1 billion to 1.5 billion. Guess what? The five or six billion additional people we've added since then represent an unimaginable store of creativity, ingenuity, and vibrancy. The next billion, two billion, three billion will do the same. Worldwide per capita incomes and wealth have exploded upwards as population doubled and doubled again.
Your comments suggest that the invention of bulldozers was a problem, since they put men with shovels out of work. Oh, for the good old days before tractors and combines, when 90% of us could find work in subsistence agriculture! Of course, life expectancy was less than 50 years back in 1900.
What is the logical extension of your philosophy? A culture of death.
Congratulations, Mr. Dulles. You are joining a long and distinguished line of thinkers who have been proclaiming that people are the problem, dating back to when the population went from 1 billion to 1.5 billion. Guess what? The five or six billion additional people we've added since then represent an unimaginable store of creativity, ingenuity, and vibrancy. The next billion, two billion, three billion will do the same. Worldwide per capita incomes and wealth have exploded upwards as population doubled and doubled again.
Your comments suggest that the invention of bulldozers was a problem, since they put men with shovels out of work. Oh, for the good old days before tractors and combines, when 90% of us could find work in subsistence agriculture! Of course, life expectancy was less than 50 years back in 1900.
What is the logical extension of your philosophy? A culture of death.
No thanks.
This thread should die quickly.
Agreed. I have no problem with illegal immigrants coming here and having six kids.
If you think there are too many people then either get yourself fixed or get off the planet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenDullesMJ12
We have heard about every explanation for why the global economy has been on a rapid decline in the last couple of years, or the last few decades in some countries. This is coupled with civil chaos from infuriated people. The effect is rise in crime, fragmentation and social decay.
What many fail to realize is that eventually societies reach a limit of how many workers they need and can support. Before the industrial revolution thousands of workers were needed to complete megaprojects, and afterward it took hundreds of them. Now due to our technology, advanced engineering and expertise, it can take less than a hundred workers to finish monumental feats.
However, the population keeps on growing and growing. They are also living longer. What is left for the rest of the people when all essential jobs are already filled to the brim? Not everyone can be an athlete, entertainer or artist. There really is nothing left when industries produce in vast quantities, beyond any sort of demand. Innovation creates a short-lived period of expansion and then regulates itself, a good example is the computer industry in the 90s and electronics industry in the 80s.
The reason we haven't noticed this trend is because on the last century the focus was on two world wars, but we have passed that stage.
The government and the banks can pump trillions into the economy, but the net effect is the same: rapid short-term consumption and artificial expansion that isn't sustained because they were unnecessary to begin with. This is the fate of the world as long as more people join the ranks of the unemployed.
Oh, and I'm part of the solution. My ex-wife and I only had one child together. My current wife and I won't be having any children because it is a medical hazard for her to carry a baby to term.
Location: planet octupulous is nearing earths atmosphere
13,621 posts, read 12,738,345 times
Reputation: 20050
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcopolo
Congratulations, Mr. Dulles. You are joining a long and distinguished line of thinkers who have been proclaiming that people are the problem, dating back to when the population went from 1 billion to 1.5 billion. Guess what? The five or six billion additional people we've added since then represent an unimaginable store of creativity, ingenuity, and vibrancy. The next billion, two billion, three billion will do the same. Worldwide per capita incomes and wealth have exploded upwards as population doubled and doubled again.
Your comments suggest that the invention of bulldozers was a problem, since they put men with shovels out of work. Oh, for the good old days before tractors and combines, when 90% of us could find work in subsistence agriculture! Of course, life expectancy was less than 50 years back in 1900.
What is the logical extension of your philosophy? A culture of death.
No thanks.
This thread should die quickly.
??so how many more billions of sheoples do you think we can cram on this planet before our trial and error system finally fails
??so how many more billions of sheoples do you think we can cram on this planet before our trial and error system finally fails
everything has a limit..
And what do you propose? Forced sterlizations? Mass murder? Nuclear bombs to large populated regions of the world? Norplant or some other long term birthcontrol device implanted at the start of a girl's puberty? Snip the boys as soon as their testicles drop? A China like one child policy then execute any additional babies either before or after birth? Or maybe a Jim Jones solution of poisoned koolaid?
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.
