It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Population control 'needs debate'

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Doesn't it seem that all the people that favor population control should, put up or shut up and volunteer for euthanasia themselves?



[edit on 17-11-2007 by whaaa]




posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 07:33 PM
link   
It is amazing how history repeats. This was perhaps the most talked about doom and gloom scenario in the 70's and 80's. We were supposed to run out of food long ago. We did not. In fact we now have plenty of food and the only problem is getting it to those who need it. Starvation is now a Political Construct to control populations. The only people starving are those from countries controlled by Dictators. The Conspiracists of that day of course did not admit their error. Most are still around with new theories just as unsupported. History is kind in that people never seem to look back more than a few years to learn that most of these theories of gloom fix themselves as Society evolves.

Since there is no population explosion in the Industrialized World this whole topic would only apply to less advanced cultures. Since telling the truth about these things is no longer allowed in our Politically Correct World this will never become a supported idea.

A good question to ask would be is having too many children wrong? Of course it is. Knowingly having children you can not afford to support is Child Abuse pure and simple. Doing so is guaranteeing a life of suffering without hope. How do you legislate common sense? You can not. It would no doubt become a horror like in China were a female newborn dead in the gutter is so common passers-by don't even take notice.



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 


Uh no, because we aren't the ones that are intent on reproducing like vermin. How about the ones who are too lazy to find a job, have no education, don't believe in contraception and still think it's fun to make babies?



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
Doesn't it seem that all the people that favor population control should, put up or shut up and volunteer for euthanasia themselves?



[edit on 17-11-2007 by whaaa]


No one here supporting population control is advocating genocide.


Controlling birth rates worldwide is a moral solution to this problem. We need to stop all the third world poor people from having 15 kids each.

And to those who say earth could support 100 billion people. Do you really want to live on a planet where all the natural habitats and forests are cut down for cities and farms?

Resources would be cut so thin that society would almost have to be a totalitarian dystopia. Do you want to live in a 100 sqft appartment and eat 2 bowls of corn soup every day for the rest of your life?

This is why I support ethical population control.



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golack
This is why I support ethical population control.

Talk about an oxymoron!



People who whine about population control don't really think about economics. Or rather, don't think. Unless they know it's crap but want to use it as a way to gain power somehow.

More people does not mean less resources - more can work.

More people does not mean that we will all starve - as we approach a level we can't support, the price of food will go up, we'll have more farmers, and it'll go down to balance itself. If we run out of food (remember we have crops, animals, fish, etc.), then as population grows the lack of food will curb it and it will stay at a level that is sustainable.



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnMike
 


Thats great and all but we are already having to chop down the amazon at an incredible rate to feed the people of asia.

You speak of resources on this earth as being infinate and more people somehow means more goods produced overall.

This is not true as farmland, oil, metal ores, and even fresh water are finite. Yes, more people can equal more food and goods produced but when we run out of land and mines this equates to diminishing returns.

So you want to let the population max out naturally. Thats fine if you are ok with mass famine and wars for resources.






[edit on 17-11-2007 by Golack]

[edit on 17-11-2007 by Golack]



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 10:57 PM
link   
So, who gets to choose who lives and who dies?

The last guy that thought he knew who was the master race was isn't remembered to well.



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Nobody has to die. All you do is control the birth rate in those contries with exploding population. Eventually population will stabilize and you can begin to slowly lower to a more sustainable level.

Some people seem extremely ignorant on the topic and seem to jump to the conclusion that population control = actively killing people.



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Population control is not about "population".

It is about control.

...and with it abuse.

Beware this dark future.



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golack
Some people seem extremely ignorant on the topic and seem to jump to the conclusion that population control = actively killing people.



And some people are so ignorant of the history of mankind and his attempts at Population control has always involved KILLING PEOPLE.


www.radioliberty.com...

[edit on 17-11-2007 by whaaa]



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Well I made my list who ever is for mass genocide to combat climate change you should go in line first to be put down you waste food and emit deadly co2 gas byby problem solved and us normal people will be left and we won't kill each other like animals.

well see how for this you are when they strap your mother in cause shes over 60 and should be put to death. Population control saves the planet. I can see the movies already of properganda. save money don't put them in a old folks home thats cruel and waste food. put your parents to death.

