Population control Isn't it about time?

Originally posted by Gorman91However all in all, the fact is that long ago these people knew how to survive. Globalism has robbed them of that native knowledge and turned them into dysfunctional mind slaves for factories. Do you really think people would live in shanty towns if they knew how to build and survive properly?

I think we have artificially sustained their increased population growth through the various aid programs usually "for the good of the starving children".

Not so sure about the slaves in factories angle making them dysfunctional. I mean if they would just have fewer children perhaps they wouldn't be starving?

the problem comes in those countries on the cusp in which large numbers of people are on the verge of starvation.

In a situation of starvation or severe malnutrition a woman ceases to ovulate as a protective mechanism. It’s related to body fat for the most part.

However, when we send food aid we keep them just over the point of severe malnutrition and thus they procreate. We, with our compassion are making the issues in these places worse.

Like when herds of deer become out of control they strip the countryside until they start to die off then the equilibrium is reached then they are in balance all is well. If we fed them we would create an artificial level of population that would result in massive die off if the aid was stopped.

That is the situation we created in Haiti and Africa. Absent European and American involvement these two places have never been able to sustain themselves to any reasonable standard. I hardly think we are the raiders people make us out to be.

Originally posted by grandmakdw
If you researched population growth you'll find that where ever women are educated, have opportunities to excel at an occupation, have all the same rights and privileges as men; then you know that these women on average have fewer than replacement level children.

How to solve the population "problem". Educate and free women. This is not a popular idea in many countries or religions, particularly in the middle east, but it is the only way. Women who are free and can truly choose their destiny and life choose to have on average 1.3 children which is below replacement level.

This is perhaps the best point I have seen so far.

This is why I believe what we are doing in Afghanistan is so important. I saw girls smiling on their way to school instead of being beaten.

Women were chattel to the Taliban now things are looking up.

The OP is seriously mis-led. There is no overpopulation on Earth

I read "The Population Bomb" when I was in college, predicting a collapse of society, if we didn't reduce population immediately. That was 39 years ago, folks...I'm now 64 and in many parts of this great land you can travel for miles and never see another person for days.

People who live in New York or LA are the ones who always cry, "the sky is falling" on this subject, thinking the whole earth is in the same miserable condition they find themselves in. IT AIN'T.

Take a deep breath and go to Montana on a hike sometime

I think it should be up to the parents to decide whether they want to have one kid who is starving to death or six. Seems that is what is happening in Somolia. There probably is enough food in the world to feed everyone if the governments don't limit its distribution. I personally would rather have one or two and provide for them the best I could, than to have so many kids that I would have to rely on government handouts to feed and clothe them.

reply to post by Gorman91



Well in Southern Calif it seems like I see a 'lot' of pregnant women going to school I don't think they are walking their children there.
Are you saying that every 13 year old (younger in many cases) who falls for a smooth line from a older man* who can't score with a woman old enough to see he is not father material should suffer a lifetime punishment for being misled?

Short of implanting all unmarried prepubescent female with Norplant (not without side effects) every five years and every male prior to puberty to (undergo a reversible vasectomy) I don't see how such can be achieved

*Granted Women pedophiles do exist but the ratio is so small in comparison to male as to not be a factor in this thread

reply to post by Reaper2137

You thread falls apart because of two things.

1. We are just breaking 7 billion, not 9 billion.
2. The Earth can sustain about 10 billion people in First World nations and about 15 billion over all.

Originally posted by Denslat so what happened to the predator for us humans?

That would be the Government, the Bilderburgers and everyone else who feeds off of your unique talents.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by RisenAngel77

 

You can motivate and encourage. You can never force it.

Unfortunately for you, most people, including myself, plan on having 2-3 kids, or more, should we make it off decently. Simply because we see this sort of thing happening, and as good parents, favor replacing your lack of reproducing with our own type of people. It's been done before, by many immigration groups, cultures, religions, etc etc. It's a sure-fire policy to reject and topple over this sort of mentality. You simply pick up where another side desires to pride itself off its own extinction.

So really, no problem by me. If one side has fewer kids, I'm encouraged to have more to replace them.

And your mentality is precisely the reason why TPTB would rather produce genocide because of the realization that people wont listen to reason.

Sorry if this has already been covered by somebody else, but the problem with population control is that historically the solution has been to kill the girls. And there's no reason to believe it will ever be any different. If it isn't "selective abortion" as in India, then it's "leave them on the woodpile" as in China. I am all for limiting population as long as it doesn't involve advance knowledge of gender or favoritism for males.

VA

Wouldn't it be crazy if the OP actually read and viewed all of the evidence and information contradicting his/her current ingrained beliefs and said something like,

"Oh, I guess I wasn't completely correct or as well-educated on the issue as I thought. Thank you all for your input even though it didn't agree with my original suppositions! I now have a better understanding of the issue."

That'll be the day.

reply to post by Golf66


You are right, and it is very logical. But there is no humanity in it. In the end, we either support them all the way or not at all. We shouldn't do this half way deal like you're saying.

Originally posted by piotrburz
But what benefits elite could obtain by depopulating earth?
-loss of consumers
-loss of cheap manpower
They are power maniacs, the bigger the empire the more illusion of power they have.

