Is the world overpopulated, or are we just underdeveloped?

We need to open up the death camps again....Getting rid of anyone over the age of 25.....;-/

 

That'd be something to look forward to instead of people having thoughts about suicide....

Of course we don't actually agree with this, though.

 

The world is overpopulated and overdeveloped. The reason is money. The human is completely alienated from nature. There is no natural selection. At the same time a human violates the natural balance in order to create products that is actually not necessary for him. According to natural laws, to preserve the classe, human is required to feed, to dress that he is not cold, a place to sleep and to copulate.

 

And Iran is only at fault from wishing to behave like the America of the Contra Days of Reagan times and espionage.:beatnik:

 

Personally, I think it's a mixture of both. But, the answer is obvious to me. Our world is under-developed for sure! We are also obviously overpopulated, but how much time and effort does it take to build multi-level greenhouses? If we had multi-level greenhouses or (something I've heard of somewhere before) if we put a greenhouse-like garden on top of housing establishments or various high-rise buildings (that don't give off much pollution) we wouldn't have to worry about the price of consumable food rising to intolerable levels. The ideas are out there, I guess people just prefer not to put them to use for fear of major companies losing their grasp of power (via currency).

Hemp can be used for an almost endless amount of things. Renewable building materials, paper, insulation, etc etc etc etc. But doing a transfer of materials like that would put many businesses... well... out of business. And we all know that would be no fun for the taxes they bring in already. So many things can be done but are pocketed away.

Another thing you might be interested in if you're reading this thread... www.Earthships.net

This guy has the right idea. I watched a documentary where he was building self-sufficient "experimental" housing from low cost materials (even aluminum cans, glass bottles, and old tires [like in Mad Max!]). He fought the legal system here in the US for upwards of 7 years to legalize his structures beyond regulation housing codes. The funny thing is, he temporarily gave up fighting the legal system to help hurricane victims in India? Korea? Somewhere around there, and they liked his ideas so much that they asked if he would teach their engineers how to build his self-cooling structures that stand up to hurricane winds! I love and support his ideas indefinitely.

The guy used bamboo, tires and mud to build a structure that would stand up to hurricane winds and built a well underneath the "floorboards" that would cool the house naturally! Check it out! I'm tellin' ya!

 

Yuh!!! I agree with the motivation for respecting the devolving difficulty in the present world of mass revolution in science. Such a world contains the trouble of past fixes in relational context of development. Now we are entering an era where the so-called re-structuring of habitat to economic growth is passing into the really named growth for economic progress. For it how do we account the real knowledge for and by capital of every essence.

However, can the market itself do adjustment to progress with compassion for the social content and psycho-analytical holism of understanding health to this over-populating society, sickness to the categorically constant environmental degradation.


That's why we have a recession. In socialist Europe uncompassionately it is survival of the fittest based on real diseases and violence.:2thumbsup:

 

When are we going to realize that just because we can fit 50 people in a room that we don't need 50 in it?

 

great thread broony.
i think both are true, but underdeveloped more so. i think the underdevelopment of the human consciousness is the reason the population has been spiking.
i wanna say you can solve both by solving one of them, but the most common solution to overpopulation is not only kinda fucked up because the decision-making of who gets the better end of the stick, but also because there are still vital fundamental issues that wouldn't disappear with a smaller populace. and for that, i'm thankful we have an enormous population because ideas and consciousness can grow faster i believe. huge population + technology like the internet = a powerful problem-solving tool.

 

When is enough, enough. Seriously, humanity is going to have a cataclysmic collapse that is going to result is a major loss of life. I do not believe we can continue to give everyone a fare share of basic needs to have a simple, healthy, fun life. The super rich have enough money to fly their personal dinners across the world to eat but the family 20 miles away lives under less than $5 a day. A time will come where far to many people are hungry and only a few are not. Things are going to get very ugly when this happens.






The black death is going to look like childs play the next time we experience population sickness.

 

i don't think a disease can ever be that strong anymore considering we now know how our body systems, organs, cells, even molecules work, and we know how to deal with them. by the time medical micro-technology comes into our normal lives, nothing like that stands a chance really.
before these past three centuries or so, human's biggest threat was the rest of the natural world, but that's been changing now, our biggest threat now is society; ourselves.
i just think this goes into a political direction. technology, science, and innovation has been one of human's biggest savior from problems in general, and just like any other problem, we need to invent a need way of society and economy.

 

this is not even a time away, one of the most recognised political risks of this modern era is that of food shortage.

think of egypt.

 

I agree but its not a world fight right now. We have not experienced world hunger to a point where population starts to decrease at a fast rate. Parts of the world have always starved but a lot has not. I was saying that sometime everyone may become hungry, not just certain people.

 

i don't know about that - they protested poor wages to food price increases in egypt. many large western countries had to intervene.

i know what you're saying, it's early stages, but food shortage due to economic inflation is undoubtedly going to become a much bigger issue very soon.

 

This; and it honestly really scares me. I don't think any development can stop this from happening. Greed is too rapid.

 

I don't think we are under developed technologically (compared to what?!) I DO think we are heavily over populated, to the planet's detriment. Look at how we are now excavating HUGE swathes of land for our oil:



Is this acceptable? Destroying enormous areas of natural habitat for other species? Species which support us and our eco-systems, some directly, some indirectly, but all finely in tune with the planet and its requirements...

What I do think we are under developed in is our relationship with the planet, and every other living being (non human) on this planet. We squander their habitats for our short lived material gain, leaving nothing to replace it with, but mines, pits, tree stumps and leached soil. When the Earths population increases further more, there will be less land to farm, less jungles to filter the air, less uncontaminated water, less fish due to polluted water and of course over fishing etc etc. I believe we are setting our selves up for a BIG fall in the not too distant future if our methods do not change. Hell, it may be too late already...



I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the singularity... I think this could have a major impact on society. Not just society, this could have a major impact on the way we produce and consume food, the way we travel, communicate, produce energy, everything. It could also lead to some highly undesirable outcomes, like the emergence of machines that are more intelligent than us, and therefore our demise as a dominant species.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2048138,00.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbn5EFWazc8"]YouTube - ‪The Singularity - History and Terrence Mckenna‬‏



P

 

This thread has made me feel depressed. But yeah, i'm on the "we're over populated" side. I used to think we had to get into space, but then we'll just deplete whatever we find there too. I think maybe it's possible that increase in intelligence such as ours can't stay in balance. We have to actually decide to stay in balance with everything, and as a collective we don't seem to be capable of it. We could be a failure as a species. Which is a shame.

 

I dunno... I'm pretty sure there are too many people though.

I'm just going to have one child and adopt another one of his/her age, that way I can pass on my genes (which I have a natural urge to do) and have the child not be an "only child" while also saving another child from foster care in the process! :sunny:

 

More people need to do just this. I bet you anything the adopted child will be thankful later in life knowing someone helped give him/her a chance at life even though you have no blood relation. :2thumbsup:

 

Much thanks for the kind words :afro:, alot of my friends are adopted so it's something I've always wanted to do.

 

Obviously this is a far better option than most people choose, don't see what I say next as an attack..

But having a "natural urge" does not make something okay, or a good idea, OR that it is out of your control. I am positive that as I get older I will experience a "natural urge" to have a baby, and I am pretty certain that I will fight against this. Those natural urges are there because if they wern't, our species wouldn't be. We don't need them right now, and surely making the most of our incredibly evolved minds involves controling our own thoughts and desires? Men sometimes have the "natural urge" to kill another man who has hit on his girlfriend, but we have decided as a species that that urge is immoral and wrong. We should do the same with the desire for biological children.