Got a disabled child save some food and co2 kill the child.

you people are sick how can you think like this you are the ones need to be gassed.

Even god gave the devil the right to live he got sent to hell but he still lives.

you are worse then satan in gods eyes.

Im glad to see such NAZI properganda being discussed on ATS fascists.

[edit on 17-11-2007 by Bushwacked]



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 11:54 PM
link   
This is a very interesting subject that definitely needs to be address; unfortunately, people skirt around it due to misconceptions and conspiricies. I hope we can have a civilized discussion without accusing others of genocidal intentions. I certainly have no genocidal intentions, nor do people worried about population or even global warming.

The question is not how do we limit population growth; rather the relevant questions are 1) what limits population growth and 2) how do we expand those limits.

Take a look at the graph below (source):



Since the rise of capitalism the world has seen enormous populaiton growth. Population is no longer bound by Malthusian constraints of food supply... innovation has increased agricultural productivity enormously. For examples, see links here or here.

What limits population is the rate of growth of technology --



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bushwacked
Im glad to see such NAZI properganda being discussed on ATS fascists.


Ermm...
WTF are you on about?



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Population control has NOTHING to do with killinlg people or with genocide. That is a huge misperception. It IS all about birth control. It is very expensive to raise a child today and most families wouldn't be able to afford more than 2 children anyway.
There's nothing wrong with birth control. It's not abortion, it's not killing anyone or anything. It is simply using some form of birth control, even if it's the rhythm method.
I'm not a racist, not into eugenics nor genocide and I respect all forms of life. It IS about not having enough resources, to me. As someone else said we already are cutting down the Amazon forest to feed people in Asia. Hundreds of thousands of acres of jungle have been cut down to raise beef, that is exported. That's just one example. We need the Amazon and other forests to provide enough breathable air.
The Earth has finite resources, they don't just keep magically appearing because you want them to. It takes a long time for the Earth to grow trees, produce oil, etc.
And finally, our world is already running out of water. Without population control, people will be dying of thirst. Without water, our planet dies and becomes inhabitable, pure and simple.
Easter Island is an excellent example of what happens when there are too many people. Think of all the experiments when there are too many rats in the maze: they begin killing and eating each other, they become way too aggressive and crazy. The same thing is happening with humans, there are too many and people have gotten crazy by living too closely in proximity with each other.
Please, don't cloud the issue by bringing in genocide, which has NOTHING to do with population control.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
I'm just fine with population control, more people means less resources. And apparently it's the poor and uneducated who are on a reproduction rampage and then wonder why they are poor and can't afford to get their kids a proper education....of course then they just blame the rich. The governments have already set things into motion that would help deter overpopulation, however even now such things aren't helping when we are using up our own medical resources.
Population control is a necessity, not something to debate.


listen right,its not the poor using up all the worlds resources.its people who live a western lifestyle.

and im talking about your average joe,who just consumes,consumes and consumes regardless,20 poor people use the same resources as an average american consumer drone.

consider this-

the lower the life expectancy,the higher the birth rate must be to counter act that.western countries have high life expectancy and low birthrate,3rd world countries have the opposite.

most of the worlds population resides in south east asia,ie india,china,japan etc.

you may notice china has had a one child policy since the 1970's,it hasnt affected the exponential growth in use of resources because...

...the chinese have adopted a wasteful western lifestyle counteracting all population control methods.

its not the numbers,its the way the numbers are acting.






[edit on 18-11-2007 by welivefortheson]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by welivefortheson
listen right,its not the poor using up all the worlds resources.its people who live a western lifestyle.

And they also produce them.


Originally posted by welivefortheson
and im talking about your average joe,who just consumes,consumes and consumes regardless,20 poor people use the same resources as an average american consumer drone.

And without these consumers, we'd have no demand and no incentive to increase supply!


Originally posted by welivefortheson
the lower the life expectancy,the higher the birth rate must be to counter act that.western countries have high life expectancy and low birthrate,3rd world countries have the opposite.

