The following was posted on another message board. Cool stat and thought I'd start one here too. If this is the case, contraception is not really necessary as the definition of "over population" doesn’t seem to fit with its exact definition had all the world’s population been put into Texas. :itold:
What about the resources required to satisfy 6,276,000,000 people? Its not just a case of people having a place to stand without touching.
In short the problem could be over consumption and/or improper use of resources, not over-population. So, to be pinpointing population as the primary and the sole cause of poverty is, I think, lopsided. Contraception had been used in the United States for nearly 50 years but "we (still) have poor people." "The solution to poverty is not to tell (families) not to have children any more because children could be the greatest treasure we have. The solution to poverty is the elimination of corruption ... not only in the US and every other nation. The solution to poverty is to care for the poorest of the poor, not to tell them not to have any children. There were "other aspects" of poverty that needed to be addressed, like "the equitable distribution of resources (and) land reform." In agriculural contries, for example, how much of the budget is dedicated to agriculture? So we need to focus on the situation in the countryside.
So what are you proposing? Global communism? Good luck getting people to buy into, sorry, ration into that.
It could of course be better for the world if the entire human population would be moved to Texas. And then nuked from space. Or at least keep the major damage local. You would still have the problem of feeding all these people. But maybe we could set up automated farms across a few other american states. Unfortunately that doesn't take care of the people's iPads. That is a bit of a problem. People can't live without those.
I'm almost astounded by the simplistic approach presented by the OP and his subsequent statements. In fact, I don't recall ever having heard anyone say that overpopulation was simply a matter of not enough standing space for all the people. Shucks, we could build high-rise apartments on an area much smaller than Texas and easily house 100 times the current total world population. No, the real problems with over-population are actually manifold and I won't even try to compile a comprehensive list - but here are just a few hints for starters: Food Jobs Infrastructure: Transportation, education, health care (and all it's various components and facilities), etc,. etc. Fresh water Human-waste management Depletion of natural resources Energy
Groups such as the Center for Reproductive Rights, from Wall Street in New York City. The business of contraception is big money.
You're right, contraception is not necessary but we need to kill off a few billion people somehow because we're destroying the environment we live in.
There is always a call to reduce poor populations. However, rich populations consume MUCH more than poor populations and poor populations have a MUCH greater need for family connections/support and a young workforce. The reality is rich populations don't want to "help" poor populations - they just want the poor populations to disappear to make more room for the so-called advanced societies of wealthier populations. Is it a coincidence that calls for population control usually come from the wealthier people instead of from the poor people who endure the brunt of resource scarcity? With wealth comes greater resource consumption, including space, goods, and services. Since goods require labor to produce, and services are direct consumption of human labor, wealthier people are the ones creating more demand for human capital - and then complaining about over-population!
Now you're tapping into the heart of population concerns: greed . . . or possibly naive materialistic consumerism.
How many people are too many people? 10 Billion? 50 Billion? How about 1 Trillion people? At some point we're going to have to do what China did and limit births OR pandemic. Almost every Chinese I know supports limiting births IN China. They ALL tell me there's too many f-n people. It's like wall to wall people. Which is why they moved here. I know families with 14 kids. 14! WHY the F does ANYONE need to pump out 14 f-n Kids?!?! You want to know why? Because they think "God" wants them to have lots and lots of kids - almost ALL of whom milk the welfare system. Bastards. this shits coming to a head Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I guess they figure if they have 14 kids, at least one of them may become successful enough to support the rest of the family.. Or, at least you have a 14 person personal workforce..Helpful if you own a farm etc. And, of course you have the "milk the system" angle also.
First brought to a head with this: The Population Bomb was a best-selling book written by Paul R. Ehrlich in 1968 Which was somewhat sensational, but basically correct in much of it's position. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb also: The Population Bomb Revisited: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/12166078/Population-Bomb-Revisited
The Wiki page on World Population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population and of course there is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_on_Zanzibar
The world population will start dropping by itself in 2050. No need to worry about the population going to a trillion.