Chirac warns of 'African flood'

Dave Frightens Me writes:

I'd love to see what type of exam that would entail, and just how they
would stop the failers from breeding.

An extremely severe prison term would work pretty well. And of course
unlicensed parents would forfeit any children they had before going to
prison.

The exam shouldn't be too much trouble. We have exams for pilots,
doctors, and lawyers; we can certain devise exams for prospective
parents.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

Dave Frightens Me writes:

I'd love to see what type of exam that would entail, and just how they
would stop the failers from breeding.

An extremely severe prison term would work pretty well. And of course
unlicensed parents would forfeit any children they had before going to
prison.

The exam shouldn't be too much trouble. We have exams for pilots,
doctors, and lawyers; we can certain devise exams for prospective
parents.

Do you think it's possible Mixi has actually started drinking?

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://homepage.mac.com/davidhornecomposer http://soundjunction.org

NightRaven writes:

The only reason we are able to uphold our standard of living,
(and not starve), is because the third world is starving today.

Hardly. Much of the Third World would be starving either way.

Most of the Third World's problems are of its own making, contrary to
popular opinion.

We *are* too many people today, but the answer is not in reducing
the population in Africa, but rather in Europe, US, Mexico and
Japan for instance.

The poorest populations are the ones that must be reduced most
urgently, otherwise they will never have the same standard of living
as the richest populations.

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

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 18:16:10 +0200, "NightRaven"
wrote:

Jim Ley wrote:
On 15 Jul 2006 14:16:52 -0700, "R. Lander"

wrote:

Many biologists conclude that 2 billion may be the maximum
sustainable level after oil peaks and crashes.

And in the 60's many believed 4 billion based on food, turned
out to
be complete bunkum just like wherever that url might've taken
me.

The only reason we are able to uphold our standard of living,
(and not starve), is because the third world is starving today.

That is complete bull****. We have our standard of living due to
having a history of being organised - end of story. No one needs to
starve for our prosperity.

It's that simple, we just pushed the problems of a too large
population over on third world countries, the results can be seen
today in the massive hunger catastrophies in other countries.
Eventually it will catch up to us though, it's like a tree
lighting setting it's roots on fire to stop from freezing to
death.
We *are* too many people today, but the answer is not in reducing
the population in Africa, but rather in Europe, US, Mexico and
Japan for instance.

You have a serious guilt complex, eh?
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

"David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and
prestwich tesco 24h offy" wrote in
message news:1hikzxi.10fzo4c11mdtwsN%this_address_is_for_s ...
JohnT wrote:

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Jim Ley writes:

how does the licensing scheme work?

They take an exam. If they pass, they can have children. If they
don't, they can't. Just like becoming a pilot.


You are totally mad.

He's a damn good pilot though. The only time he's crashed that I
remember from his blog was when he went to do some washing and left the
game, sorry, simluator on auto-pilot.


So that means he gets a licence to procreate? (Don't answer that!).

JohnT

"David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and
prestwich tesco 24h offy" wrote in
message news:1hil0br.8q3q3g13tzo5cN%this_address_is_for_sp ...
Mxsmanic wrote:

Dave Frightens Me writes:

I'd love to see what type of exam that would entail, and just how they
would stop the failers from breeding.

An extremely severe prison term would work pretty well. And of course
unlicensed parents would forfeit any children they had before going to
prison.

The exam shouldn't be too much trouble. We have exams for pilots,
doctors, and lawyers; we can certain devise exams for prospective
parents.

Do you think it's possible Mixi has actually started drinking?


Perhaps he is in love?

JohnT

Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 18:16:10 +0200, "NightRaven"
wrote:

Jim Ley wrote:
On 15 Jul 2006 14:16:52 -0700, "R. Lander"

wrote:

Many biologists conclude that 2 billion may be the maximum
sustainable level after oil peaks and crashes.

And in the 60's many believed 4 billion based on food, turned
out to
be complete bunkum just like wherever that url might've taken
me.

The only reason we are able to uphold our standard of living,
(and not starve), is because the third world is starving
today.

That is complete bull****. We have our standard of living due
to
having a history of being organised - end of story. No one
needs to
starve for our prosperity.

That's a fairy-tale, wealth and prosperity Always comes at the
expense of someone else, otherwhise where would the wealth come
from in the first place ? Or are you denying slave-traders, wars,
pilfering, skewed trade treaties, out-sourcing, explotations of
labour, etc. ? We (the west) have a history of violence and
dis-organisation, that's why we used to have kingdoms and
tyrranies, it was the best way to control us. Give us liberty,
freedom and technology and we run to web to squabble amongst
ourselves our petty things.
Japan, though, does have a history of being organsied, which
probably explains why they've managed to rise to be an economical
superpower.

It's that simple, we just pushed the problems of a too large
population over on third world countries, the results can be
seen
today in the massive hunger catastrophies in other countries.
Eventually it will catch up to us though, it's like a tree
lighting setting it's roots on fire to stop from freezing to
death.
We *are* too many people today, but the answer is not in
reducing
the population in Africa, but rather in Europe, US, Mexico and
Japan for instance.

You have a serious guilt complex, eh?

Me ? Over what ? I didn't partake in the exploitation of the
third world when it started. I'm not saying I'm spotless, no
human are, but in this case I can't really feel I have anything
to be guilty of.

- NightRaven

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 19:49:51 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Dave Frightens Me writes:

I'd love to see what type of exam that would entail, and just how they
would stop the failers from breeding.

An extremely severe prison term would work pretty well. And of course
unlicensed parents would forfeit any children they had before going to
prison.

In this type of world, you mightn't have been given the chance to be
who you are.

The exam shouldn't be too much trouble. We have exams for pilots,
doctors, and lawyers; we can certain devise exams for prospective
parents.

For pilots, the criteria is to get a plane to its destination without
any problems.

For a human?
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 16:15:28 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

B Vaughan writes:

They won't support family planning programs that include abortion.

Why not? Abortion is a legitimate and effective form of birth control
when other methods fail.

The refusal was an easy way for Republicans to get Right to Life
votes. They never seriously try to stop abortions in the US, because
they would lose as many votes as they would gain. However, if they cut
off funds to Planned Parenthood International because they're
including abortion in their family planning packages, it's a win-win
vote getter. The Right to Choose people can't be bothered agitating
about it, when they're so tied up trying to keep abortion legal in the
US. And Republicans get to tell their constituents that they voted to
stop abortions. And they also get plaudits from those who oppose all
foreign aid.

--
Barbara Vaughan
My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it
I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 16:16:43 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

B Vaughan writes:

You just can't sell fertility control to a population whose children
die off at an alarming rate.

The societies with exploding populations do not have children dying
off at alarming rates; that's why their populations are exploding.

Africa hasn't really experienced a population explosion. Mortality is
still rather high, but steadily declining. Fertility decline always
lags behind mortality decline, because it takes some time for the fact
to sink in that most children are surviving to adulthood. It's called
the fertility transition. It is happening in Africa at a faster pace
than it happened in Europe.

--
Barbara Vaughan
My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it
I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup