View Single Post
Old 02-19-2009, 09:50 PM   #27
Tommycat's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Originally Posted by HIGH ON PIE 14 View Post
@Tommycat: we don't need to worry about producing more food as we produce enough food to adequately feed the whole world - it is a problem of distribution.
I thought so, I mean I could have sworn I read somewhere that we(the US) grew enough food to feed everyone in the world.

Originally Posted by HIGH ON PIE 14 View Post
I agree with DY. When it comes to overpopulation, it is mostly in developing countries. I know China's system of controlling population is a bit harsh but they have a decent idea that they just implemented wrong. They have a serious overpopulation problem, more than the rest of the world.
Again, it may seem cold to say it, but the overpopulation in those areas is offset by the starvation. This naturally limits the population. We go in and start trying to limit the population, the starvation could kill the population all together. Once a population reaches critical mass, the chances are a major disease will decimate the population of an area, as living in such close proximity to others increases transfer rate. I think any kind of government mandated killing of children is a bad thing.

Why is it somehow acceptable for a government to tell a woman she has to get an abortion(even if she wants the child), but it isn't ok to tell a woman that she must carry the child to term? Are those of you who support that kind of population control pro-choice? or actually in this case it would be more appropriate to call it pro-abortion since the choice portion of it is taken out of the equasion.

Originally Posted by HIGH ON PIE 14 View Post
I think that at some point or another (sooner probably more than later) we will have a serious problem with overpopulation. It is hard to argue either way because there really is no one set limit at which the world is overpopulated. The more people on earth, the less resources there will be for each- it depends on the quality of life that we desire.

Again, this is where innovation kicks in. We think we're getting close to our upper limit, and we find a new way to live. Or the world decides it's time for a cleaning and kicks out a new disease for us to battle. I mean the Influenza outbreak wasn't that long ago(relatively speaking). I'm sure there will be another outbreak that will help cull the population far more effectively than the "You can't have more chilluns" method.

We developed a new way to live the last time we neared our population limit. Look at New York City and see how much we have grown. In the early 1800's we would have considdered the sheer number of people living there an impossibly high number.
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,