The Malthusians are out of control

The striking thing, and it could be how the quotes are represented but even Mary doesn’t knock it off the agenda, but more concerned to the selling of the idea of population control.

The Malthusians are misguided and are out of control. They preach a self-centered ideology that is based on a flawed concept of life and universe. Their characteristic rational manifests itself as state imposed misery via TAXES and banal regulations. No room or flair for life. No we must eradicate its incursion on ours more precious.

The constant cry “there is not enough for us all” is a false cry, a wolf calling boy. The truth of their rhetoric is “there is not enough for all of some of us”.

I also note that Mr Turner has five children. All being trustifarians no doubt. I am sure their global resources footprint would be equal to many many thousands of those third world babies he thinks we dont need.

So who is going to support the One Baby generation in China in their old age?

Another hypocritical wind bag billionaire .

They all seem to default to this outlook. Makes you wonder.

It is utterly disgusting to hear rich western people talking like this Have they never seen the equation

I = PAT, which can be used to demonstrate it is not population thats the problem, its affluence and technology.
Reminds me a lot of the green party’s misguided policies. We need a proper technocracy where decisions are based on solid scientific principles, not the newest illconcieved meme

Man, now there’s a song I heard before…

Hey Boomshackala the Lucifarians are already on this ill conceived path and it too is not working. Presuming you are not a Lucifarian that is :smiling_imp:

If the Malthusians only had one child each, would that solve the problem?

Only if they ate the child…

I said we need one, not that we should should try and get one, everyone knows that anarchism is the only plausible answer :laughing:

Just based upon the mathematics, population control is necessary.
Heading to 7 billion and beyond, there will come a point at which starvation is inevitable.

However, bar a draconian system such as China, implementation is near to impossible.
Also, human history has little to no evidence of planning to avoid such a disaster.

This combination will result in the obvious - mass starvation in countries which have explosive population growth.
The usual suspects will be hit - Sub-Saharan Africa and poor Asian countries including India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Humans will be subject to the old Fox and Chicken graph.
But it will be Humans and Food/other resources.

Don’t know when that point will be hit, but unchecked population growth points to ‘when’, not ‘if’.

have a look at the wikilink I posted above, it might clarify things. For instance a western house cat needs something like an acre of land to keep it going, much more than families of humans in poor countries. What matters is the resources consumed rather than population numbers.

I too watch QI :stuck_out_tongue:

If you are going to control anything at least start with the Malthusians they seem to be predisposed resource hogs :smiling_imp:

do elaborate

Surely you get the irony of my proposal? :neutral_face:

According to my calculations, you could put 6.5 billion people in Ireland with every one having 138.6 square feet. :bulb:

Ted Turner’s land holdings are more than 2 million acres. That is about 1/10th the size of Ireland.

The whole population of the world would fit on his land with each person having about 14 square feet.

Edit to add information.

Fair enough, must have had a blond moment there

How about this for the population control facists:
theres a place where they have western standards of fertility, literacy and life expectancy and still live on under a dollar a day. Their impact must be tiny by western standards, and I think its from places like this that the next civilization will dawn

If you have a boring job, this is well worth a read today. They definitely look at the world differently there, but then again they have a nice climate, they can afford to sit around in Sari’s all day and talk about postmodernist indian film trends

What equations?

Why 7 billion?

I think getting rid of support for single mothers would do in most of Western World. Removing CB would be other idea.

What combination? What if their population would channel into producing goods and services that can be exchanged by food? Are families larger in poorer countries or are countries poorer when families are larger?

I could not argue that closed feedback loops do exist, but mathematics has limited applicability in reality. I’m suspicious if this very regular graph would hold true, as food chains are much more complicated.

9/10 Billion animals are slaughtered each year for the US alone. They are fellow mammals requriring very similar if not identical resources.

DO you think you know magical number that reveals the biological capacity of mother spaceship earth?

So far wide of the mark of marks. The Lucifarians have their field day with the blinding festivals of numbers. So easily the aspect lost.

SO easily distracted by nothing. Try not to make it a habit!

it would be nice if we could manage and limit population growth trends without dictating who should be sterilized. The best way to do this is education (ref Hans rosling: he’s got lots of videos on, which are quite interesting). Education and subsequent rise from poverty causes fertility rates to drop like a stone. The Example I gave above about Kerala is an excellent example. The problem I think Rosling doesn’t see is that by doing so, these societies get contaminated by western industrialization and consumerism and all the unsustainable living habits that come along with it, unless they can repel it by assuming an opposing ideaology like the Keralans did. The bottom line is that it’s Capitalism probably has a lot to answer for, with its polarization of wealth, private property rights, enslavement of the bovine population etc, but its also probably an unstoppable force.