Population: how to control it

Login or register to post comments Last Post 31206 reads   180 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 171 through 180 (of 180 total)
  • Tue, Mar 24, 2009 - 09:06pm

    #172
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

[quote=Alex Szczech]Now this is what I’m talking about: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5950442.ece [/quote]

This is friggin awesome!!! Smile

  • Tue, Mar 24, 2009 - 09:17pm

    #164
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

[quote=Alex Szczech] Absolutely. Controlling population humanely must become a moral imperative if we’re to have any chance whatsoever of taking on the big problems and achieving sustainability. The sad truth is that the issue has been something of a taboo subject for the past 25 years or so. THIS NEEDS TO CHANGE.  [/quote]

My sentiments exactly.  One big reason the subject of population control has been taboo is due to religious orthodoxy.  Why would any church encourage their members to limit family size ($children$—$future members$) which directly provides money, for the future, to the church?  Talk about exponential growth of people and dollars!!!  Religions depend upon people for their survival.  With religion being one of the most powerful forces on the planet why would any religion encourage the reverse of large families if they didn’t have to?  Why would they advocate something as useful as birth control?  Because the size of the congregation is directly correlated to the size of their fat checks.

My parents raised us, six kids, Catholic.  I’m happy to say that only 16.67% of the kids turned out to be religious.

Andrea- turned Lutheran Frown (three kids) Frown

Caroline- Atheist (1 child) Embarassed

Melanie- Atheist (1 child) Embarassed

Daniel- Atheist (0 children) Smile

Sean- Atheist (0 children) Smile

Ryan- Atheist (0 children) Smile

STOP POLLUTING THE POPULATION WITH MORE PEOPLE!!! 

What???

7 billion people aren’t enough for you!!??!!??

Advocate reduction (aka– smaller family sizes!)

(if you already have kids and, in retrospect, wish you wouldn’t have had so many– Thank you)

(the above statement indicates that you cannot change what has already happened but if you knew then what you do now; by no means does this statement indicate or assume you love your kids any less)

Had I known then what I know (and feel) now about OverPopualation I would not have had children.

 

 

  • Tue, Mar 24, 2009 - 10:25pm

    #173
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

[quote=Dogs_In_A_Pile]

Nickbert –  

I’d have to pull out my History of Western Civilization but I’m pretty sure the "Black Death" outbreak in the early 14th century made no distinction between the proletariat, the bourgeoisie and the ruling class as it migrated from China to Europe.  Or in any of the outbreaks in Europe up through the late 1700s.

Hold on, a flea just bit my leg…………………………..Laughing

[/quote]

Hehe Laughing

Anyway, those events happened well before modern medicine had been established.  Right now, even if we did not have a cure for a hypothetical pandemic-causing disease, we at least understand how diseases are spread and what actions can help prevent infection.  But this knowledge/means to help avoid infection and treatment to survive the infection (assuming it’s not 100% fatal) will probably be less available as one goes down the socio-economic ladder.  However I would not expect to see a big disparity in most cases…. at best wealth might be able to tip odds a little in one’s favor, at least if you plan on living a halfway normal life and not hiding in a hermetically-sealed bunker Laughing

– Nickbert

  • Tue, Mar 24, 2009 - 11:03pm

    #174
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

Looks like money is the potent virus of the moment. In its demise we might find our numbers reduced by a variety of unpleasant and unwelcome means. The cities filled very slowly but they might empty rather faster. If we can’t afford oil they will quickly become untenable, at least in their most dense places.

Don

____________________

still …
here  …
still here
still here?

