The Myth of an Overpopulated World

[80zephyr]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

On the contrary, your freedom extends to where the next persons feet begin. The closer those feet are, the less freedom you have. If you have only 4 people living along a river 400 miles long all urinate in the river, it doesn't make a bit of difference. If 4 million people live along the river, and all do that, you no longer have a river, just a big sewer that is a health hazard for all. And you have to have regulations to protect the people from their own actions.

As the population increases and people's feet get closer together, there is less freedom of action for all. Simple, physical effect.

I agree.

Mark

 

[Unkotare]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

On the contrary, your freedom extends to where the next persons feet begin. The closer those feet are, the less freedom you have. If you have only 4 people living along a river 400 miles long all urinate in the river, it doesn't make a bit of difference. If 4 million people live along the river, and all do that, you no longer have a river, just a big sewer that is a health hazard for all. And you have to have regulations to protect the people from their own actions.

As the population increases and people's feet get closer together, there is less freedom of action for all. Simple, physical effect.

Still more than enough room.

 

[mamooth]

Still more than enough room.

So you're okay with a large number of immigrants moving in next to you?

Oh, you meant "more than enough room somewhere far from me."

 

[80zephyr]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

On the contrary, your freedom extends to where the next persons feet begin. The closer those feet are, the less freedom you have. If you have only 4 people living along a river 400 miles long all urinate in the river, it doesn't make a bit of difference. If 4 million people live along the river, and all do that, you no longer have a river, just a big sewer that is a health hazard for all. And you have to have regulations to protect the people from their own actions.

As the population increases and people's feet get closer together, there is less freedom of action for all. Simple, physical effect.

Still more than enough room.

Sure there is. But there is no need for more people.

Mark

 

[Unkotare]

Still more than enough room.

So you're okay with a large number of immigrants moving in next to you?...

Sure, not that it has anything to do with this false crisis.

 

[Unkotare]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

On the contrary, your freedom extends to where the next persons feet begin. The closer those feet are, the less freedom you have. If you have only 4 people living along a river 400 miles long all urinate in the river, it doesn't make a bit of difference. If 4 million people live along the river, and all do that, you no longer have a river, just a big sewer that is a health hazard for all. And you have to have regulations to protect the people from their own actions.

As the population increases and people's feet get closer together, there is less freedom of action for all. Simple, physical effect.

Still more than enough room.

Sure there is. But there is no need for more people. ...

There was no "need" for you, but here you are.

 

[80zephyr]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

On the contrary, your freedom extends to where the next persons feet begin. The closer those feet are, the less freedom you have. If you have only 4 people living along a river 400 miles long all urinate in the river, it doesn't make a bit of difference. If 4 million people live along the river, and all do that, you no longer have a river, just a big sewer that is a health hazard for all. And you have to have regulations to protect the people from their own actions.

As the population increases and people's feet get closer together, there is less freedom of action for all. Simple, physical effect.

Still more than enough room.

Sure there is. But there is no need for more people. ...

There was no "need" for you, but here you are.

I can see your point of view, I simply disagree with it. BTW, with a worldwide fertility rate of 2.36, we are just over the replacement rate of 2.33

If it holds, population will grow slowly or possibly not at all, in the near future.

Mark

 

[Unkotare]

Bullshit.

On the contrary, your freedom extends to where the next persons feet begin. The closer those feet are, the less freedom you have. If you have only 4 people living along a river 400 miles long all urinate in the river, it doesn't make a bit of difference. If 4 million people live along the river, and all do that, you no longer have a river, just a big sewer that is a health hazard for all. And you have to have regulations to protect the people from their own actions.

As the population increases and people's feet get closer together, there is less freedom of action for all. Simple, physical effect.

Still more than enough room.

Sure there is. But there is no need for more people. ...

There was no "need" for you, but here you are.

I can see your point of view, I simply disagree with it. BTW, with a worldwide fertility rate of 2.36, we are just over the replacement rate of 2.33

If it holds, population will grow slowly or possibly not at all, in the near future.

Mark

Within the next 50-60 years global population will begin to decline. When it starts it will pick up speed rapidly. Overpopulation is a myth opposite of what we should be planning for.

 

[80zephyr]

On the contrary, your freedom extends to where the next persons feet begin. The closer those feet are, the less freedom you have. If you have only 4 people living along a river 400 miles long all urinate in the river, it doesn't make a bit of difference. If 4 million people live along the river, and all do that, you no longer have a river, just a big sewer that is a health hazard for all. And you have to have regulations to protect the people from their own actions.

As the population increases and people's feet get closer together, there is less freedom of action for all. Simple, physical effect.

Still more than enough room.

Sure there is. But there is no need for more people. ...

There was no "need" for you, but here you are.

I can see your point of view, I simply disagree with it. BTW, with a worldwide fertility rate of 2.36, we are just over the replacement rate of 2.33

If it holds, population will grow slowly or possibly not at all, in the near future.

Mark

Within the next 50-60 years global population will begin to decline. When it starts it will pick up speed rapidly. Overpopulation is a myth opposite of what we should be planning for.

I agree. Even one generation of women having below replacement level fertility will cause a "collapse" in our population.

Mark

 

[sealybobo]

I won't bore you with the math, but if you put every human being on earth in Texas, Texas would have half the density of Manhattan.

I've learned the only people whining about overpopulation are those that do not travel.

Have you heard how humans are overfishing the oceans?

Have you heard we are running out of sand? Look it up.

We have too many big cities overpopulated with poor people. We may not be overpopulated in Mayberry but we are in big cities.

We have too many poor people. I believe and hope the republicans policies will cut off the number of poor people who get pregnant. Even poor people aren’t stupid enough to have more than one mistake when there’s no additional help for a second mistake.

One of the things I like about republicans they don’t want to subsidize stupidity. Their policies will lower the birth rates appropriately

 

[sealybobo]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

You must admit we have too many poor women with multiple kids on welfare and food stamps. I’m hoping republicans make cuts to welfare and food stamps and Medicaid not because I want to hurt kids but instead I want to stop their parents from having half of them. I understand giving a poor mother food stamps but what about Obamacare? You believe poor women’s kids should get free healthcare? If you do that would surprise me.

So I’m thinking if republicans don’t continue all the programs that help these people their parents will think twice before having another mistake.

Middle class people stop after one or two kids because we can’t afford more. We’d love to have more but then we’d be poor. It’s the main reason I didn’t have kids. So why do poor people ever have more than one mistake?

For this I’m a republican

 

[Vastator]

I won't bore you with the math, but if you put every human being on earth in Texas, Texas would have half the density of Manhattan.

I've learned the only people whining about overpopulation are those that do not travel.

I saw the same you tube video. At least give credit where credit is due. And you call your self a Christian...

 

[Vastator]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

Real compelling evidence you brought to the table there... It’ll take the board a good while to formulate a decent response...

 

[Unkotare]

Some liberal hypocridiots are too dumb/disingenuous to recognize the distinction between economic principle and valuing human life in and of itself.

...

Middle class people stop after one or two kids because we can’t afford more.

"We"?

...

It’s the main reason I didn’t have kids.

Yeeeeeaaaaaah.....sure......

...

So why do poor people ever have more than one mistake?

Human life is not a mistake (present company excluded).

...

For this I’m a republican

No, you're not.

 

[Unkotare]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

Real compelling evidence you brought to the table there... It’ll take the board a good while to formulate a decent response...

We have more than enough room and resources on our planet. "Harmoniously" is not a matter of headcount. 10 billion people can live together if they want to, and two people can kill each other if they want to.

 

[sealybobo]

Some liberal hypocridiots are too dumb/disingenuous to recognize the distinction between economic principle and valuing human life in and of itself.

...

Middle class people stop after one or two kids because we can’t afford more.

"We"?

...

It’s the main reason I didn’t have kids.

Yeeeeeaaaaaah.....sure......

...

So why do poor people ever have more than one mistake?

Human life is not a mistake (present company excluded).

...

For this I’m a republican

No, you're not.

It just seems to me we wouldn’t be overpopulated at all if all the kids on welfare were not born.

And maybe, just maybe, if it weren’t affordable for poor people to have more than 1 kid they wouldn’t just like middle class people don’t have more kids than they can afford.

I’m just saying if you have one kid on welfare food stamps and Obamacare you should not be having a second. No one disagrees

 

[Unkotare]

Some liberal hypocridiots are too dumb/disingenuous to recognize the distinction between economic principle and valuing human life in and of itself.

...

Middle class people stop after one or two kids because we can’t afford more.

"We"?

...

It’s the main reason I didn’t have kids.

Yeeeeeaaaaaah.....sure......

...

So why do poor people ever have more than one mistake?

Human life is not a mistake (present company excluded).

...

For this I’m a republican

No, you're not.

It just seems to me we wouldn’t be overpopulated at all if ...

We ARE not overpopulated at all.

 

[sealybobo]

Some liberal hypocridiots are too dumb/disingenuous to recognize the distinction between economic principle and valuing human life in and of itself.

...

Middle class people stop after one or two kids because we can’t afford more.

"We"?

...

It’s the main reason I didn’t have kids.

Yeeeeeaaaaaah.....sure......

...

So why do poor people ever have more than one mistake?

Human life is not a mistake (present company excluded).

...

For this I’m a republican

No, you're not.

It just seems to me we wouldn’t be overpopulated at all if ...

We ARE not overpopulated at all.

But we are overfishing our oceans. What about that?

 

[Unkotare]

Some liberal hypocridiots are too dumb/disingenuous to recognize the distinction between economic principle and valuing human life in and of itself.

...

Middle class people stop after one or two kids because we can’t afford more.

"We"?

...

It’s the main reason I didn’t have kids.

Yeeeeeaaaaaah.....sure......

...

So why do poor people ever have more than one mistake?

Human life is not a mistake (present company excluded).

...

For this I’m a republican

No, you're not.

It just seems to me we wouldn’t be overpopulated at all if ...

We ARE not overpopulated at all.

But we are overfishing our oceans. What about that?

Fish smarter

 

[80zephyr]

While our Earth could support more people, I would rather limit population if we could. More people means more regulations, control, etc. There are too many people on this Earth to live harmoniously today, IMO.

Mark

Bullshit.

Real compelling evidence you brought to the table there... It’ll take the board a good while to formulate a decent response...

We have more than enough room and resources on our planet. "Harmoniously" is not a matter of headcount. 10 billion people can live together if they want to, and two people can kill each other if they want to.

The populations of our urban centers say differently. People are not made to be packed like rats.

Mark