If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Chirac warns of 'African flood'
Jim Ley wrote: On 15 Jul 2006 12:32:47 -0700, "R. Lander" wrote: Jim Ley wrote: Yet they have a fraction of the number of people other much smaller areas are able to support, there is not an overpopulation problem in Africa. A "fraction" of what number? Africa is pushing the 900 million mark and there's no evidence to support your claim. You're probably referring to Japan and densely populated parts of Europe. They import most of their food because they've crowded out too much land to grow it. Erm, you know Europe is more than self sufficient in food, it pays farmers an awful lot of money to grow less than they could. AIUI Japan is also self sufficient in food, but I certainly don't know for certain. which food, bluefin tuna, whales ? Farming attempts in the Sahel keep degrading the soil and logic says there are just too many people (logic would prevail if another species was under discussion here). No, there are wrong technologies, lack of a rule of law, lack of a functioning market, lack of education etc. etc. meaning that people cannot or don't know enough to use techniques which are practical in the environment. Africa as a whole would have no problem being self sufficient in food (and other raw materials, we know it's got more than enough of) but places with very, very good climates for farming the high yield crops available today - such as Zimbabwe are complete basket cases due to problems that have nothing to do with population growth. and you are saying that more people will help ? Africa may never achieve first-world status, and even if it did, huge energy supplies would be needed to sustain agriculture, since the modern world grows food with oil. except of course, there's no reason to... indeed it's already practical to grow oil in a lot of the world, so it's obviously still profitable to farm... Regardless, what's the point of constant crowding under any scenario? There's no point, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the point at hand, the reason for large families is poverty, so if there is a decline in family size, there will be a decline in poverty ! it's not catholicism, or some nutters I've never seen who want more people around. indeed 'nutters' want more people around "Overpopulation myth" propagandists expect Africa to forever borrow resources when it's never really helped them. Food aid has made Africa the world's messiest welfare state. Absolutely, which is why I've not once advocated food aid, I've advocated help to get a rule of law, but most importantly I want rich *******s in the first world to start caring about other people and deal with the massive subsidies given to a tiny minority of people, and the tarrifs designed to keep other people poor. I agree stop food aid and stop subsidies |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Chirac warns of 'African flood'
On 15 Jul 2006 14:24:43 -0700, "Hooverphonic"
wrote: and you are saying that more people will help ? Yes, large families are needed because of high mortality rates, without those large families the communities would not be sustainable, you may want them to die out, but I don't think that is a good idea. There's no point, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the point at hand, the reason for large families is poverty, so if there is a decline in family size, there will be a decline in poverty ! Yes, because unfortunately due to preventable diseases and high mortality, young children and young adults are very productive members of the community, remove them, and you remove the level of productivity for the community. You could see for youself in a rich country if you removed a lot of their productive members of the community, the level of poverty wouldn't go down, it would rise drastically. Absolutely, which is why I've not once advocated food aid, I've advocated help to get a rule of law, but most importantly I want rich *******s in the first world to start caring about other people and deal with the massive subsidies given to a tiny minority of people, and the tarrifs designed to keep other people poor. I agree stop food aid and stop subsidies Tarrifs are even more important than the subsidy. Jim. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Chirac warns of 'African flood'
Jim Ley writes:
Yes, large families are needed because of high mortality rates, without those large families the communities would not be sustainable, you may want them to die out, but I don't think that is a good idea. If that were true, the population would not be growing. The fact that it is growing demonstrates that mortality is not high enough to negate the rate of reproduction. In other words, people are having far more children than they should, even with high mortality. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Chirac warns of 'African flood'
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:42:29 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote: Jim Ley writes: Yes, large families are needed because of high mortality rates, without those large families the communities would not be sustainable, you may want them to die out, but I don't think that is a good idea. If that were true, the population would not be growing. no it wouldn't, you're confusing the effects required for individual family groups with the effect that has over the entire population, you're also ignoring that some poverty reduction is happening in some countries. In other words, people are having far more children than they should, even with high mortality. Yes, we've already established you don't believe in freedom, and that African's should be controlled to meet your idea of what is apparopriate, it doesn't hold you in a nice light before, and it doesn't now. Jim. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Chirac warns of 'African flood'
Jim Ley writes:
Yes, we've already established you don't believe in freedom ... I believe very much in freedom, but reproducing is not a freedom, it's a privilege ... because it involves a helpless third party whose rights must be protected. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Chirac warns of 'African flood'
Hooverphonic wrote:
it's not catholicism, or some nutters I've never seen who want more people around. indeed 'nutters' want more people around Fox News' John Gibson is just one example of such nuttiness. He wants whites to have more babies to compete with the Hispanic flood. A stupid birth-race in lieu of a stupid arms-race. Little does he care that everyone loses in the end. http://mediamatters.org/items/200605...fset=60&show=1 Even when birthrates decline (i.e. Europe & Japan), instead of breathing an ecological sigh of relief, growthaholics will clamor for more. It proves that "economic growth" and population growth are tag-along twins. We can't grow the GNP and create millions of (global) jobs per year with a stable population (there'd be no need to!) Most economists still see consumption as a casual externality. Production is all they care about. R. Lander |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Chirac warns of 'African flood' | Hooverphonic | Africa | 114 | August 2nd, 2006 08:54 PM |
Chirac warns of 'African flood' | Hooverphonic | Europe | 171 | July 29th, 2006 04:10 PM |
Chirac warns of 'African flood' | Hooverphonic | Travel - anything else not covered | 91 | July 20th, 2006 04:17 AM |
Chirac warns of 'African flood' | Hooverphonic | Africa | 5 | July 16th, 2006 07:17 PM |
Chirac refuses to give up his necktie! | Earl | Europe | 84 | June 19th, 2004 12:54 PM |