Climate change versus over population.

[123everton]

In a question about climate change one the poster's suggested that over population was the problem.
Ok, let's say it is, it is certainly issue, so what's the solution?
A restriction on birthrate would only abate the increase in population, perhaps a cut off point?
Three score years and ten followed by termination, would you be willing to go into te pot?
If population controls were to be implemented how happy would you be to have these controls imposed upon you and yours?
In what form could they be implemented?
Is it really that there's not too many people on the planet, rather too many of the wrong kind of people on the planet?

[Androcles]

The resources of earth are finite. If we continue to grow population then sooner of later we will not be ale to produce sufficient food for every body. IN my view there is only one humane way to do this and that is for man to voluntarily restrict the growth rate, which means contraception and a target that we agree only to replace ourselves, i.e one child per person, lifetime limit.

Anything else is tyranny!

[Old_Geezer]

Ideally it needs to be voluntary. It is a human rights issue too. Governments can help by giving incentives to keep families smaller rather than incentives to have another child.

Why do you think it would only abate the increase ? If applied successfully and one gets fewer than an average of 2 children per pair of adults, the population decreases.

Compulsory euthanasia is a "straw man" and the subject should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

However this is a long term solution tacking a root cause. It is probable the planet needs to find shorter term patches to our problems too, but not to stop having applied them.

[Androcles]

That should be "able to produce sufficent food".

[123everton]

I quite like the cut of your jib Old Geezer.

[Ankou]

the argument is that we need a next generation labour force to prop up the economy and secure that our future going into retirement and death is sustained by a new young workforce. limiting population growth limits welath generation and labout productivity.

the counter argument of course, is the drain in society that is this unsused labour force of teenage/20s unemployment levels have nothing to produce or sell (lack of industry or lack of education) and we have become primarily a service industry nation (professional, accountants, bankers etc) and our production and export levels are probably at its lowest ever.

i think as said above, the only incentive would be financial, as in you are only suported for one child or two children - anything after that is down to you.

[Rev Sermon]

There is as always a lot of scaremongering and I doubt we'll run out of space or food in the near future however Androcles' first two sentences are ultimately correct.

Ideally if the whole of the world's poulation signed up to a limit on reproduction the population would stabilise, unfortunately that's against human nature and our base instincts and is never likely to happen. Rightly or wrongly I suspect the traditional methods of population control will inevitably kick in at some stage, namely pestilence and war.

Sorry to put a downer on things.

[Ankou]

maybe climate change is natures way of trimming down this over-burden on the planet.

[Androcles]

"Ideally if the whole of the world's poulation signed up to a limit on reproduction the population would stabilise, unfortunately that's against human nature and our base instincts and is never likely to happen. Rightly or wrongly I suspect the traditional methods of population control will inevitably kick in at some stage, namely pestilence and war."

Enter the Rev Malthus?

[Rev Sermon]

Androcles,

Afraid I had to resort to Google but basically yes. You can only fit so many people on the planet so either we rein ourselves in or war, famine and disease will do it for us.

[jake-the-peg]

This is an incorrect argument designed to distract attention

As usual you have to examine the numbers and they are hoping you will not do this

China uses 3.1 Tonnes of Carbon per head
India 1.0
USA 29
UK 15

http://www.clickgreen...93-uk-comes-10th.html

Even if you take out the per head and take absolute values China just squeezes out the US by the barest of margins

Effectively the argument says to developing countries "you have to continue living in poor conditions so that we don't have to cut back"

Not only that but because so much of the goods we use in the west are produced in China we are effectively outsourcing our emissions to them!

The idea that the problem is in population growth also assumes that we are OK as we are and do not to reduce which is incorrect.

I'm assuming that the argument was also put that they're not even trying to cut back.

This is also untrue

China and India both signed up for Carbon reductions last year

http://www.guardian.c...rbon-intensity-target

I'm not getting drawn into the climate change debate in News any more though because you can show them all the facts and give them all the reasons you like.

They associate climate change with left wing politics and so the fingers just go in the ears and it's "Nah Nah Nah If I shout loud enough it won't be true"

[123everton]

Maybe the world would be a better place if it weren't for all those pesky foreigners messing it up.

[jake-the-peg]

Yes - why take responsibility and act when you can simply blame someone else?

[123everton]

Cos it's fun.

[rojash]

It was suggested that all people with an IQ under 80 should be humanely terminated. But AB lobbied strongly against this on the grounds that it would empty Chatterbank and decimate News

[TWR]

Two bricks normaly work Everton.

[flobadob]

The earths been working away for a dew billion years if you believe that scientific hype so I don't think the actions of a few overgrown monkeys are going to bother mother nature too much.

[naomi24]

I tend to agree with flobadob. Man can't defeat nature. The best he can hope for, whether it be his fight against global warming, or over-population, is to delay the inevitable. Having said that, maybe the worst scenario isn't inevitable. Perhaps nature itself will find its own remedy.