From: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu (Doug Mohney)
Subject: Re: Population
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 18:18:09 GMT
Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park
Reply-To: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu

In article <BuLIuE.J55@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:

[ in the truest sense of out of control topic growth.....]

>First, I'd like to point out that I'm not the same person who wrote the follow
>up to my post, nor do we agree on all things.  Doug lumps us togther.  Since 
>the mid 80's, America has stopped giving moneyt to the UN agency that works to
>combat population growth in the third world.

We stopped giving money to UNESCO, the educational and cultural part of the UN,
along with a lot of other folks, because they were gold-plating their office in
France. Literally. They started getting their act together, so the taps have
been open. 

The <mutter/grumble> Reagan adminstration stopped giving money to some non-UN
organizations which were "promoting" abortion as a means of birth control.

>Come to think of it, I believe we don't give the UN any money anymore. 

We give them money. We don't give them as much money as we owe them; I think
we're back-debted at least $300-450 million; don't have a ready reference for
that here.

> Anyway, my point is the following,
>given that there is an unfulfilled demand for birth control (I don't think I've
>cited sources here, but if you want I'll dig some up) and that population
>growth in the third world tends to eat up progress made by foreign aid,

This was one of these paradoxes of the 60's and 70s. We provided modern health
care first in the form of vaccinations and other (minor for First world)
improvements without anticipating the growth in number of mouths to feed.

ANYwhooo, there are any number of organizations, both publically and privately
funded, which are providing family planning/birth control information and aid
to these places. However, until you reduce the incentives for big families
through economic growth (i.e. turn 'em into capitalists :-), the individual
family is going to continue to have kids. 

UN(?)fortunately, the spread of AIDS is going to adversely affect the Third
World. Serious war going on to promote condom usage, which may (should) also
check population growth. Unless condoms aren't used, in which case population
growth will (alas) be checked by biological means. 

>But transitions take a while.  The people who are working on electric vehicles,
>which may eventually be quite competitive with gas powered ones, or solar 
>thermal power, or finding ways to _save_ money through conservation are doing
>it because it's a good investment.  The substitutes you're talking about are
>being worked on now, but you're slamming them.

I am not slamming substitutes. I am slamming crash programs to throw money at
problems which, as the Synfuels debacale of the Carter Administration showed,
doesn't really work. 

But, how we solve the problems of the world rather than NASA is drifting wayway
way down the yellow brick road.


                 Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet 

  -- >                  SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU                        < --
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro