js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) (03/25/85)
Martillo writes: > Of course, though actually I was more interested in deriding the zpg > nonsense. India may be overpopulated but not the US. The US should > eliminate immigration quotas altogether. Zpg is not nonsense. In the long term, it is the *only* way for humanity to survive in an all-too-finite biosphere. The US may not be overpopulated yet, but eliminating immigration quotas certainly seems like a good way to make sure that we *are* overpopulated within a generation or two. Especially with an administration that thinks that birth control causes pregnancy. > > All zpg meant was slowing population growth in underpopulated, > productive Western countries while they make even more babies in > overpopulated less productive nations. I'm not sure what you meant by this. Apparently that overpopulated countries are making little effort towards zpg. I don't see how that fact (if true) is an indictement of the zpg concept. Somehow I think you meant it as one, though. And again with the 'underpopulated' western countries. Just what is your idea of the best population level? Why is it higher than the number of people we already have? -- Jeff Sonntag ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j "War is peace."-the ministry of truth
sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) (03/27/85)
> Martillo writes: > > Of course, though actually I was more interested in deriding the zpg > > nonsense. India may be overpopulated but not the US. The US should > > eliminate immigration quotas altogether. > > Zpg is not nonsense. In the long term, it is the *only* way for humanity > to survive in an all-too-finite biosphere. The US may not be overpopulated > yet, but eliminating immigration quotas certainly seems like a good way to > make sure that we *are* overpopulated within a generation or two. Especially > with an administration that thinks that birth control causes pregnancy. > > > > All zpg meant was slowing population growth in underpopulated, > > productive Western countries while they make even more babies in > > overpopulated less productive nations. > I'm not sure what you meant by this. Apparently that overpopulated > countries are making little effort towards zpg. I don't see how that fact > (if true) is an indictement of the zpg concept. Somehow I think you meant > it as one, though. > And again with the 'underpopulated' western countries. Just what is > your idea of the best population level? Why is it higher than the number > of people we already have? > -- > Jeff Sonntag > ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j > "War is peace."-the ministry of truth The alternative to birth control is death control. The most popular and most widely practiced form of this is war. Just like rats in a skinner box, the more overpopulated we get, the more warlike we get. Take the pill or take the bomb. When Malthusian growth exceeds the food supply, famine will result. Little farms are going broke one by one. Soon the famine comes. Then the pestilence and disease, then we get more warlike and comes armegeddon. Overpopulated? nawwwwww. Not U.S. We've got the bombs and missles and marines to make sure we have the Arabian oil to keep the teamsters rolling to get the chemically polluted carcinogenic food trucked to the local supermarket. It comes down to cubic feet of topsoil per capita. Our modern industrial food companies are destroying the topsoil with their chemicals, driving the pure reproducible species of food out of the seed catalogs, and making us all dependent on hybrids you have to re-buy each year from the chemical companies. The Dow of Industrialization. The Tao of Ecological Suicide. Look at it another way. By limiting the population through war, we selectively breed for ability to wage war... the winners get to reproduce their jeans. If instead we intelligently choose to practice birth control (like by reversing the tax structure to tax rather than encourage more babies per couple), then we can select for intelligence and earning power rather than for pugnaciousness. Sunny -- {ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)