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.

 

Have Less Kids! Gore Pushes Population Control

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
Now that Gore is separated from Tipper and not getting any, he wants to inflict his state on all others.


Actually I'd take that one step further. If you had the likes of tipper gore coming at you in the dark that could EASILY be used as a means of population control. Perhaps tipper should mount a campaign, anything that ugly would serve purpose and could enforce the ideas of al gores proposal.

brill
edit on 22-6-2011 by brill because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   
In third world countries people have more children because that is the best way to survive.

Infant mortality is higher, children are sold as property for money. Some cultures consider daughters a liability, others a 'bargaining tool.' Sons work for the family business (if there is one) for free. If there's no family business, more children means more contribution to the household in either income or labor. Not every damn country is like the west where pampered babies consume as the television and brainwashed people teach them.
Children care for you when you become too old to make it on your own. Also, there is the joy of parenting, which - in a real sense may be the only uplifting aspect of their lives... The third world is NOT what they tell you it is.

Saying "You should have X number of children" is the epitome of intrusiveness. As long as you bear the burden (socially and economically speaking) you should have as many children as you choose. bearing in mind that excess is its own punishment.

Soon they'll be telling me how much water I can drink everyday, and how far I can drive to work.... as if they could 'generalize' about that too --- all the while mind you, it affects neither them nor their posterity.

This effort to control the population' is not about conservation. It's about expedience. Mostly, political expedience. From political expedience begins exploitation.

A different approach would be to create a well-educated population capable of critical-thinking with access to information on which they can build there own judgment. I don't need someone else telling me whether my wife and I are 'acceptable' to someone else's long-range plans because we do or don't want to have more (or any) children. Do you really want government to regulate procreation?

I prefer reason and faith to govern my life.


edit on 22-6-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
People are already having less kids, and I hear govmints are worried about it, so govmints are starting programs to create incentives to encourage people to have more kids.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TheOneElectric
 


It's good to see some common sense thrown out every now and then on the internetz. I have to agree whole-heartedly with this as well...
The amount of stress we are putting on our environment and on the planet in general is unprecedented and gets worse as time passes. Why? Because the human population is still experiencing exponential growth.
The fight for natural resources will only worsen if the human population is not curbed SOON
Gore isn't always the best face for environmentalism, but he's dead on regarding this issue. BTW if I had been 18 at the time of the 2000 election...I would have voted for him.
Unfortunantely, baby boomers have a tendency to ruin everything, including the future of younger generations.
edit on 22-6-2011 by laiguana because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mister_Bit

Originally posted by e11888
We should be doing everything possible to ensure our survival as a species. Humanity isnt a disease and Im sick of these paid off scum minions telling me otherwise.

And IF our survival was proved to be under threat because of overpopulation what would be your answer?


Id say prove it to me first because that, atleast at this current moment, is impossible for you to do. Its more possible that at any given day or time that we will be hit with a solar flare or asteroid and our entire species will be exterminated overnight. We cant live on this planet forever, eventually its going to be destroyed. That is a fact. That is something that eventually humanity WILL have to come to terms with. Wasting money on this crap makes no sense when we can fix it in other ways.

But to answer your question directly, if overpopulation was a problem, which its not, Id be trying to find ways to expand either into the ocean, underground or onto the moon or mars through advances in technology. The answer is never to kill. Advancing into space is something we will have to do eventually regardless of how sci fi you may think it is. Like I said, this planet and even our sun wont last forever.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   


Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thomas Malthus said the same thing.........300 years ago. Do some research.


With already a billion malnutritioned people on this planet and rising, I would say Malthus was partially right. Our population does not grow in harmony with our ability to take care of their basic needs.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I think the OP is confusing his partisan ideology with reality, a shame really as this is a really important subject. If one does the math, has an understanding of exponential growth, views his world and is aware of finite resources in an enclosed finite environment, then it becomes quite obvious to the non-biased thinker that overpopulation is a major problem.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by e11888

Originally posted by Mister_Bit

Originally posted by e11888
We should be doing everything possible to ensure our survival as a species. Humanity isnt a disease and Im sick of these paid off scum minions telling me otherwise.

