Enough Already

Recent news says the U.S. population will reach 300 million sometime in
October 2006. This continues the mindless modern tradition of more
traffic jams, housing tracts, noise, malls, boulevards, diverted rivers
and wilderness yielding to the saw and drill. It should not be welcomed
as progress. 200 million was plenty back in 1967. Since the population
must peak someday, it may as well have peaked yesterday. There is no
intrinsic value in more crowding.

Our economy clamors for population growth to keep the GNP rising, but
nobody can explain why that "must" be. Economists try but they get into
an endless loop of demand driving supply (people make money off it, but
they've always made money). We've been confusing gross consumption with
per-capita prosperity for a long time. Mathematics says you can't
portion a pie in endlessly bigger slices while feeding more people in a
finite world. Personal and government debt is the price we pay for that
illusion. The drawing down of finite oil and water supplies is the
"bank" covering most of that debt.

I may be around when we hit 400 million in under 40 years, and the
number could easily surpass 500 million by 2100. I can picture homes
and roads creeping into every biome except the driest deserts, wettest
swamps, highest alpine meadows or coldest tundra. I can see Nevada, a
rare refuge for solitude, being opened up with extravagant water
schemes from the north and west. Watch out, Lake Tahoe. At some point
they may ruin Great Salt Lake with desalination plants or build extreme
canals from the Great Lakes, transferring the population burden from
one place to another. Aquifers nationwide have been shrinking ever
since pumps were invented.

More money will be made by growth-addicted developers and the land will
keep losing its character. The construction industry can count on a
solid century of mindless digging, damming, building and paving to
satisfy all those people. The needs of other species will continue to
suffer as pressure mounts on their habitat. Depending on how many
"conserv"atives the ignorant half of the populace elects, development
could crowd the edges of many national and state parks. The fight for
ANWR will just be one of many. Alaskans think they need to consume more
wilderness to support their economy, but they should question that
whole parasitic scheme.

I don't even want to think about the rest of the world as the growth
parade tramples everything. We may see the extinction of several major
species in Africa and Asia via bush-meat and exotic foods. The world's
fisheries will continue to decline with more mouths to feed. Trying to
reducing CO2 emissions with more people emitting is a joke. How about
Kyoto-2 with a contraception clause? Instead of futilely "managing"
growth, let's make birth-rates match death-rates, like nature intended.

All of you who equate the endless tide of people with progress, please
volunteer to live in dense urban areas and stay close to home on
vacations. Save the vanishing open spaces for those who truly
appreciate nature; and that doesn't mean building trophy homes to covet
and simultaneously spoil the last vistas. If you consider yourself an
environmentalist but you're fine with unbridled immigration, don't
complain as your battles get ever more futile. If you think PBS nature
documentaries are sobering today, just wait.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/
If any other species behaved like Man we'd call it a plague.

"More people, more scars upon the land." (John Denver)

ian-mstm

This just isn't true. There's nothing to indicate that the population *must* peak.


Au contraire! There are lots of folks who can explain it... you just don't happen to agree that those explanations are valid. Big difference!



Since the US is larger than China, we can easily support a population of 1+ billion. There are still lots of places in China that are wild and rugged! You're just so myopic, you don't seem to understand this!

Anyway, in addition to being off topic for this forum, you seem to have your own personal agenda in all of this... and that's just boring. When you graduate from high school, come back and entertain us some more.

Ian

Eric Swanson

In article <[email protected] .com>, [email protected] says...
    >Recent news says the U.S. population will reach 300 million sometime in
    >October 2006. This continues the mindless modern tradition of more
    >traffic jams, housing tracts, noise, malls, boulevards, diverted rivers
    >and wilderness yielding to the saw and drill. It should not be welcomed
    >as progress. 200 million was plenty back in 1967. Since the population
    >must peak someday, it may as well have peaked yesterday. There is no
    >intrinsic value in more crowding.

Yeah, consider India. In 1948, after independence was achieved, the
population was around 350,000,000. Now, it's greater than 1,000,000,000.
The U.S. is becoming another India, as in, Indian...