It's a good thought, but I truly believe their liabilities are currently outweighing their assets. The problem with people is each one has a mind of their own, with different wants, needs, desires and opinions. Controlling all of this is getting harder and harder. The more dissident voices in the empire, the less power the illusion has.

If you rule over everybody in the world, then it really doesn't matter how many there are. 7 million would be much less of a logistical headache than 7 billion, and there's no reason to assume that absolute power would be any less satisfying.

Originally posted by romanmelThere is no overpopulation on Earth

Yes there is but it is regional not worldwide.

Originally posted by romanmelPeople who live in New York or LA are the ones who always cry, "the sky is falling" on this subject, thinking the whole earth is in the same miserable condition they find themselves in. IT AIN'T.

Take a deep breath and go to Montana on a hike sometime

Set aside the fact that most people in NY And LA are idiots; this is basically my point overpopulation exists just not globally.

Therefore the solution is not a global one in which the 1st world is stripped of the lifestyle they have built for themselves so we can all live in 2nd world nations, but rather for each locality to support itself and find the balance with the resources they have available.

We need to stop globalism – it is an anathema to the competitive nature of human beings.

We are never going to live in harmony as a diverse multicultural "lStar Trek" melting pot.

The cultures have real and some would argue even biological differences that will never be overcome.

Embrace and accept it – to be counter to ones true nature is an abomination.

We are different and each culture/race has advantages and disadvantages they will compete for world hegemony and some will go through phases of waxing and waning like the moon gaining and losing influence over the affairs of the world.

reply to post by VforVendettea


To be honest, anyone whose stupid enough to fall for that does deserve what they get. We should promote young independent female minds who are smart enough to flip the creep the bird, while caring enough to take care of their mistakes the humane way, not the machine way of ripping out and killing our mistakes. Same for boys, too, btw. What the hell led to the idea of a guy sleeping with as many girls as possible as something good or helpful to society? Were is trust? Where is loyalty? Where is humanity? I don't want to sound like some chivalry promoter, but to be honest, a little humanity would be nice.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Golf66

 

You are right, and it is very logical. But there is no humanity in it. In the end, we either support them all the way or not at all. We shouldn't do this half way deal like you're saying.

I am sorry, I obviously didn't communicate my stance very well.

I am all for leaveing the 3rd world to their own devices entirely - no foreign aid what so ever.

Only in leaving them alone will they achieve thier balance with regional resources.

ETA:

Originally posted by Gorman91 What the hell led to the idea of a guy sleeping with as many girls as possible as something good or helpful to society? Where is trust? Where is loyalty? Where is humanity? I don't want to sound like some chivalry promoter, but to be honest, a little humanity would be nice.

Something we definitely can agree upon; men and this need to conquer and forget mentality with regards to women in some cultures - especially the American inner cities and the third world nations has contributed to their present condition.

Women need to be educated and empowered in these environments - that information would do more good than any financial or food aid.

reply to post by RisenAngel77


Well genocide always catches up to its promoters. I haven't seen anybody truly get away from it.

Of course from my point of view, a river of blood is worth the tree of liberty it feeds.

reply to post by Golf66


But we do have to be responsible. Our actions have caused that imbalance. Are we to drop and run like the English French and Belgium did in Africa, leaving a continent in eternal war and suffering?

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Golf66

 

But we do have to be responsible. Our actions have caused that imbalance. Are we to drop and run like the English French and Belgium did in Africa, leaving a continent in eternal war and suffering?

Sometimes that is the best answer; we can't support them forever. Like a parent who overendulges a child and creates one who can't seem to support themselves - then later realizes it...

For the good of the child as painful as it might be to watch - they must at some point kick them out of the nest.

The bird will fly or fall as it were...it is through the falling and getting back up the bird learns to fly properly.

It's either that or support them forever.

ETA:

Originally posted by Gorman91You are right, and it is very logical. But there is no humanity in it. In the end

I think it is the most humane thing to do. What is most preferable is for them to be no suffering. However, preferable it may be it is not practical. So the shortest period of suffering may be the only option. They will either learn to survive or not but the suffering will not be prolonged by our continued meddling.

Of course "they" don't want more population. More people = less control for TPTB. And not even in a sinister, ulterior motive viewpoint. It's a lot of work for governments. They would just just not deal with the issues a higher population creates, although, population in of itself is not a problem.

Then you have greed: there are plenty of natural resourses, especially of the untapped kinds. But of course, your .05% of the richest would not live their happy gluttonous lives out like they wanted if oil went away.

You get laziness + greed and end up with people imagining we have this population issue. It's an illusion.

Now.. there ARE population issues within single families. I think responsible families makes sense. Not 12 kids. That makes no sense if you cannot sustain for your own family.

Russia at the moment is facing a serious population DECLINE, which they are trying to combat. They are expecting to lose some 40 million people in the next couple of decades. So no, the world is not just exploding in an overabundance of people.

Originally posted by Reaper2137
Just because you are to closed minded to see whats happening doesn't mean its not. Here in the United States over population is not a problem yet. Its a problem in non-industrial countries with lack of basic resources and it also doesn't help that the United States has like 5% of the world population and consumes 30% of the world resources.

How many of these other non industrial Countries have you visited?
my guess is you have never been outside of US borders.
Your "New World Education" suggests that you are the one with the closed mind.
Travel the Globe, you will never look at things in quite the same way again.

PEACE,
RK