 

  • Wed, Mar 25, 2009 - 01:09am

    #175
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

[quote=Alex Szczech]

[quote=nickbert]But I honestly have never seen a system or proposal that can manage that.  At least not yet.  And so I think it is unfortunately likely we’ll see in some places throughout the world either draconian population control measures, population reduction by war and/or famine, or a combination of both.  I know we will eventually learn to live within our means, but the notion that it will happen sooner rather than later probably won’t be the case.  But if a good plan that fits all the criteria above comes to light, I would support it.[/quote]Me too. In lieu of a plan though, at the very least, I’d like to see mainstream environmental groups quit pussyfooting around the issue and forcefully connect human overpopulation to environmental sustainability. At
least make an earnest effort to appeal to folks’ common sense and moral
reasoning.

 

[/quote]

 Alex,

Your post (which I put in bold) really struck a chord with me. For years I have listened to environmental "activists" whine continually about "growth problems"and the need to "stop this and that" because of it’s growth inducing impacts and so forth.

Not once have I heard or seen even one suggestion as to how the source of the real growth problem might be addressed and handled. The movement is simply an effort to keep the problem out of their own backyard and to hell with really tackling the hard issues. I call it is a form of paupers greed. Their rich cousins are living in wall street!

Coop

  • Wed, Mar 25, 2009 - 01:10am

    #176
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

[quote=Alex Szczech]

[quote=nickbert]But I honestly have never seen a system or proposal that can manage that.  At least not yet.  And so I think it is unfortunately likely we’ll see in some places throughout the world either draconian population control measures, population reduction by war and/or famine, or a combination of both.  I know we will eventually learn to live within our means, but the notion that it will happen sooner rather than later probably won’t be the case.  But if a good plan that fits all the criteria above comes to light, I would support it.[/quote]Me too. In lieu of a plan though, at the very least, I’d like to see mainstream environmental groups quit pussyfooting around the issue and forcefully connect human overpopulation to environmental sustainability. At
least make an earnest effort to appeal to folks’ common sense and moral
reasoning.

 

[/quote]

 Alex,

Your post (which I put in bold) really struck a chord with me. For years I have listened to environmental "activists" whine continually about "growth problems"and the need to "stop this and that" because of it’s growth inducing impacts and so forth.

Not once have I heard or seen even one suggestion as to how the source of the real growth problem might be addressed and handled. The movement is simply an effort to keep the problem out of their own backyard and to hell with really tackling the hard issues. I call it is a form of paupers greed. Their rich cousins are living in wall street!

Coop

  • Wed, Mar 25, 2009 - 01:56am

    #177
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

It should be obvious by now that there is no plan for controlling the human population.  There are some groups with their programs scurrying about, but not accomplishing much.  One might actually speculate that the plan, if there is one, has been to do nothing.

In the next few decades the human population will run up against the natural limits of the Earth’s carrying capacity.  In some areas, the local population is already there.  In the not to distant future, everyone on the planet will be in the same situation.  Arguably sooner.  Our financial paradigms have the capability to cause massive starvation as well as crop failure.  The cause of a population crash need not be the actual physical limits of the Earth.

The political class has chosen to play the game for as long as they can.  Perhaps the assumption was that the game could be played forever.  Who knows?  The outcome will certainly be failures of markets, agriculture, fishing, energy production, etc.  The die is cast.  There’s too much inertia in the system to bring it to a new way of making a living on a small planet.  Decades of environmentalists have been running around the core problem and getting nowhere.  Collapse is the only option.

It would be prudent to "build down" in anticipation of a reduction in societal complexity.  Don’t hold your breath.  Which of our institutions is willing to go first?  Is it possible for the government to force the other institutions to get on the right track and scale back to a sustainable level of production/consumption?  The propaganda paradigm that says government is the problem pretty much precludes any effective groundswell of opinion that would steer government away from uncontrolled collapse.  The elite opinion makers have put that option well outside the bounds of public debate.

I think the issue of population control should be laid to rest.  It’s useless to keep on whipping this tired horse.  It’s not going to move.  Give up, dismount, and walk on.