And IF our survival was proved to be under threat because of overpopulation what would be your answer?


Id say prove it to me first because that, atleast at this current moment, is impossible for you to do. Its more possible that at any given day or time that we will be hit with a solar flare or asteroid and our entire species will be exterminated overnight. We cant live on this planet forever, eventually its going to be destroyed. That is a fact. That is something that eventually humanity WILL have to come to terms with. Wasting money on this crap makes no sense when we can fix it in other ways.

But to answer your question directly, if overpopulation was a problem, which its not, Id be trying to find ways to expand either into the ocean, underground or onto the moon or mars through advances in technology. The answer is never to kill. Advancing into space is something we will have to do eventually regardless of how sci fi you may think it is. Like I said, this planet and even our sun wont last forever.

I accept your ideas but no one is endorsing killing, just controlling numbers.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
When machines started taking people's jobs away in mass.

You would have thought - - we would have been smart enough then to say: "Hey! Maybe we should stop producing more people".



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
I think the OP is confusing his partisan ideology with reality, a shame really as this is a really important subject. If one does the math, has an understanding of exponential growth, views his world and is aware of finite resources in an enclosed finite environment, then it becomes quite obvious to the non-biased thinker that overpopulation is a major problem.


And which resources are finite exactly? Oil? Stop using it. Food? Please. What? What is it that is finite that we cant do without? Please explain this to me. The OP, myself, understands the fact that we can fix anything by advancing our species. Prove to me this world is overpopulated. SOMEBODY IN THIS THREAD PROVE IT TO ME!



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo



Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thomas Malthus said the same thing.........300 years ago. Do some research.


With already a billion malnutritioned people on this planet and rising, I would say Malthus was partially right. Our population does not grow in harmony with our ability to take care of their basic needs.

Do you think it's more seasonable that those people suffer in Africa and other places, due to their lack of markets?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo



Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thomas Malthus said the same thing.........300 years ago. Do some research.


With already a billion malnutritioned people on this planet and rising, I would say Malthus was partially right. Our population does not grow in harmony with our ability to take care of their basic needs.


And those problems could be fixed overnight if the people in power wished it.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
al gore is encouraging the death of america,

according to the us census bureau the average american birth rate is 1.5 kids per 2 parents,

for those of you who cant do simple math, this means we are not birthing enough children to replace the parents who age and die, our population is declining WE ARE DIEING and al gore is encouraging it,

over population is bs



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
There is absolutely nothing wrong with having less kids, it's the more responsible thing to do this day and age. When peak oil hits, many will be sorry they didn't practice sustainability before hand.

Most of you seem to have some sort of illness "Everyone is out to get us"

Go to a doctor, get it checked out. I'm sure they have medicine for it "Oh no big Pharma"

Give me a break.


Its called CHOICE.

Officer: Do You Under Stand?
Me: No Officer I Do Not Stand Under you or anywone, for I am a real flesh and blood woman with unalieable rights.

First world nations are zero or negative stats, so is he speaking on behalf of the more fascist countries, the theocracies?

And your awareness level, or any doctors, on the issues, means very little to me. Its you who will be setting the next step for yourself and your frequency.

In addition, Al Gore thinks he's in some counsel. His opinions mean nothing to me, he like all other controllers should be thoroughly investigated by civilians and their investigators to see if he can be charged under real common law for HARM, Theft, and money laundering/exhortion/fraud.

I feel he could be.
edit on 22-6-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by e11888

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
I think the OP is confusing his partisan ideology with reality, a shame really as this is a really important subject. If one does the math, has an understanding of exponential growth, views his world and is aware of finite resources in an enclosed finite environment, then it becomes quite obvious to the non-biased thinker that overpopulation is a major problem.


And which resources are finite exactly? Oil? Stop using it. Food? Please. What? What is it that is finite that we cant do without? Please explain this to me. The OP, myself, understands the fact that we can fix anything by advancing our species. Prove to me this world is overpopulated. SOMEBODY IN THIS THREAD PROVE IT TO ME!


Metals (copper, nickel etc..), fresh water, rainforests, coal, oil, fish (marine life), coral reefs, ecosystems, food, top soil (industrial agriculture, agribusiness), and all materials that you see used in modern society. You say we can solve everything by the use of technology, well if that's the case why haven't we done so already? If you mean technology is in development, well doesn't that mean it's not here yet? And how long will it be? Would it require an energy source to produce? Where are we going to get this energy source? You want exploration of the oceans and moon, yeah how would we build it? Wouldn't we need materials and energy sources? Is the technology available? To have an idea is fine and dandy but realistically implementing that idea is another thing altogether. Do you know what exponential growth is (please answer that question)?

Here's something for you to read:

www.guardian.co.uk...


Two-thirds of world's resources 'used up'
The human race is living beyond its means. A report backed by 1,360 scientists from 95 countries - some of them world leaders in their fields - today warns that the almost two-thirds of the natural machinery that supports life on Earth is being degraded by human pressure.

The study contains what its authors call "a stark warning" for the entire world. The wetlands, forests, savannahs, estuaries, coastal fisheries and other habitats that recycle air, water and nutrients for all living creatures are being irretrievably damaged. In effect, one species is now a hazard to the other 10 million or so on the planet, and to itself


Also good to note is the date, Wednesday 30 March 2005. That was 6 years ago, and I am sure it doesn't take a genius to think that things have gotten worse since then. But my guess is it'll be looked on as 'liberal propaganda"

edit on 22-6-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by e11888
 


The most important resource, that is our ability to efficiently utilize and distribute resources, is lacking.


edit on 22/6/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
So as a race we shouldn't do the responsible thing and try to control ourselves for the sake of future generations?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye
 





according to the us census bureau the average american birth rate is 1.5 kids per 2 parents,


Source? According to this link, the US total fertility rate is 2.06 per woman, which is considered ideal:

www.indexmundi.com...



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
www.npg.org...



One key factor noted in the report is that the population of the more developed nations (not including the U.S, China or India) "is hardly changing and will age markedly." It stated, "A combination of people living longer and having fewer children would nearly double the number of people over 60 years of age from the current 245 million to 406 million in 2050."

Another interesting forecast states that "the populations in 46 countries, including Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, most of the former Soviet Union states and several small island states are expected to be lower in 2050 than they are now." ...


www.statcan.gc.ca...


Throughout the 35 year period prior to 2007 the level of natural increase peaked in 1990 during which year there were 213,500 more births than deaths. Natural increase contributed just over one-third to the growth rate in Canada in 2007 relative to net migration. In some developed countries such as the United States and France natural increase is a more important factor in population growth than is net migration, as a result of relatively higher fertility. Yet other countries (e.g., Germany, Japan, Russia and Hungary) are experiencing very low or negative levels of natural increase due to low fertility, resulting in sometimes negative population growth rates.



www.winnipegfreepress.com...


Despite the worldwide recession, Canada is in the midst of a long-range labour shortage.

Between now and 2020, baby-boomer retirements, coupled with declining birth rates, are expected to produce a labour deficit of approximately 1.2 million workers.


Its all just spin, and propaganda.

What they should be focusing on instead is equalizing, and ridding the world of the pyramid structure and globalists/elitists, run by civilians. With that equality, and truth for a change, not lies and warring religions, no theocracies, no fascist states, but equality AND freedom, the population would be kept down to a dull roar.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Actually we need more kids. The blood ritual of war needs sacrificial victims to slake the thirst of the Old Gods.
Mankind loves to send it's children off to be killed and murdered in the name of patriotism and religion.

More kids....more war.... more blood and more money for those that profit in flesh and blood of innocents.

Gore is a traitor to the Glory of Mankind!




top topics



 
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join