Let the resource wars begin! (If they haven't already...)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...r18&refer=asia

--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------

Just Cocky

On 15 Jan 2006 23:08:54 -0800, "Enough Already"
<[email protected]> wrote:
    >Recent news says the U.S. population will reach 300 million sometime in
    >October 2006.

Good! The US needs at least 1 billion to continue to foreshadow other
countries economically.

Ray

I blame it all on too much sex in the world ......

Raylopez99

Sorry Eric. No resource wars, and your ethnic bias is noted. Truth be
told, the danger (read William Pesek's latest column at Bloomberg) is
in underpopulation in Asia. Hence nations like Singapore and Japan
are trying to encourage more reproduction.

RL

Atheist 4 Bush

Eric Swanson wrote:
    > In article <[email protected] .com>, [email protected] says...
    >> Recent news says the U.S. population will reach 300 million sometime in
    >> October 2006. This continues the mindless modern tradition of more
    >> traffic jams, housing tracts, noise, malls, boulevards, diverted rivers
    >> and wilderness yielding to the saw and drill. It should not be welcomed
    >> as progress. 200 million was plenty back in 1967. Since the population
    >> must peak someday, it may as well have peaked yesterday. There is no
    >> intrinsic value in more crowding.
    >
    > Yeah, consider India. In 1948, after independence was achieved, the
    > population was around 350,000,000. Now, it's greater than 1,000,000,000.
    > The U.S. is becoming another India, as in, Indian...

The androids of the future won't use many resources.

However, they will zap us with their lasers when they deem us
of inferior intelligence.

I wonder if they'll care about global warming.

TruBrit

lol with 3 loop roads around Houston and the 4th being built, traffic jams in abundance plus with all the Louisiana ve-hicles...dunno what it'll be like in 10yrs time, hopefully I'll be long gone, dunno where but outta here for sure...global warming in the US lol don't make me laugh...nah they don't care....

Enough Already

ian-mstm wrote:

    > This just isn't true. There's nothing to indicate that the population
    > *must* peak.

Except resource sustainability, common sense and a healthy respect for
breathing room.

    > Au contraire! There are lots of folks who can explain it... you just
    > don't happen to agree that those explanations are valid. Big difference!

The only big difference is that you don't really care what happens to
nature and open spaces. You'd like the country to become even more of a
huge feedlot than it is. I don't share that people-centric view of the
land.

    > Since the US is larger than China, we can easily support a population of
    > 1+ billion.

China actually has more land acreage than the U.S. (minus water
acreage) and it's barely smaller in total acreage. 1 billion Americans
would be a tragedy for the landscape. Hopefully we'll peak at 500
million tops. Are you so stupid as to think traffic jams will be
trivial at even half a billion? Do you love dealing with crowds and
noise everywhere you go? Are you eager to see even more species put on
the extinct or threatened list? Population growth is THE reason all of
the above are occurring.

    > There are still lots of places in China that are wild and rugged! You're just so myopic,
    > you don't seem to understand this!

http://www.reliefweb.int/mapc/asi_ea...china_lulc.jpg (China
land use map)

Most of China's true wilderness is in the eastern high deserts and
rugged mountains. Most desirable, habitable areas are packed, and don't
forget the much simpler lifestyle of the average Chinese. If they all
adopted our sprawling lifestyle (it's in the works) you'd see a lot
more land invaded. They are already building the world's largest dam
project (Three Gorges). In America, the lower 48 States are honeycombed
with people and infrastructure. True wilderness, by my definition, is a
place that lacks roads where you can't hear engine noise (except
airplanes) for several days at a walking pace. There isn't much
unbroken wilderness left in regions where people are comfortable
living.

    > Anyway, in addition to being off topic for this forum, you seem to have
    > your own personal agenda in all of this... and that's just boring. When
    > you graduate from high school, come back and entertain us some more.

Off topic for what forum(s)? Mindless growthism is a mental illness
that has everything to do with immigration and the environment.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/
If any other species behaved like Man we'd call it a plague.

Enough Already

raylopez99 wrote:

    > Sorry Eric. No resource wars, and your ethnic bias is noted. Truth be
    > told, the danger (read William Pesek's latest column at Bloomberg) is
    > in underpopulation in Asia. Hence nations like Singapore and Japan
    > are trying to encourage more reproduction.

