A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Africa
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Chirac warns of 'African flood'



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 15th, 2006, 05:21 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,830
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

Jim Ley writes:

No it wouldn't, killing all pensioners would lead to a knowledge
deficit, and lack of cheap support for workers. Killing a large
proportion of the middle aged, would lead to no-one to do the work to
keep everyone else alive, and killing all the children (or stopping
more children being born) would do nothing to provide for those middle
group of people when they grew old.


Nobody said anything about killing anyone, except you.

I suppose you could selectively kill people, based on some sort of
testing, or maybe ethnic origin to reduce the impact, but I can hardly
see that as a way to resolve problems.


Nobody said anything about killing anyone, except you.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
  #12  
Old July 15th, 2006, 05:22 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,830
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

~* Magda ~* writes:

Do like India and China - kill the girls.


Reducing the population doesn't require killing anyone.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
  #13  
Old July 15th, 2006, 05:22 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,830
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

Hooverphonic writes:

I was thinking, tackle the problem at source, i.e. have less kids.


Exactly.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
  #14  
Old July 15th, 2006, 06:25 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Jim Ley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 862
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

On 15 Jul 2006 07:44:35 -0700, "Hooverphonic"
wrote:

Jim Ley wrote:
killing all the children (or stopping
more children being born) would do nothing to provide for those middle
group of people when they grew old.

I suppose you could selectively kill people, based on some sort of
testing, or maybe ethnic origin to reduce the impact, but I can hardly
see that as a way to resolve problems.


I was thinking, tackle the problem at source, i.e. have less kids.


Which was covered, it does nothing to provide for the rest of the
population as they age.

Jim.
  #15  
Old July 15th, 2006, 06:27 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Jim Ley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 862
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 18:21:48 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Jim Ley writes:

No it wouldn't, killing all pensioners would lead to a knowledge
deficit, and lack of cheap support for workers. Killing a large
proportion of the middle aged, would lead to no-one to do the work to
keep everyone else alive, and killing all the children (or stopping
more children being born) would do nothing to provide for those middle
group of people when they grew old.


Nobody said anything about killing anyone, except you.


nope, I looked at ways to reduce population, there's either killing
poeple, or not having any more born, the not having any more born was
covered too, it's just as a naiive solution as you normally come up
with. not having new children born does nothing but make matters
worse for those who are still alive.

Of course, every human society we've seen has smaller birthrates as
they get richer, and that is natural, because you can invest more in
the individual child, so decreasing poverty is likely going to do a
lot more than your simplistic advice which does nothing but harms
individuals. Are you a communist perhaps? Not let people have any
children for the "greater good" ?

Jim.
  #16  
Old July 15th, 2006, 06:30 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Jim Ley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 862
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 18:20:46 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Jim Ley writes:

Rubbish, whilst there is not an infinite amount of resources, there is
certainly more than enough for much larger population than the earth
has now.


How much, exactly, and with what standard of living?


How much what?

exactly what?

I have no idea what a "and with what standard of living?" can apply to
an exactly - do you mean population of the planet? I would say
12,453,123,109 and with a standard of living of 87.6 on the Theolophis
scale.

Jim.
  #17  
Old July 15th, 2006, 06:34 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Hooverphonic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 133
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'


Jim Ley wrote:
On 15 Jul 2006 07:44:35 -0700, "Hooverphonic"
wrote:

Jim Ley wrote:
killing all the children (or stopping
more children being born) would do nothing to provide for those middle
group of people when they grew old.

I suppose you could selectively kill people, based on some sort of
testing, or maybe ethnic origin to reduce the impact, but I can hardly
see that as a way to resolve problems.


I was thinking, tackle the problem at source, i.e. have less kids.


Which was covered, it does nothing to provide for the rest of the
population as they age.

Jim.


how many kids do you suggest per family ?

  #18  
Old July 15th, 2006, 06:49 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Jim Ley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 862
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

On 15 Jul 2006 10:34:34 -0700, "Hooverphonic"
wrote:

I was thinking, tackle the problem at source, i.e. have less kids.


Which was covered, it does nothing to provide for the rest of the
population as they age.

Jim.


how many kids do you suggest per family ?


For what?

In general it will depend on things like mortality rates etc. Let's
be clear controlling family size is not a sensible solution for
African poverty.

Jim.
  #19  
Old July 15th, 2006, 06:57 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,830
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

Jim Ley writes:

Which was covered, it does nothing to provide for the rest of the
population as they age.


You cannot provide for the aged through a spiral of ever-increasing
population, either. Handling the aged is a matter of raising the
standard of living, and increasing the population is in direct
conflict with this goal.

If you don't control population, eventually everyone will be living in
poverty, and then they will starve. There is no way around this, so
any policy that constantly increases population is doomed.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
  #20  
Old July 15th, 2006, 06:59 PM posted to rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.africa,rec.travel.misc
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,830
Default Chirac warns of 'African flood'

Jim Ley writes:

nope, I looked at ways to reduce population, there's either killing
poeple, or not having any more born ...


The latter is the usual method.

... the not having any more born was covered too ...


Covered?

... it's just as a naiive solution as you normally come up
with.


If you don't control births and you don't kill anyone, nature will
kill everyone. You're saying that the only possible scenario is
widespread poverty, disease, famine, and death?

... not having new children born does nothing but make matters
worse for those who are still alive.


How so?

Of course, every human society we've seen has smaller birthrates as
they get richer, and that is natural, because you can invest more in
the individual child, so decreasing poverty is likely going to do a
lot more than your simplistic advice which does nothing but harms
individuals.


It's hard to decrease poverty when the population is doubling every
few years and more than half the people alive are still dependents
themselves.

Are you a communist perhaps?


No.

Not let people have any children for the "greater good" ?


No. I think people should be restricted in the number of children
they can have, but obviously reproduction cannot be completely
prohibited.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chirac warns of 'African flood' Hooverphonic Europe 171 July 29th, 2006 04:10 PM
France gets its first black TV presenter after Chirac pressure eetinBelgië Europe 10 March 11th, 2006 12:44 PM
Bombs in LOndon The Reids Europe 799 July 25th, 2005 09:03 AM
Chirac refuses to give up his necktie! Earl Europe 84 June 19th, 2004 12:54 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.