From: djvv@zlf.uucp (David van Veen)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: progeny limits (was "...toxicity of wood smoke")
Date: 9 Apr 92 06:20:32 GMT
Organization: daj Seattle

In article <1992Apr7.174146.4415@ole.uucp> ssave@ole.uucp (Shailendra Save) writes:
>In article <1992Apr5.014952.16932@zlf.uucp> djvv@zlf.uucp (David van Veen) writes:
>>
>>   Well Bob, what the hell would you do then? Let the population
>>continue to increase until the planet is so over burden that none
>>of us can be fed? As it is now the planet has trouble supporting 
>>the life that is on it. Millions are starving as we speak. There
>>is not enough resources left to allow the human population to 
>>increase at its current rate. Can you not see any of this? 
>>What would you do!?
>>
>>Dave
>> 
>
> So Dave, do you drive a gas guzzler to work everyday? Leave it in the garage
>for the rest of the time occupying space and poluting air?  Do you consume 
>more than you produce?  Have you ever not eaten a meal so that it could be
>donated to some starving child somewhere else?  Are you married?  Do you have
>any children? What is the difference between Socialist China (which allows 
>only one child per family) to get certain subsidies from the Government for
>food, and us, if we implement the one child policy?  How else are you going to
>implement the one child policy?  
>
> What can you do? First, realise that there is enough to go around. Believe
>it or not.  What we have, should be used wisely. The 60's and 70's policy of
>let-us-consume-all-we-can-on-credit-because-there-will-always-be-ways-to-produce-
>more-later-to-make-up, apparently has not worked. Hence the deficit. (not the 
>national deficit, but from household to household.)  If we all started to 
>consume just about what we can produce, we would be fine.  Contrary to popular 
>belief, not many people in Japan, China and India (the two most populous) are 
>starving, both those countries made themselves self sufficient in food.  Japan has
>a higher population density than the US, but is still self-sufficient in production
>of food. But 1 in 4 children in this state is starving, which is a contradiction 
>in terms.  What you see in Ethiopia and Sudan in starving millions is due to improper 
>farming practices which have reduced much of the land to desert. Defoliation and 
>cutting trees and natural habitat, that is what. 
>
> When we stop and think,"What is in it for me?" when deciding to give food aid
>to another starving country, we have reached to lowest form of human degradation
>one can possibly achieve. So your question of "millions are starving as we speak"
>is not because of food shortage. It is because, we have somewhere along the line
>taken up this NIMBY type attitude, as long as I can hoard and keep myself (over)fed,
>why should I care about the rest of the world?  Your worry is not that "none of us
>can be fed."  Your fear is "*I* will not have enough to eat." 
>
> I do not contend to say that our population should increase at its present
>growth rate. All I am saying is that your "One child policy" is not the way to
>limit it. Perhaps nature will kick in and begin eliminating the human species for
>balance. Cancer due to polution, artificial coloring and additives in food, AIDS, 
>chemical poisoning from sea-food, skin cancer due to the lack of the ozone layer,
>asbestos inhalation, DDT, Lead and mercury in ground water, and a kazillion other
>effects the supposedly-intelligent human species has been doing to increase the
>so-called standard of living. (Not standard of LIFE mind you, but standard of LIVING.) 
>
>-Shailendra
>ole!ssave@sumax.seattleu.edu
>
>PS: If we all have to die some day, what's the big deal?
>


   Are you by chance a young Catholic hippie chick. You've got a lot of eye opening to
do. Most of your comments are aimed in the wrong direction. The plain and simple 
fact is this earth is to full. If it gets to much fuller, the effects will be 
catostrophic. It may not happen for a few hundred years but it will happen if 
we continue at our present rate. And I ask you `What would you do?'!

Dave