7 billion... make love, not babies?
-
well, we are now officially 7 billion...
overpopulated?
look around you... everywhere, people are cramped like sardines... there is major degradation of the ecosystem, pollution everywhere.. it is unsustainable...
=> 7 billion
yet, most gabraments keep telling their people to have more children...
the global population doubled in the past 50 years...
are we going the way of Easter Island where there will be an ecological great die-out?
make love, not babies...
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
well, we are now officially 7 billion...
overpopulated?
look around you... everywhere, people are cramped like sardines... there is major degradation of the ecosystem, pollution everywhere.. it is unsustainable...
=> 7 billion
yet, most gabraments keep telling their people to have more children...
the global population doubled in the past 50 years...
are we going the way of Easter Island where there will be an ecological great die-out?
make love, not babies...
Tell me about it and maybe species are wiped out in the wild for damming projects etc and forests being cleared to make way for more corn and soybean fields because there is just not enough food.
And then we have the Americans who are busy marketing food as alternative source of energy when producing them consumes as much fossil fuels -_-"
-
china and india the main problem.
1 billion each. really siao liao.
-
Gabrament policies of "more babies" and "less babies" cycle is stupid... It's a short term solution but it doesn't nib the problem in the bud...
if u have more babies now, next time too much ppl, no housing, then less babies then wait later not enuff labour and manpower... then u bring in the FT, then shyt happens...
beside, are we some sort of factory like u call us more babies then we more babies, u say less babies then we less babies???
-_______-
-
Originally posted by ^Acid^ aka s|aO^eH~:
Gabrament policies of "more babies" and "less babies" cycle is stupid... It's a short term solution but it doesn't nib the problem in the bud...
if u have more babies now, next time too much ppl, no housing, then less babies then wait later not enuff labour and manpower... then u bring in the FT, then shyt happens...
beside, are we some sort of factory like u call us more babies then we more babies, u say less babies then we less babies???
-_______-
Well, the reason our govt wants us to have more babies is because they need more workers for the economy. So do you think they think we are some sort of factory?
-
of course we are some sort of factory for them, the GDP translates to their big fat pocket
-
And when these immigrants and babies grow old, they will need even more immigrants and babies to replace and support them. The current system is unsustainable and untenable. The only way to keep humanity going would ironically be a "crime against humanity"...
-
overcrowding is aggravated by good life witnessed by the inches of fats that 2 seats are needed for one asshole....
-
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:
And when these immigrants and babies grow old, they will need even more immigrants and babies to replace and support them. The current system is unsustainable and untenable. The only way to keep humanity going would ironically be a "crime against humanity"...
Well said.
-
I guess I can't subscribe to this view.. having just a baby myself recently :)
I think subscribing the problem to the population quantity is sort of confusing a correlation with the cause.In the whole history of mankind- the average number of babies PER couple is probably far more than the current situation. Just look at our grandparents, most of them stop at... 6-7? We stop at 1-2. The advanced technologies in medical, agricultural fields simply meant out of the 1-2, more survive and survive longer. Thus, population boom.
Now, the problem of environmental destruction is due ALSO to the advanced technologies: that are not advanced enough to use but not abuse. The worst of this is: the benefit of these technologies are only enjoyed by a SMALL group of the entire population. It isn't consumerism due to LARGE population. It is consumerism and wastage by a much much smaller 'elite' piece of the population pie.
Sure, CHina contributes the most to global warming. India is on the list too. BUT per capita, their contribution is TINY. Instead its United States and Australia, that contributes the TOP Co2 to global warming - and comparatively - their population is much smaller.
So... population may MAKE the problem worse - but it isn't the cause of the problem. I think what we need is .. to make a BIGGER Portion of the population start being aware and conscious of the wastage and damage.. (and as I say this, I am guilty of having the TV on while typing on the laptop)... to recycle and reuse more.
THe problem isn't with the quantity of the population: It is with the QUALITY of mankind now.
-
Originally posted by ShrodingersCat:
I guess I can't subscribe to this view.. having just a baby myself recently :)
I think subscribing the problem to the population quantity is sort of confusing a correlation with the cause.In the whole history of mankind- the average number of babies PER couple is probably far more than the current situation. Just look at our grandparents, most of them stop at... 6-7? We stop at 1-2. The advanced technologies in medical, agricultural fields simply meant out of the 1-2, more survive and survive longer. Thus, population boom.
Now, the problem of environmental destruction is due ALSO to the advanced technologies: that are not advanced enough to use but not abuse. The worst of this is: the benefit of these technologies are only enjoyed by a SMALL group of the entire population. It isn't consumerism due to LARGE population. It is consumerism and wastage by a much much smaller 'elite' piece of the population pie.
Sure, CHina contributes the most to global warming. India is on the list too. BUT per capita, their contribution is TINY. Instead its United States and Australia, that contributes the TOP Co2 to global warming - and comparatively - their population is much smaller.
So... population may MAKE the problem worse - but it isn't the cause of the problem. I think what we need is .. to make a BIGGER Portion of the population start being aware and conscious of the wastage and damage.. (and as I say this, I am guilty of having the TV on while typing on the laptop)... to recycle and reuse more.
THe problem isn't with the quantity of the population: It is with the QUALITY of mankind now.
Yes, we can reduce our footprint but only by so much, because every living person needs to food, water, transport and shelter. And it doesn't help when people in rapidly-industrialising countries aspire to the kind of lifestyle that is portrayed in the developed world, and believe it's their right to attain it before thinking about saving the planet.
-
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:
Yes, we can reduce our footprint but only by so much, because every living person needs to food, water, transport and shelter. And it doesn't help when people in rapidly-industrialising countries aspire to the kind of lifestyle that is portrayed in the developed world, and believe it's their right to attain it before thinking about saving the planet.
Yeah some of my friends have decided to reduce consumer wastage by totally not buying anything new. They either borrow, buy 2nd hand, get from freecycle.com etc. It requires a lot of discipline and commitment and a HUGE paradigm shift. -
Originally posted by ShrodingersCat:
Yeah some of my friends have decided to reduce consumer wastage by totally not buying anything new. They either borrow, buy 2nd hand, get from freecycle.com etc. It requires a lot of discipline and commitment and a HUGE paradigm shift.is it dat bad in spore now?
-
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:
Yes, we can reduce our footprint but only by so much, because every living person needs to food, water, transport and shelter. And it doesn't help when people in rapidly-industrialising countries aspire to the kind of lifestyle that is portrayed in the developed world, and believe it's their right to attain it before thinking about saving the planet.
the united nations should target countries with exponentially high human production rates and take steps to innoculate n sterilise them by force.
-
*deleted
-
what wastage?never wasted anything unlesss im some million $$$$$$$ minister.
-
and why did shrodingers cat delete stuff?
-
our natural resources are being chewed up like anything and with our ever growing hunger for materialism, the effects of climate change will become even more apparent.
-
make love not war..
-
What the world needs is a better redistribution of people across the world.
-
when the next killer virus comes......like black death, world population reduce by at least half.
-
Pfft... 7 Billion. lol
Redistrubition.. but with so many people foreigner phobia... haha
-
a baby is born every 3 seconds.......
-
Originally posted by FireIce:
a baby is born every 3 seconds.......
no lah, 1 baby per 2 seconds
-
Overpopulated, I think not (yet). Long overdue for resource management, yes! How much perfectly decent food are we tossing into bins, and how many across the globe are actually starving from malnutrition?
Oh, and licensed parenting maybe...
