BF2S Forums A Warming Planet Struggles to Feed Itself

Population reduction would solve a lot of humanity's problems.

Pubic wrote:

Population reduction would solve a lot of humanity's problems.

How do we go about that? China's solution?

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

The planet's not struggling. Life is.

Agree'd.  There's nothing humans can do that will irreversibly destroy the planet.  Sure, we may kill off ourselves and maybe a bunch of species, but mass extinctions are nothing new.  There's nothing we can do that a few hundred thousand years won't fix. 

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Meh, I live in California. When it gets bad the f**king retarded environmentalists will let us irrigate certain areas of the Central Valley again. As opposed to making hundreds lose their jobs to save a fking 1inch long fish nobody gives a crap about.

Fucking christ someone get shitty some crayons so he can express himself in a more appropriate fashion.

Kmar wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Kmar wrote:

How do we go about that? China's solution?

take away peoples babies and put them up for adoption while pocketing the cash.

lol.. that will go over real smooth like.

it did in china

Cybargs wrote:

Kmar wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

take away peoples babies and put them up for adoption while pocketing the cash.

lol.. that will go over real smooth like.

it did in china

Start snatching peoples children up in a free society and prepare for war.

Macbeth wrote:

Kmar wrote:

Pubic wrote:

Population reduction would solve a lot of humanity's problems.

How do we go about that?

In the west? Easy, provide economic incentives for limiting reproduction. Add a bunch tax penalties for having children.Combine that with more sex education and you could begin to drive down the population in U.S.

I don't know why you would want to do that though. There isn't really a population problem in most industrialized countries. Hell the Japanese and Taiwanese are trying to get their people to start reproducing again.

So your easy solution is to tax the people trying to support children? Sex education isn't going to change much. Almost everyone knows the consequences of unprotected sex and they still do it. The US population has gone from 150 mil to over 300 mil in about 50 years. It's true that European nations have stalled. But most of the rest of the world has not.

Examples: http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb- … &dl=en
Tick the world box to see the trend as a whole.

What on earth would taxing people in the US do when the overwhelming majority of the world's population growth will be in Africa?

I'll say it again - population growth + global demographics is by far the most poorly understood global issue around atm.

Blue Herring wrote:

Especially since higher carbon dioxide levels have existed in the past. It won't go down overnight, but to state that it will never go down and that our children and children's children won't have clean air to breathe is just asinine.

No-one has ever claimed that.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

In the west? Easy, provide economic incentives for limiting reproduction. Add a bunch tax penalties for having children.Combine that with more sex education and you could begin to drive down the population in U.S.

I don't know why you would want to do that though. There isn't really a population problem in most industrialized countries. Hell the Japanese and Taiwanese are trying to get their people to start reproducing again.

The problem basically is the economic system which requires exponential growth.

that's been obvious for a very long time now. the question is: how do we even start to fix that shit when everybody and his mother in law is neck deep in it?

What we should do is wait until we're up to our ears in swamp and then worry about it.

To those making claims... prove that the earth can not sustain a population double what it is supporting today. Hint: You can't. So fuck off with this whole the earth is dying, we need to eradicate humans bullshit.

Burden of proof lies with those asking for massive changes. Most of the world has a negative growth rate.  Africa and South America do not. They either need to industrialize their food production or cut their growth rate. Either way food aid needs to end. People like you caused the mess.

Population will either fall back on itself through plague and famine or we will transcend the limitations of our time and use technology to maintain the species.

Two factors that could potentially balance out a ruined world:

- New coastal flood plains. If the Greenland and the Antarctic ice sheets should melt, then we might expect many coastal regions to be submerged or damaged greatly; however, new lands may open up for irrigation.

- With that, new liveable land will open up in those areas formally covered in ice and arctic tundra.

Jay wrote:

Burden of proof lies with those asking for massive changes. Most of the world has a negative growth rate.  Africa and South America do not. They either need to industrialize their food production or cut their growth rate. Either way food aid needs to end. People like you caused the mess.

Food aid does not need to end, not until we find a better solution. South America and Africa contained sustainable populations before colonization-- populations not ridden with pestilence and starvation. We owe them the tools to reach levels of sustainability once more.

Last edited by Superior Mind (2011-06-06 06:42:00)