General Discussion

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)

36. A resource utilization problem is different than a population one.

Sun Feb 14, 2016, 08:12 PM

Feb 2016

What population growth there is in the US is driven in large part by immigration, which means in many cases third world resource utilization level people are being turned into first world utilization level people.

Folks seem to walk away from the conversation, here, at that point ive noticed.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

74 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DU Poll on World Population [View all] SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 OP

Finite World - With Finite Resources - Better With Fewer Consumers cantbeserious Feb 2016 #1

2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #2

"the world" isn't a unit. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #4

Make that three Warpy Feb 2016 #12

Thanks SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #15

+1 excellent post... AOR Feb 2016 #24

Conversations on population are generally a waste of time, here. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #3

Thanks for the thoughtful post SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #5

Agreed Travis_0004 Feb 2016 #6

not sure about this part SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #7

Obviously the planet is a single entity. But population growth doesn't behave like one. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #34

The world is not a single unit? Really??? hunter Feb 2016 #42

Again, a waste of fucking time. "The world is so a single unit!" Derp Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #43

No problem here Kilgore Feb 2016 #8

Yep - What happens in the rest of the world never touches some places. SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #10

So what exactly would you like to do about it? Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #35

The whole point is a joke about Scalia having 9 fucking kids SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #37

I'm pro choice. The problem with that guy was that he was not. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #38

That question can't be answered until the ownership and distribution of resources is addressed. rug Feb 2016 #9

nice post SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #11

Really? What if the question were, MH1 Feb 2016 #13

Yes I would. rug Feb 2016 #17

So, it isn't obvious that 10 trillion people are too many, MH1 Feb 2016 #19

10 trillion can be considered a very big number SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #21

Not necessarily. rug Feb 2016 #22

Wow, seriously? Do you think the biosphere could support that many, MH1 Feb 2016 #26

What influence do you think human activities have on the biosphere? rug Feb 2016 #29

Well said... AOR Feb 2016 #31

Nope, Malthus was not the last. But your argument is absurd. Resources are finite. MH1 Feb 2016 #45

I won't give you a FB but I'll give you a F' in fact. Or three. rug Feb 2016 #49

Corporations are run by human beings. (No they are not "people" MH1 Feb 2016 #52

And not for human beings. They are run for private profit. (No, profit is not "people".) rug Feb 2016 #53

So what is the plan to get to that ideal economic system? nt MH1 Feb 2016 #59

By the way, I withdraw my thinking that you and I are close on any topic. MH1 Feb 2016 #46

Thank god. rug Feb 2016 #50

Yes, best for all concerned. MH1 Feb 2016 #51

+1 AOR Feb 2016 #25

I'm not sure that the problem is "way too many people", honestly. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2016 #14

Yes - but that paints the USA in a bad light SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #20

A resource utilization problem is different than a population one. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #36

I have explored "wild areas" all across America. SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #39

I am not disputing that Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #40

Agree SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #41

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many people. GliderGuider Feb 2016 #16

Many Thanks SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #18

Malthus and his debunked nonsense were a stain on human history... AOR Feb 2016 #30

but still... SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #33

Of course you are correct. MH1 Feb 2016 #47

There are too many damn people in the Mormon Tabernacle Choir! rug Feb 2016 #44

Oh, bullshit. The capitalists want as many destitute people as possible as fodder for their MH1 Feb 2016 #48

How would Social Security be maintained ? philosslayer Feb 2016 #58

That is where tweaking the economic system comes in. MH1 Feb 2016 #64

The bullshit belongs to you... AOR Feb 2016 #60

My argument is much more nuanced than you give me credit for. MH1 Feb 2016 #66

There is no provable evidence of a "population bomb" on the horizon... AOR Feb 2016 #68

Civilization is the resource concentration mechanism The2ndWheel Feb 2016 #70

Usually take a glance at posting history before responding to this kind of post... AOR Feb 2016 #71

Everyone comes from their own place The2ndWheel Feb 2016 #72

+1 nt GliderGuider Feb 2016 #74

Thank you for that yourpaljoey Feb 2016 #32

There is just about the right number of people Blue_In_AK Feb 2016 #23

Too many Duggars, not enough vasectomies. nt valerief Feb 2016 #27

My favorite reply SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #28

7.5 billion people can live on this earth sustainably, happily and comfortably. We simply need to Dont call me Shirley Feb 2016 #54

You are probably right Quixote1818 Feb 2016 #61

We can slo minimize our dependence on wood using hemp, bamboo and probably many other Dont call me Shirley Feb 2016 #65

So, if the planet is overpopulated, MineralMan Feb 2016 #55

One child and I can be ok with people that have two - three is out SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #56

And you? How many children? MineralMan Feb 2016 #57

thank you SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #62

The no-brainer answer is to provide easy access to control one's own reproduction. MH1 Feb 2016 #63

We really don't have the Mega Cities like they do in Asia yuiyoshida Feb 2016 #67

bump for the night SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #69

There is an easy and quite simple solution that can be implemented to address this issue. Glassunion Feb 2016 #73