We have to look at population growth, which is sort of the sum of that.



Originally posted by weliveforthesonyou may notice china has had a one child policy since the 1970's,it hasnt affected the exponential growth in use of resources because...

...the chinese have adopted a wasteful western lifestyle counteracting all population control methods.

If you mean that they've actually had an economy, then yes.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
Population control has NOTHING to do with killinlg people or with genocide. That is a huge misperception. It IS all about birth control. It is very expensive to raise a child today and most families wouldn't be able to afford more than 2 children anyway.

Depends on where you look. But if they can't afford to feed them, then they will die. That's how life works (and nothing, including communistic redistribution of wealth and whatnot can change that).


Originally posted by forestlady
There's nothing wrong with birth control. It's not abortion, it's not killing anyone or anything. It is simply using some form of birth control, even if it's the rhythm method.

I agree.


Originally posted by forestlady
I'm not a racist, not into eugenics nor genocide and I respect all forms of life. It IS about not having enough resources, to me. As someone else said we already are cutting down the Amazon forest to feed people in Asia.

More food is a good thing.


Originally posted by forestlady
Hundreds of thousands of acres of jungle have been cut down to raise beef, that is exported. That's just one example. We need the Amazon and other forests to provide enough breathable air.

Wrong. This is nothing but an argument from ignorance. I laugh every time I hear this.

Over 90 percent of the oxygen you breathe is actually from algae and sea plants (with algae making up the vast majority). Land plants have very little impact on the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere.


Originally posted by forestlady
The Earth has finite resources, they don't just keep magically appearing because you want them to. It takes a long time for the Earth to grow trees, produce oil, etc.

Oil is a good one but that's more economic than environmental, and for now we really don't have to worry about its supply. The best thing is to set up more nuclear reactors, but we have the environmental nuts stopping us from doing that. So we keep using oil.


Trees, you have to make sure you're logging correctly. It's not economical for anyone, including a logging company, to go right through the forest and cut everything. There are regulations, anyway.


Originally posted by forestlady
And finally, our world is already running out of water. Without population control, people will be dying of thirst. Without water, our planet dies and becomes inhabitable, pure and simple.

Um...no? Where do you suppose the water goes after you're done with it, sweetheart?


Originally posted by forestlady
Easter Island is an excellent example of what happens when there are too many people. Think of all the experiments when there are too many rats in the maze: they begin killing and eating each other, they become way too aggressive and crazy. The same thing is happening with humans, there are too many and people have gotten crazy by living too closely in proximity with each other.

Actually there's a great deal of uninhabited land - most people just choose to live close to more densely populated area. The United States is a good example of this.


Originally posted by forestlady
Please, don't cloud the issue by bringing in genocide, which has NOTHING to do with population control.

It is, in the sense that it allows some agency, a government, to decide what you can do and how you can have children. It's my right to have as many children as I want, and no government will stop me.

For every kid you won't have, I'm going to have two.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


do you think a society based around the consumption of worthless products is a beneficial one?.

do you think newton,einstien,graham bell wasted thier lives on the consumption of resources?

look around your house,what actually has any relevance beyond satisfying your pleasure drives?.

if the west is so advanced then why doesnt it implement the technology that will enable people to live a much less wasteful lifestyle????.

its so easy,cheaper,logical to produce your own energy,yet instead you just pay someone else to do it for you.

the answer is in a capitalist society,efficiency means nothing,its all about maximum revenue which is incredibly wasteful.

jesus owned nothing,consumed nothing,produced nothing,yet he is the most influential man in history(though some people would say tesla round here!).

[edit on 18-11-2007 by welivefortheson]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I say that those that are seeking a way to control the population start with themselves.

It might just increase the intelligence of our gene pool when these individuals take matters into their own hands and start with themselves.


apc

posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


Well... Georgia might have something to add about the water supply...

But as WyrdeOne so rationally pointed out, an unsustainable population is just a symptom of a bigger problem to be solved. Not the population; the unsustainability.

Solving the real problem doesn't involve restricting individual liberty.




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join