  • Wed, Mar 25, 2009 - 03:10am

    #178
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

Hi DurangoKid

You miss the possibility (improbability) trumpeted by the conspiracists that the collapse of financial systems is a deliberate activity or at least seeded by the elites. If I was a world dictator, concerned about the number of serfs, who had succeeded in getting the most resource hungry people on the planet addicted to money, then by simply cutting the money supply, I could implement a devastating crash in population. 

We have heard above that educated women make a major contribution to population control.

The only way any population has ever been controlled is by food (after Daniel Quinn). Limit the food and numbers are limited.  

Were we to organise ourselves into human scale groups in our neighbourhoods we would be in a position to gradually take back responsibility for ourselves and to live again within local resource constraints or move. This is a possible/ probable outcome of crisis not so severe as to totally destroy neighbourhoods http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9208714/

I don’t think we waste our time discussing this subject. Just doing that is a major step forward.

Don

____________________________

still …
here  …
still here
still here?

  • Wed, Mar 25, 2009 - 03:52am

    #179
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

Don,

I prefer Occam’s Razor.  A grand conspiracy isn’t necessary to account for the situation we’re in.  It may be true the banking elite have collapsed the economy to destroy demand for energy and perhaps put us on a track for a die-back.  This conflicts with their selfish tendencies to accumulate as much as they can and ignore the consequences.  This is the "rational player" in the "free market" scenario they’re so fond of.  Capital is running up against the same constraints as everyone else.  They’ve had to resort to ever more devious instruments to realize a return because they are approaching the limits of resources, labor, markets, finance, planning, energy.  Just like everyone else.  Are they aware of the fundamental causes?  Maybe.  Is it necessary that they know?  No.  Humans in the aggregate are about as smart as yeast in a vat of grape juice.

I have no doubt that elites are attempting to steer the economy and society toward their selfish ends.  How well they are succeeding is anyone’s guess.  Yes, they’re filthy rich, but have they achieved all their goals?  In the days of Peak Oil, what are long term plans really worth?  Throwing money at a hole in the ground will not produce oil.  And fusion, the ultimate answer, is still 30 years away from a solution as it has been for the last 30 years.  They’re bound by their prejudices just like most of us.

The mere fact that population is growing means all attempts to get the problem under control have thusfar failed.  Population has been a hot issue since the 60’s and yet there are over a billion more humans.  It’s not enough to slow the growth; it must stop.  We’re a long way from a global policy to stop the population growth.  Not to worry, though.  When the cheap oil is finally gone, the human population will decline with it.  Just like the yeast without sugar, the growth stops.  This leaves the issue of that pesky alcohol.  I hope we haven’t stretched the metaphor too far.  We’ll see.

-DK

  • Wed, Mar 25, 2009 - 01:53pm

    #180
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1583

    count placeholder0

    Re: Population: how to control it

http://www.optimumpopulation.org/opt.release11Jul08.htm

[quote]REPORT CHALLENGES “RIGHT” TO HAVE CHILDREN

There is no unlimited right to have children, according to a study published today (Friday July 11, World Population Day) by the Optimum Population Trust.

Despite the United Nations’ reassertion, for this year’s World Population Day, of the 1968 UN declaration that individuals “have a basic human right to determine freely and responsibly the number and timing of their children”, human rights theory, legal precedent and national and international practice do not back this up, the study argues.

In reality, there is only a far more limited right to “found a family” which itself must be balanced against both one’s duties as a parent and also a series of other rights – belonging to other people, to future generations and to nature, wilderness and non-human species. All these set a limit on the number of children to which people are “entitled”.

“Most of us consider the decision of whether to have children an entirely personal matter,” the paper says. “The thought of others being affected or having a say in the decision strikes us as an interference with our privacy. In reality, it is the most public action – in the sense of influencing the lives of others – most citizens will ever take.”

Is there a “right” to have children? is written by Carter Dillard, an American legal academic specialising in reproductive rights law and a former US Government adviser, and is based on a paper that originally appeared in the Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal. It describes the notion of a limitless procreative right, a “privacy right free of limiting duties”, as “self-contradictory and illogical”.

