From: neal@atmos.washington.edu (Neal Johnson)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: progeny limits (was "...toxicity of wood smoke")
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:50:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: eos-airs.NEAL.92Apr8115032
	<1992Apr5.014952.16932@zlf.uucp> <1992Apr7.174146.4415@ole.uucp>
Organization: Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington

In article <1992Apr7.174146.4415@ole.uucp> ssave@ole.uucp (Shailendra Save) writes:

.
.... stuff deleted..... go back and read it if you have strong stomach...
   >
   >   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? 

And you?  He who is without sin blah, blah, blah.

>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?  

Nobody (er, in their right mind) really considers such a policy
likely.  Can you imagine trying to push this past Teddy Kennedy?

> 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.)  

Jeez, I wish somebody would have informed me of the policy.  I'd have
accepted those FREEEE gold cards.

>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. 

I have no time nor penchant for gardening nor cattle ranching thank you.

1 in 4?  a) I doubt that very much, b) where are all these starving
children?  Where do they live?  
 
>  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." 
>

Lowest form of degradation?  Hardly.  Heard of the holocaust? 

My god is Dave worried about himself?  How horrid.

I am not sure what NIMBY means but when we begin to think that we are 
responsible for the well being of the rest of the world aren't we
assuming a bit much.  Don't we hear repeatedly that it is none of our
damn business what machinations go on in the internal affairs of
foreign nations?  Or is it that sometimes we know best and should
enforce that knowledge and sometimes we know best and should just feel
content in that knowledge?  This really does confuse me.

Who died and said that you knew what was wisest for everyone.

>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.) 

What cave do you live in?  I think when you make such a list as above
you should keep in the *expletive-of-your-choice-deleted* forefront 
of your mind the marvelous bene's we have provided along with these 
nastier by-products.

After all, lifespan is on the increase.  

My standard of life has been incomprehensibly enhanced by the fossil-
fuel consuming, pollution producing inventions of man, by the
additives in my food which prevent spoilage and my illnesss, by *SEX*
(unfortunately not as irresponsibly and with as many partners as some),
by the positive effects of alleged poisoning chemicals presumably once
used to enhance farm output, by the use of ozone damaging chemicals in
a myriad of applications both industrial and at the retail level, by the
wonderful insulative abilities of the asbestos fiber (remember if
you'd just leave them alone they won't harm you), and by the kazillion
other things that men and women wiser than I have done for my (and, 
oh my god, their own!) benefit.

I don't think I ever got anything out of DDT.  Too young.

I don't know why folks would just toss out Pb and Hg into the ground
water.  These are both valuable elements.  Who does this and why?
I am sure they have a good reason or they are criminals.

> -Shailendra
>ole!ssave@sumax.seattleu.edu
>
>PS: If we all have to die some day, what's the big deal?
>

The big deal is in the quality between then and now.  I won't plan your
life for you, if you don't plan mine for me.  How'd that be?

>Disclaimer: My computer typed this in when I was not looking.

Would that it were so.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not sure what this whole thing has to do with pnw.general.
I am weary of these types of folks.

So are the Sonics or Trailblazers the better team now?

Is the Seattle real estate market making a rebound?  My tax assessment 
sure says it must be.

What is the nicest golf course in Portland under $30?

Anyone know how the Apple suit against Microsoft is proceeding?

Anybody besides me actually make a few earthquake preparations after the
World Series interrupter in SF?  


--
Neal C. Johnson		INTERNET: neal@atmos.washington.edu
                 	UUCP:	  uw-beaver!atmos.washington.edu!neal
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         "No Harrylock!  Don't squirt me with that acid."