Population Control is Logical and Needed

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
I'm someone who believes in freedom, who doesn't like ID cards and being forced to hand over my biometrics and yet i can see that population control will be needed eventually.

* North America, Western Europe ans Australia are, if anything, underpopulated. All that is required is a tougher border control, in the USA southern borders and southern coast line, in the South and East of Europe and in Australia; along with tougher policies on illegals and their rapid repatriation.

I see no need, other the Government Control, for you to be required to have a Federal ID card or any other Federal Document.
In fact North America is the biggest exporter of food in the world so...


The earth only has so much land space, we also need to leave some alone to allow natural cycles to continue. Without these natural cycles the ecosystem would die and start all over once we were gone. So it's a simple fact that the earth can only support a certain amount of people and remain viable for human life.

Again i'll state it clearly, each individual human requires land area to live for food and other things, the earth has only so much land area, therefore the earth can mathmatically only support a certain size of human population before we reach a tipping point where we start starving just like the foxes in the graph.

If such an argument is put forward you are usually called a nazi or some other horrible label, however this is simple facts, simple logic and quite correct. Whilst i don't think we've reached our maximum population, it is a situation that needs to be addresses before we do. If we don't address it then we'll see even more people starving to death as we realise a balance is needed and achieve an eqaulibrium.

* Such issues are being officially taken into consideration by the UN. Countries with severe over population are being encouraged and helped in their strive to lower their growth rates ( The Chinese 1 child per family policy being an example of such programs).

* The fact that the Nazis did some sick s*it, dos not mean they where wrong in everything. No nation, or regime, is purely good or purely evil...
Besides what you are probably referring to is Eugenics, not Nazism...

For further reading on the subject try:
- FERTILITY, CONTRACEPTION AND POPULATION POLICIES at www.un.org/esa/population/publications/contraception2003/Web-final-text.PDF

www.unescap.org/stat/meet/microdata-May2008/sdc-concepts-methods.pdf

-For all types of documents and studies on population:
www.un.org...

[edit on 6-7-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]




posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cthulwho
If we were to apply this to humans, at some point overpopulated countries will reach breaking point. When this happens there will be mass starvation, disease, war and death. In order to maintain the natural population balance, as seen with foxes and rabbits, foreign countries cannot interfere. As bad as that sounds it's true, we don't go and feed the fox population when the rabbit population dwindles, and we also don't go and save the rabbits from been eaten by foxes.


Well forgive me but i'd prefer to not have mass starvation! I'd prefer to create programs that would make having more than say 2 children per family a negative thing. Taxing it comes to mind and cutting off child support for anyone who has more than two kids. Note i wouldn't make such a policy retroactive.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
To solve the problem of land for farmming, could we build sky-scrapers of hydroponic farms? Seems like we'd have the ability to do that by now.


Wow you know that's a great idea and I've never heard it before. But I think it would cause the price of produce to bottom out which would mean whoever built the skyscrapers would end up in the hole. And if the government did it then all the farmers would go broke. So that's probably why it's never happened. Good idea though.

@Cthulwho: Totally agree. Star.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:48 PM
link   
good points anti-tyrant but the main problem i forsee is TRASH, WASTE



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by bugs_n_recovery
 


i'm sure there are lots of planets we can move to..eventually

we need to evolve though imo...we cant have racism,wars,corrupt govs,gangs,etc. travelling out into space and spreading this stuff to other planets..heh

this planet's humans need to make some major changes ASAP...current course is not going to work imo..



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by bugs_n_recovery
 


Well, that's always been a problem.

I'll admit that a high population of over 20 billion people are going to generate an awful lot of waste - hell, even in today's climate we have great difficulty dealing with the issue.

But that's only because they don't have the facilities - treatment plants, recycling plants, incinerators, etc - on hand to deal with it.

I think humanity has the potential to overcome these difficulties if we put our collective heads together and work it out, what about you?



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:55 PM
link   
and there it is skipper, we are human and because we are so evov=lved we are our own worst enemy we have always been and always will be
pride, power, money, religion, sex, rich, poor, envy, jealosy, blood, thats us ...period



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skipper1975

this planet's humans need to make some major changes ASAP...current course is not going to work imo..


Unfortunately, Skipper, i don't think that's going to happen anytime soon.

Perhaps it will once we've dealt with this particular issue.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:59 PM
link   
Perhaps this is more important than dealing with humanity's failures.

If we focus too much on our failures, we'll never succeed.




posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
OK i'll clarify why i want a control on the global population. This is how i see the future going based solely on logic.

We keep increasing our population (estimates are 80 million a year), we keep improving our farming methods but at some point we can't do more on that one. The population grows and grows until we hit a big tipping point, suddenly stores of food run out, we can't produce enough, the remaining supplies are dealt out by government in an emergency.

Everyone eats for a while, feel safe and then it all runs out. It starts slow with some people running out faster, they riot, fighting their neighbors for food, even killing for it. Eventually all the food is gone and getting more is extremely difficult because with everyone hungry the infrastructure of countries falls apart. Truck drivers, airplane pilots, workers in factories, all of them are to hungry to work and transport food.

At this point everything goes wrong, medical systems halt, food is gone unless you find it yourself and billions of people die until an equalibrium is again reached. Like my first explanation about the graph however i left a point out. When the foxes reach their bottom, their population is far lower than the rabbits, it has to get very bad before an equal footing can be reached again.

That's the first choice, the second choice is population control, preventing this ever happening.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Global Solutions:

- Stop sending food aid to 3rd world nations.

- Stop sending medical aid to 3rd world nations.


National Solutions:

Stop all forms of immigration for at least a minimum of 10 years.

Begin deporting each and every illegal alien.

Instead of the retarded, "faith based" view of teaching abstinence, mandate birth control education in every school.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Or, we could single-mindedly work towards getting ourselves out this mess by working together.

Let's face it, people are never going to accept the culling of humans out of nessecity for population control, so instead of focusing on that, i think we should spend time and a lot of effort working on alternative means to ensure that humanity's population can continue increasing.

Of course, until we get it into our heads that we need to migrate to another planet, we have to figure out terrestrial solutions, three of which i have highlighted for the purposes of discussion.

If we ensure the population can continue to grow at the rate it is for a further 100 (more, preferably) years, then i know we will have the technological capability to migrate to a different planet.

Remember - we are at the sweet-spot between evolving into a true class-1 civilisation and failing miserably.

It's a proverbial "All or nothing" set-up.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:24 AM
link   


It would seem that humanity isn't ready to move into the next space-age.


Maybe once we learn to stop being critics the stark reality of our doomed existence will become apparent.

We can't turn back on this - if we turn back we will use the resources we need to get materials from other planets to support our over-whelming population.

We HAVE to move forwards!

[edit on 7-7-2008 by Anti-Tyrant]



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


A continually growing population will only lead to disaster for everyone.

Definitely not a good idea, and neither the math or the science back up your idea.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by slackerwire
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


Definitely not a good idea, and neither the math or the science back up your idea.


Ah, of course, so we'll just kill everyone then?

PEOPLE WILL NOT ACCEPT THAT AND THEY NEVER WILL.

Population control in this sense, will only lead to bloodshed.

At the very least, i offer hope for those who are willing to fight for their futures.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Do i have to make this clear?

We do not have a choice.

Either we put serious time and serious effort into;

A) Supporting the increasing population as it is, so that more minds and more effort can be put into technological advancements.

and

B) Working constantly on better methods of space-propulsion.

Or

We die.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


I didn't say kill everyone.

I said stop sending aid to 3rd world nations which continually have higher birth rates compared to modern, civilized nations. Let natural selection work.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant
Or, we could single-mindedly work towards getting ourselves out this mess by working together.

Let's face it, people are never going to accept the culling of humans out of nessecity for population control, so instead of focusing on that, i think we should spend time and a lot of effort working on alternative means to ensure that humanity's population can continue increasing.


I'm getting tired of this, i have nowhere at any point suggested killing human beings, i have gone out of my way to say i'm against the killing of a human. Really is unfair to put words in my mouth. We don't need more people than we have at the moment, if we don't start plans to control population then we will see mass starvation of the entire world.


Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant
Of course, until we get it into our heads that we need to migrate to another planet, we have to figure out terrestrial solutions, three of which i have highlighted for the purposes of discussion.


Well we don't have the techology for it at the moment. You can talk abot secret tech all you want but i mean the people don't have access to such things if they exist.


Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant
If we ensure the population can continue to grow at the rate it is for a further 100 (more, preferably) years, then i know we will have the technological capability to migrate to a different planet.


Population growth helps technology advancment? Whilst i understand the idea we would have a higher chance of creating great geniuses, i doubt it would advance us that far.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by slackerwire

I said stop sending aid to 3rd world nations which continually have higher birth rates compared to modern, civilized nations. Let natural selection work.


Say what you like, that will be the cause of their deaths.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

1)I'm getting tired of this, i have nowhere at any point suggested killing human beings, i have gone out of my way to say i'm against the killing of a human. Really is unfair to put words in my mouth. We don't need more people than we have at the moment, if we don't start plans to control population then we will see mass starvation of the entire world.


I believe we do need more people, we need more manpower.

There is always a use for labour, even if it is labouring to create a better tomorrow.


Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
2)Well we don't have the techology for it at the moment. You can talk abot secret tech all you want but i mean the people don't have access to such things if they exist.


Then we protect what we do know and protect what we acheive.

If they aren't willing to give us the technology, then we have to make it for ourselves.


Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
3) Population growth helps technology advancment? Whilst i understand the idea we would have a higher chance of creating great geniuses, i doubt it would advance us that far.


Even a small advancement is better than none, i'm sure you agree.





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join