Enough Already
2008-07-05 16:07:09 UTC
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%2B%22growing+demand+for+energy%22+%2Bpopulation
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%2B%22growing+demand+for+water%22+%2Bpopulation
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%2B%22growing+demand+for+food%22+%2Bpopulation
Without zero population growth, the best conservation efforts will be
futile in stabilizing demand for energy, water, food, land-acreage and
most major commodities. If conservation is indeed the goal, massive
efforts should be put into contraceptive usage and education. So far,
that's only occurred in a piecemeal, politically-correct way. People
are still told they have unlimited rights to crowd out their neighbors
and wipe out other species.
The standard excuse is that, if one can make enough money, one can
"afford" to be a mindless resource-taker. Money is treated as physical
resource but it's only an abstraction, especially in today's digital
form. You could paper the walls of your house with money but it
doesn't create the land the house sits on. You can't breath, eat,
drink or burn money in a gas tank. Physical matter can't be created or
destroyed, and human "production" is only a transformation of existing
matter, to which money assigns psychological value.
Given the circumstances of a finite planet, the term "population
control" is perfectly reasonable, but "planned parenthood" is as far
as it usually goes. Even that is considered unreasonable by archaic
religions, growth-addicted marketers, land developers and global
traders. People accept the hype of "no limits!" and don't discern
between personal/spiritual growth and physical consumption growth.
They sit like sheep in traffic jams and talk of urban planning, while
constant crowding renders it absurd.
The idea that it's "offensive" to suggest that people limit their
progeny (replacement-level birth control) offends common sense. The
planet is finite with a maximum sustainable population, and most
evidence shows that the population is already too large. The end of
cheap oil has finally brought this home. Claims to the contrary are an
endless list of what-ifs, centered on magic technologies and the
assumption that wilderness and free ecological "services" are
expendable.
Everything is still focused on supplying more stuff to more people
each day, with any supply shortfalls seen as economic stagnation. The
whole economy is geared toward rising consumption, even with all the
talk of going Green. Conservation is a joke on many levels. Reducing
the _rate_ of demand increase is about as good as it gets, but it took
$4/gallon gas for the average drone to really slow down. It seems that
people are genetically programmed for gluttony.
E.A.
http://enough_already.tripod.com/
Nature gives you everything yet owes you nothing.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%2B%22growing+demand+for+water%22+%2Bpopulation
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%2B%22growing+demand+for+food%22+%2Bpopulation
Without zero population growth, the best conservation efforts will be
futile in stabilizing demand for energy, water, food, land-acreage and
most major commodities. If conservation is indeed the goal, massive
efforts should be put into contraceptive usage and education. So far,
that's only occurred in a piecemeal, politically-correct way. People
are still told they have unlimited rights to crowd out their neighbors
and wipe out other species.
The standard excuse is that, if one can make enough money, one can
"afford" to be a mindless resource-taker. Money is treated as physical
resource but it's only an abstraction, especially in today's digital
form. You could paper the walls of your house with money but it
doesn't create the land the house sits on. You can't breath, eat,
drink or burn money in a gas tank. Physical matter can't be created or
destroyed, and human "production" is only a transformation of existing
matter, to which money assigns psychological value.
Given the circumstances of a finite planet, the term "population
control" is perfectly reasonable, but "planned parenthood" is as far
as it usually goes. Even that is considered unreasonable by archaic
religions, growth-addicted marketers, land developers and global
traders. People accept the hype of "no limits!" and don't discern
between personal/spiritual growth and physical consumption growth.
They sit like sheep in traffic jams and talk of urban planning, while
constant crowding renders it absurd.
The idea that it's "offensive" to suggest that people limit their
progeny (replacement-level birth control) offends common sense. The
planet is finite with a maximum sustainable population, and most
evidence shows that the population is already too large. The end of
cheap oil has finally brought this home. Claims to the contrary are an
endless list of what-ifs, centered on magic technologies and the
assumption that wilderness and free ecological "services" are
expendable.
Everything is still focused on supplying more stuff to more people
each day, with any supply shortfalls seen as economic stagnation. The
whole economy is geared toward rising consumption, even with all the
talk of going Green. Conservation is a joke on many levels. Reducing
the _rate_ of demand increase is about as good as it gets, but it took
$4/gallon gas for the average drone to really slow down. It seems that
people are genetically programmed for gluttony.
E.A.
http://enough_already.tripod.com/
Nature gives you everything yet owes you nothing.