On Jan 28, 9:47 am, default <
defa...@defaulter.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:20:29 -0800 (PST), TheTibetanMonkey
>
>
>
>
>
> <
comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Mary just pretends to be holy and it's fake.
>
> >Anyway, there are two issues that we must control. The first one is
> >OVERCONSUMPTION, the second one is OVERPOPULATION. The Dalai can't
> >say it more clearly, which is why I'm here. We need to address though
> >the problem of EDUCATION, which is the first step toward population
> >control, unless we want to go the Chinese way of quotas...
>
> >What can we do in the West though? Our problem is NOT overpopulation
> >or lack of education, just plain GREED fed by the hungry lion...
>
> >"Over-consumption is a theory related to overpopulation, referring to
> >situations where per capita consumption is so high that even in spite
> >of a moderate population density, sustainability is not achieved."
>
> >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overconsumption>
> The problem I see with those ideas is placing consumption ahead of
> population. Consumption seems like a symptom of population.
>
> How would you decide what the optimal balance of consumption is, per
> unit population?
>
> That raises several other questions. What standard of living is
> tolerable or desirable? Realizing more people will invariably mean a
> lower standard of living for all?
>
> Do we live in hovels constructed of mud and twigs, while foregoing all
> creature comforts to make sustaining the largest human population
> possible - or the techno extreme: sustained on life support while
> stimulated electronically?
>
> Bicycles do take an enormous amount of energy to produce and are
> polluting to the environment - not like cars perhaps, but not exactly
> benign either. It does take a fairly large infrastructure to support
> manufacturing to make bikes.
>
> Then how old are you, and where do you live? A bike is great if you
> don't have far to travel to meet your needs, are physically capable of
> getting around, and don't have to pedal up a 8,000 foot hill to get to
> work. A city dweller could get by with a bicycle or public
> transportation - if you like living in cities. Even then there's a
> price to pay to move food, fuel, goods and water in and waste out.
>
> Who and how do those decisions get made? And how do you keep the
> people making them honest?
>
> Then, what works in a mild climate won't work in a less forgiving one.
> A small population on a tropical island may not need anything at all
> to live very well.
>
> Greed is the problem? Overpopulation is a manifestation of greed.
>
> Why do people overpopulate? I hear a lot of "reasons" for having
> children, but those reasons sound more like justifications.
>
> Unborn people consume far less than born ones.
>
> The choice is a few people living well, or many people living poorly -
> damage to the environment (or "sustainability") is the same for either
> choice.
> --- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The minute I see a monkey in an SUV, or a house with 5 rooms for 3
people I realize that's over-consumption. SUVs particularly are
conspicuous signs of over-consumption.
A car is reasonable,and a bike is the best. It should be a reason for
pride to ride a bike, not the other way around, like it is now in this
Christian world of happy sheep driving SUVs.