EU proposes CO2 fine on carmakers.........about time

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:43:08 +0530, "grusl" wrote:

In some quarters, high population/growth is now being seen as a positive
rather than a negative factor.

Royal families' servants quarters? There has to be a reason.
--

From admittedly dim memory, I think it was something along the lines of
large populations creating a large demand for goods and services. Also high
economic growth during a period of low population growth or population
decline is historically unsustainable. It's been reported that by 2020 the
USA will be short of 17 million people of working age, China by 10 million,
Japan by 9 million and Russia by 6 million while India will have a surplus
of 47 million working age people.

I'm merely reporting, not advocating.

Cheers,
George W Russell
Bangalore

John wrote:
"Jenny Talwart" wrote in message
...

No more generation improving on generation, just doom and gloom
everywhere.

John

.......otherwise known as consumerism.....


I prefer to call it evolution, betterment, or progression.

My parents had a coal fire in one room of the house and had to have a bath
in a tin bath in front of said fire. Luckily, times have changed and the
human race has progressed to a point where I have a plumbed-in bath, in a
purpose-built bath-room, and central heating that keeps the whole house warm
(with radiator thermostats so that rooms not used as often can be cooler [or
not heated at all] than those used frequently).

We have to keep moving forward and advancing the species but, as I said
earlier, the powers that be will only be happy when we're all back in caves
again.

John


While it's progress that everyone has a bath, it is really progress to
have cars with 300HP engines weighing over two tons driving at 140 mph?

Doesn't Frequently Mop writes:

A little bit? Heard of the one child policy? No exactly a token
policy!

If it is rigidly followed long enough, it works. But China is overpopulated,
so that policy would have to remain in effect for generations to come.

Of course, other countries are doing nothing at all, so China is still ahead.

grusl writes:

In some quarters, high population/growth is now being seen as a positive
rather than a negative factor.

There are always stupid people in the world.

grusl writes:

From admittedly dim memory, I think it was something along the lines of
large populations creating a large demand for goods and services.

So does affluence. A small but affluent population is preferable to a large,
poor population.

Also high economic growth during a period of low population growth
or population decline is historically unsustainable.

Economic growth isn't necessary if you have economic stability.

It's been reported that by 2020 the
USA will be short of 17 million people of working age, China by 10 million,
Japan by 9 million and Russia by 6 million while India will have a surplus
of 47 million working age people.

What will the standards of living be like in these countries?

On 21 Dec, 13:01, Martin wrote:
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:52:10 +0100, Tom Peel wrote:
John wrote:
"Jenny Talwart" wrote in message
...

No more generation improving on generation, just doom and gloom
everywhere.

John

.......otherwise known as consumerism.....

I prefer to call it evolution, betterment, or progression.

My parents had a coal fire in one room of the house and had to have a bath
in a tin bath in front of said fire. Luckily, times have changed and the
human race has progressed to a point where I have a plumbed-in bath, in a
purpose-built bath-room, and central heating that keeps the whole house warm
(with radiator thermostats so that rooms not used as often can be cooler [or
not heated at all] than those used frequently).

We have to keep moving forward and advancing the species but, as I said
earlier, the powers that be will only be happy when we're all back in caves
again.

John

While it's progress that everyone has a bath, it is really progress to
have cars with 300HP engines weighing over two tons driving at 140 mph?

and middle aged buffoons making popular TV series misbehaving in such cars?
--

Martin

rather than middle aged buffoons misbehaving on usenet ??

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
grusl writes:

From admittedly dim memory, I think it was something along the lines of
large populations creating a large demand for goods and services.

So does affluence. A small but affluent population is preferable to a
large,
poor population.

Until you get in a war...

Also high economic growth during a period of low population growth
or population decline is historically unsustainable.

Economic growth isn't necessary if you have economic stability.

Examples please.

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Doesn't Frequently Mop writes:

A little bit? Heard of the one child policy? No exactly a token
policy!

If it is rigidly followed long enough, it works. But China is
overpopulated,
so that policy would have to remain in effect for generations to come.


Well no.

China has a much lower population density than, say, the UK or Germany,
or the Phillipines come to that.

Unless you mean Taiwan, in which case you're right...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
..

On Dec 21, 8:03*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
grusl writes:
From admittedly dim memory, I think it was something along the lines of
large populations creating a large demand for goods and services.

So does affluence. *A small but affluent population is preferable to a large,
poor population.

Also high economic growth during a period of low population growth
or population decline is historically unsustainable.

Economic growth isn't necessary if you have economic stability.


I'm under the impression that economic growth is generally considered
a good thing.



It's been reported that by 2020 the
USA will be short of 17 million people of working age, China by 10 million,
Japan by 9 million and Russia by 6 million while India will have a surplus
of 47 million working age people.

What will the standards of living be like in these countries?


2020 is only a dozen years away. China and India are generally
improving though not across the board, while Russia is slowly
recovering after a decline. The USA is possibly on the cusp of a
downturn - no doubt it will recover - and Japan is holding steady.

Cheers,
George W Russell
Bangalore

"Doesn't Frequently Mop" wrote in
message ...
On the particular moment of Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:02:37 +0100 in
relation to Mary's disappointingly immaculate rumpy pumpy, Mxsmanic
put forth:

grusl writes:

In some quarters, high population/growth is now being seen as a positive
rather than a negative factor.

There are always stupid people in the world.

And they are too dumb to realise it. Good thing we're not in that
category, eh!

You can't have a nation of old people without bringing in immigrants to look
after them.

Cheers,
George W Russell
Bangalore