Instead of treating procreation as an unlimited private or personal right, he says, we should define it in terms of replacing ourselves, which suggests a “right” to have only one or, some would argue, two children. Beyond this “core” value, the procreative right would have to be balanced against other, wider interests and the public good. Simply wanting a “large family” might not be enough.

Other points include:

*Introducing more people into a finite space increases competition and decreases access to resources. “This is one of the few areas where Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, fathers of modern political theory, agreed: as population grows, so does conflict…”

*The “private” right to have an unlimited number of children is at odds with other people’s rights to enjoy freedom and nature – including the right to be “let [left] alone”. In a 1992 judgement, the US Supreme Court said that “the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life”. The paper argues that the presence of others interferes with the right to be left alone, adding: “Access to wilderness is comparable to what Locke termed ‘natural liberty’ – a freedom outside the sphere of humanity, a right not to be trapped in a world of others’ making.”

*Unfettered procreation “thrusts us into competition with our descendants” who, because of rising numbers, may not be able to enjoy the same right. “Future generations will not thank us for leaving them an overpopulation problem we were afraid to face up to.”

*Despite the rhetoric in “non-binding” sources of international law, such as the 1968 declaration referred to by the UN above, binding sources agree only on the right to found a family and set this against “competing international human rights, such as the right to liberty of movement, choice of residence, continuous improvement of living conditions, environmental hygiene and prevention of disease, all of which limit family size.” It adds: “When the [procreative] right must be applied in concrete circumstances, expansive rhetoric yields to a far more limited vision.” Courts in practice treat procreation “as an interpersonal, non-autonomous act, and they limit its exercise accordingly”.

*China has argued that its one-child policy is perfectly consistent with international law. “It has done so not based simply on notions of state sovereignty, but upon notions of competing rights, and its obligations to protect children and society as a whole from unjustified and destructive behaviour.”

*Current controversies over housing growth, as communities try to protect themselves from the “chaotic effects of expanding populations”, highlight the “elastic” relationship between population and law. As numbers increase, life becomes more “complex”, the scope of law expands and regulation brings a contraction of rights. “The degree to which a person can exercise certain rights is inversely proportional to the number of other people exercising certain rights.”

*Locke argued that parents have a duty to “preserve, nourish, and educate” their children but where a parent will not fulfil that duty but nonetheless procreates at “maximum biological capacity”, others – either individually or through the state – must step in with their own resources. This impinges on their property rights and liberty as well as violating the child’s rights and the parent’s duty.

*Only the decision not to have children is a genuinely private act. “Not procreating is personal; procreating is interpersonal.”

The paper argues that through a society-wide process of agreement, internalisation and normalisation – a series of “gentle nudges” rather than “hard shoves”, similar to that involved in seat belt or anti-smoking legislation – a voluntary population policy should be incorporated into law.

“Given that law guides our behaviour, a policy that treats procreation as private is regressive, environmentally damaging and peculiarly anti-social: it teaches us to disregard others and their interests. Until we have policies that reflect the truly public nature of having children, we will encourage irresponsible procreation, and all the harm it causes,” Dillard concludes.

NOTES:

A copy of the OPT briefing is appended and can also be viewed at http://www.optimumpopulation.org/righttoprocreate.briefing.pdf.

An extended OPT abstract with summary, extracts and author biography can be viewed at http://www.optimumpopulation.org/righttoprocreate.extracts.pdf.

A copy of the paper in the Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal (August 2007, Volume 10), with full notes and references, is viewable at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1089552 .

The theme of this year’s World Population Day is the “right of people to plan their families”. The UN says: “In 1968, world leaders proclaimed that individuals have a basic human right to determine freely and responsibly the number and timing of their children.” See UNFPA.[/quote]

Viewing 10 posts - 171 through 180 (of 180 total)

Login or Register to post comments