Please don't try to tell people that population growth is a non-issue.
Parts of Asia and Europe may have birth dearths but not China, India,
Africa and Mexico, etc.. Where do you think the projected 9 to 10
billion by mid-century will come from, the Moon? We may have to send
them there!

The whole world economy is addicted to growth for no logical reason. If
growth slows in one area, customers for products (and fading natural
resources) will be sought elsewhere to feed the frenzy. When local
resources have been depleted, growthism borrows from Peter to pay Paul.
The world transportation network is run on fossil fuels, making it
unsustainable and precarious. Follow the trails of oil exploration,
timber harvesting and fish catching throughout history. One region gets
depleted and we move on to the next, but it can't last forever.

I encourage all growth-addicts to study this refutation of infinite
abundance. Most growthism is underlain by Simon's illogical
mathematics.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/dalysimon.htm


E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/
If any other species behaved like Man we'd call it a plague.

Enough Already

Just Cocky wrote:

    > On 15 Jan 2006 23:08:54 -0800, "Enough Already"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >Recent news says the U.S. population will reach 300 million sometime in
    > >October 2006.
    > >
    > Good! The US needs at least 1 billion to continue to foreshadow other
    > countries economically.

I hope you're kidding. We'd be foreshadowing our own demise, and
certainly that of nature, which keeps our whole economy functioning.
People who think nature plays second fiddle to economics are walking
around with fiddlers in their heads.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/
If any other species behaved like Man we'd call it a plague.

Enough Already

Atheist 4 Bush (reformed) wrote:

    > The androids of the future won't use many resources.
    > However, they will zap us with their lasers when they deem us
    > of inferior intelligence.
    > I wonder if they'll care about global warming.

How about a future like this one where the temperature is uniform and
humans have essentially become drones.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/Sil...body_cares.mp3


E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/
If any other species behaved like Man we'd call it a plague.

Enough Already

Eric Swanson wrote:

    > In article <[email protected] .com>, [email protected] says...
    > >
    > >Recent news says the U.S. population will reach 300 million sometime in
    > >October 2006. This continues the mindless modern tradition of more
    > >traffic jams, housing tracts, noise, malls, boulevards, diverted rivers
    > >and wilderness yielding to the saw and drill. It should not be welcomed
    > >as progress. 200 million was plenty back in 1967. Since the population
    > >must peak someday, it may as well have peaked yesterday. There is no
    > >intrinsic value in more crowding.
    > Yeah, consider India. In 1948, after independence was achieved, the
    > population was around 350,000,000. Now, it's greater than 1,000,000,000.
    > The U.S. is becoming another India, as in, Indian...
    > Let the resource wars begin! (If they haven't already...)

Yes, people take for granted that India and China have mostly had
peasant standards of living. It's unclear how many will become American
style gluttons. The youth are caught up in cultural changes and could
seemingly care less about the environment. Maybe they'll slow down and
do things right but I'm not counting on it.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/
If any other species behaved like Man we'd call it a plague.

Enough Already

Correction: I meant to say previously, "Most of China's true wilderness
is in the WESTERN high deserts and rugged mountains."

E.A.

David Goldberg

Enough Already wrote:

    > Recent news says the U.S. population will reach 300 million sometime in
    > October 2006. This continues the mindless modern tradition of more
    > traffic jams, housing tracts, noise, malls, boulevards, diverted rivers
    > and wilderness yielding to the saw and drill. It should not be welcomed
    > as progress. 200 million was plenty back in 1967. Since the population
    > must peak someday, it may as well have peaked yesterday. There is no
    > intrinsic value in more crowding.
    > Our economy clamors for population growth to keep the GNP rising, but
    > nobody can explain why that "must" be.

Because unless you want to live in the Stone Age, where every single day
was a struggle for survival, that's the way the world works.

Every single technological advancement, from fire to agriculture to
antibiotics, has made life easier and allows us to support a growing
population. It's the reason you have time to post nonsense on the internet
instead of doing manual labor for 15 hours per day.

You cannot draw a line in the sand and say "As of now, all economic growth
must stop".

--
"If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it's free."
~P.J. O'Rourke