Something Random

[ddrueding]

Occasionally, on a really good day, I care about the future of humanity. When I do, the biggest concern I have is that stupid and poor people are breeding way more than smart/rich people are.

I wholeheartedly agree with Merc and Will that the world needs less people, not more. I think if the global population were decreased by about 80% that the remaining 20% would have a much better future.

But if civilization has a chance, it needs more smart people. If only trailer trash in the deep south who believe that birth control is a sin and need the higher social security check that comes with more kids reproduce, the world is surely doomed.

 

[MaxBurn]

Occasionally, on a really good day, I care about the future of humanity. When I do, the biggest concern I have is that stupid and poor people are breeding way more than smart/rich people are.

I wholeheartedly agree with Merc and Will that the world needs less people, not more. I think if the global population were decreased by about 80% that the remaining 20% would have a much better future.

But if civilization has a chance, it needs more smart people. If only trailer trash in the deep south who believe that birth control is a sin and need the higher social security check that comes with more kids reproduce, the world is surely doomed.

I could definitely go along with that. I wouldn't wipe out that many though, more like 40-50% and then find a way to keep it at that level. Ever read Earth Abides (environmental class, not my pick)? Don't want to return to the bronze age here...

 

[Chewy509]

DD, what's up? I've just read through the last 20+ posts, and while the last few have a brighter side, some of those earlier ones, well... real downers?

Glad to hear things are going well for you, in regards to your partner. Having kids is a big responsibility, and as others have said and even yourself said, only do it for the right reasons.

During the period in my life where things weren't going so well, (my divorce, etc which most of you know about), I had a lot of thoughts like you have posted about. In the end, one of my mum's friends said to me, "As long as you have a roof over your head, a warm bed to sleep in, and a warm meal each day, your a hell of a lot better than a lot of people out there...". I had all three, and was still depressed. I guess, modern Western society places a too high standard on who and what we should be. Once I realised all the stress I was placing on myself was my own doing, I longer was stressed and I started enjoying life again!

Now things have changed for me personally. My divorce should be finalised in just over a week, I've been dating a beautiful woman for the last 5mths, and am happy in life. My personal fitness has only been better when I was serving in the Army, (not bad for a 30yr old), and am happy/content with what I have. I don't have too many cares at the moment.

My girlfriend and I have been talking about moving in together at the end of the year (our current living arrangements suite both of us work wise, and at the end of the year she'll be relocating work-wise closer to where I work). We've talked about kids, etc... And the thing about kids, we both agreed that one is all we should have, simple because that's all we can properly support.

Now enough on me, the whole lets reduce the world population by x, well I tend to agree in principle. The world as it is now does not have the resources to cope with the current human population. I was watching a TV Show on ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corp), about human population growth, and basically, once we get to around 2060-2070 we are screwed. The Earth simply will run out of resources to support the human/animal/plant population if current population growth continues at the current rate. I think "Agent Smith" said it best in the Matrix, human kind is a virus, one that should be stopped and controlled. IIRC, even China has government endorsed restrictions on population growth. Has China got it right?

On a more controversial note, are diseases like HIV/AIDS, Bird Flu, Cancer, etc, just Natures way of controlling the human population? Is Nature trying to tell us something and we as a whole not listening?

 

[timwhit]

Glad to hear things are going so well for you, Chewy.

On to more somber things. Population growth really seems to be a problem in developing nations (3rd world if you want to say it right, as some really aren't developing). Population growth in India, China, and Africa are huge problems.

With a population of over 1.3 billion, the PRC is very concerned about its population growth and has attempted with mixed results to implement a strict family planning policy. The government's goal is one child per family, with exceptions for ethnic minorities and flexibility in rural areas, where a family can have a second child if the first is a girl or physically disabled. The government's goal is to stabilize population growth early in the twenty-first century, though some current projections estimate a population of anywhere ranging from 1.4 billion to 1.6 billion by 2025.

At 1.6 billion people that would encompass the ENTIRE US population (the 3rd most populous country in the world) in growth in 18 years (current population is close to 1.3 billion). That sounds like a problem to me.

India is an even larger problem. India currently has a population growth rate of 1.38%. Estimates place India's population at 1.8 billion by 2050.

Africa is currently around 840 million, but the population is estimated to double to 1.69 billion by 2050.

Most of Europe and North America have growth rates around 0, if you don't count immigration. This is a good thing. Something needs to be done about countries that have growth rates that will double the population in under 50 years. I don't have any solution to this problem. Mass starvation and disease should help in the coming years.

 

[ddrueding]

DD, what's up? I've just read through the last 20+ posts, and while the last few have a brighter side, some of those earlier ones, well... real downers?

...

During the period in my life where things weren't going so well, (my divorce, etc which most of you know about), I had a lot of thoughts like you have posted about. In the end, one of my mum's friends said to me, "As long as you have a roof over your head, a warm bed to sleep in, and a warm meal each day, your a hell of a lot better than a lot of people out there...". I had all three, and was still depressed. I guess, modern Western society places a too high standard on who and what we should be. Once I realised all the stress I was placing on myself was my own doing, I longer was stressed and I started enjoying life again!

I am clinically bi-polar, so don't expect too much out of me

In the second paragraph you posted, you presented the standard line. "You should be happy, there are people worse of then you." So what? Just because people tell you to be happy doesn't mean anything, and just because that line has worked on stupid people in worse conditions doesn't make your conditions any better.

 

[jtr1962]

Seems like you've got it, except for not factoring in the costs. It seems to me based on other conversations here that you have a pretty straightforward life; many of the routine things are so routine that you no longer think about them at all. I can understand factoring them out of the equation after a while but doesn't that simply mean that you aren't doing all the math?

There's probably some truth to that. It's also true that since I've done a lot less "adventurous" stuff in my 44 years than you have in your 26 what may seem routine to you might even seem like an adventure to me. Even something simple like taking the train to Manhattan around the holidays, seeing everyone enjoying the occasion, is something I look forward to each year. You've been to places like China which I may never get to. Furthest I've ever been from where I was born was Montreal, Canada, and this was when I was 11 years old. Second furthest was when I visited my grandmother in Rome, NY about 270 miles away. So far my "big trip" this year was to visit someone from Candlepowerforums who lives 90 miles away in New Jersey. You travel more than that almost every single day.

Well, truth is I'm probably not big on travel, or at least the transportation modes readily available for travel in the US, or I'd do more of it. I won't fly, car travel (and flying) both make me physically ill, and we don't really have a decent enough rail network to make traveling beyond the NY metro area viable. Maybe if we had a high-speed rail system like Europe or Japan I'd enjoy traveling more. However, going via car or plane it's just not worth it to me. Sort of the cost-benefit analysis you mentioned.

I'm not entirely sure I agree that life isn't worth living if the bad outweighs the good. That's almost always been the case with me. I've even heard that life is basically just a few highlights interspersed between long periods of routine. For most people just the fact that they need to earn a living makes that so. Unless you genuinely love your job, by definition doing something you're less than crazy about 5 days out of 7 shifts the balance to the negative. I'll guess that my life, as uneventful as it often is, remains tolerable precisely because my work schedule is irregular. Who knows what the next week will bring? I remember I hated shift work with a purple passion. Getting up/coming home the same time, having days which were carbon copies of the day before, literally drove me nuts. It's said some people thrive on routine like this. I hate it. It just wears me out.

One thing I do agree with you on is that it is a crock that I should be happy because there are people worse off than me. I know there are, but they may be better at coping, or more importantly they may never have known anything better. It's probably harder to be lower middle class in a country where millionaires waste more money than you'll earn in your life right in front of you than it is to be poor in the slums of Calcutta where everyone you see is in pretty much the same boat.

 

[udaman]

You've been to places like China which I may never get to. Furthest I've ever been from where I was born was Montreal, Canada, and this was when I was 11 years old. Second furthest was when I visited my grandmother in Rome, NY about 270 miles away. So far my "big trip" this year was to visit someone from Candlepowerforums who lives 90 miles away in New Jersey. You travel more than that almost every single day.

Well, truth is I'm probably not big on travel, or at least the transportation modes readily available for travel in the US, or I'd do more of it. I won't fly, car travel (and flying) both make me physically ill, and we don't really have a decent enough rail network to make traveling beyond the NY metro area viable. Maybe if we had a high-speed rail system like Europe or Japan I'd enjoy traveling more. However, going via car or plane it's just not worth it to me. Sort of the cost-benefit analysis you mentioned.

Yeah you're not big on travel and I see more phsycological barriers than any real physical barriers. You favor train travel therefore you will do it, you don't like the ideal of air/car travel therefore you're exceptionally overly reacting to the most minor inconviniences. Really, if car travel makes you physically sick (and what is that? particulates or actual aversion to fumes, then you'd never be able to walk outside your home to do anything because auto fumes are everywhere, just as concentrated or actually you'll get a bigger inhale walking down the street at a rapid pace even in the winter than you would sitting in a car, unless that car is stuck in bumper to bumper traffic...have you ever gone on a skiiing trip in the Western USA or Canada...can smell much of fumes at highway speeds way out beyond city pollution). You can't smell and get sick from diesel fumes of a train motor or do you qualify only by using trains that are fully electric. I think jtr is in love with the ideal of trains in general so any actual reality as far as air quality is negated in his biased mindset, JMO.

Get jtr loaded up on a nice bottle of 17% alc. Zinfandel after a good meal, I'll bet he'd never even notice those physically ill scnearios he claims affect him with air/car travel. How exactly did you get to Jersey recently jtr? By car, and so you were physically ill the entire 4hr roundtrip???

And why is train travel so bad across the USA jtr, you've actually charted all of the routes, and some how in Europe its magically 10 times better? Again, placebo bias effect happening here I should think.

Something here doesn't add up jtr ;P

 

[jtr1962]

Really, if car travel makes you physically sick (and what is that? particulates or actual aversion to fumes, then you'd never be able to walk outside your home to do anything because auto fumes are everywhere, just as concentrated or actually you'll get a bigger inhale walking down the street at a rapid pace even in the winter than you would sitting in a car, unless that car is stuck in bumper to bumper traffic.

It's a combination of the fumes plus the plastics/leathers typically used in car interiors plus the constant excessive accelerations/decelerations which all combine to make me physically sick in short order. My tolerance is a bit higher in winter when the air smells better. And yes, the fumes walking down the street can make me sick as well which is why in warmer weather (like now) I usually stay indoors until 10 PM or so. Been this way since I was a kid and I find it's actually getting worse as I get older, or maybe the air's getting dirtier.

You can't smell and get sick from diesel fumes of a train motor or do you qualify only by using trains that are fully electric.

Yes, only electric. I'll admit the fumes on a diesel train might be tolerable since train interiors are typically fiberglass/stainless steel, and hence don't intereact in bad ways with the fumes like auto interiors seem to. Besides that, if I rode towards the back, I'd be like a quarter mile from the engine. And trains just aren't capable of changing speeds at high enough rates to make me sick like cars or planes are. Putting all that aside, I still don't like diesel trains because they are dog slow compared to electrics. Amtrak's diesel locos at best run about 100 mph, and take ages to accelerate a heavy train up to that speed. The AEM7s used on the Northeast Corridor get a 7-coach train up to 100 in 2 minutes flat, top out at 125+. The high-speed electrics in Europe/Japan offer average speeds, inclusive of intermediate stops, in the 150 mph area. So that's your answer why I think train travel in most of the USA is so bad. Very infrequent service, poor adherence to already padded schedules, sub-50 mph average speeds, poor or nonexistent public transit connections at the endpoints, etc. Europe isn't ten times better, but it is at least three times better, maybe four if you count better public transit connections. 150 mph average speeds make train travel competitive with flying out to at least 500 miles once one counts the usual time to get to airports. With a decent high-speed system I could make it to LA to share a bottle of Zinfandel with you in maybe 16 hours. Just board the train at dinner time in NY, sleep on board, and I'm there in time to lunch with you. No worries at all that I'll be ill from enduring six hours in a howling aluminum tube, plus an hour taxi ride at each end. The extra 7 or 8 hours for the train trip ends up being time getting a good night's sleep, or really no wasted time at all. I know we'll probably never see something like this before I'm on Social Security given the cavemen who run this country, but it's a nice thought nevertheless. Even a so-called third-world country like China is building a high-speed network.

How exactly did you get to Jersey recently jtr? By car, and so you were physically ill the entire 4hr roundtrip???

I got lucky. It was January, we hit no traffic jams, made the trip in about 80 minutes each way. We also slept over so that helped with any lingering ill effects. If we had hit traffic, or it had been much warmer, guaranteed we would have had to turn around and go home. I even warned the guy driving ahead of time about that possibility. The aforementioned trips to Rome, NY were similar. Dead of winter, little traffic, my brother made the 270 miles in under 3 hours. This past March I got pretty ill on a 30 minute trip to visit my father's grave. I'm 100% sure if every car on the road was an EV my tolerance to car travel would easily double or triple. Replace the plastics/leathers with stainless steel and fiberglass seats, and I'd probably be mostly OK with car travel (except stop and go).

No placebo effect here at all. Very real symptoms. Even as a kid I used to dread car trips to relatives since I usually ended up puking at some point. Like I said, I do the equations. The virtual guarantee of getting at least sick, plus the slight probability of dying in transit, skews the equation to the point I consider it not worth it to travel extensively. I don't doubt we'll one day have cool ways to get around like transcontinental/transoceanic maglevs which I would make me love traveling (3 hours to China and I'll be like when do we leave ), but it sadly probably won't be in my lifetime.

 

[Sol]

On a more controversial note, are diseases like HIV/AIDS, Bird Flu, Cancer, etc, just Natures way of controlling the human population? Is Nature trying to tell us something and we as a whole not listening?

I think if we make the mistake of anthropomorphising nature then we run the risk of entirely misconstruing what she's trying to tell us...

 

[LOST6200]

When I do, the biggest concern I have is that stupid and poor people are breeding way more than smart/rich people are.

gReate, are you aNazi now or somjething?

 

[ddrueding]

gReate, are you aNazi now or somjething?

Does that mean you disagree?

 

[MaxBurn]

Quote:
Originally Posted by LOST6200 View Post
gReate, are you aNazi now or somjething?
Does that mean you disagree?

I am with you on that, the slums are where all the kids are. Anyway I thought in a post industrial nation like we are there was supposed to be a leveling off or a negative population growth. What happened to that?

IIRC, even China has government endorsed restrictions on population growth. Has China got it right?

Yes

 

[Howell]

I think if we make the mistake of anthropomorphising nature then we run the risk of entirely misconstruing what she's trying to tell us...

Intentional irony?

 

[Sol]

Intentional irony?

It kinda spoils it if you have to say...

 

[Howell]

It kinda spoils it if you have to say...

True but humor that dry doesn't translate well in written form.

 

[Howell]

IIRC, even China has government endorsed restrictions on population growth. Has China got it right?

Yes

Seems to be a lot of negative consequences to that solution.

 

[ddrueding]

Seems to be a lot of negative consequences to that solution.

That is what happens when you try to pass laws that people are against. It doesn't work.

 

[MaxBurn]

I think that is more of a social issue they have going there favoring males. Actually it is working even better because without the females they further the cause and limit reproduction. I don't think something similar would happen in the US as we don't have the whole male superior thing to the same degree here.

 

[ddrueding]

I know. I'm not saying that that law would have similar impact here, just that laws in general that go against the will of the people they affect don't work.

 

[MaxBurn]

I know. I'm not saying that that law would have similar impact here, just that laws in general that go against the will of the people they affect don't work.

Understood, I am just at a loss to figure out a better or more humane way to control populations.

I think we can all agree that better health care and living longer is great so we don't want to change that.

 

[ddrueding]

I am a capitalist (go figure). I feel the best way to shape people's behavior is to make it in their financial best interest.

[naive idealist mode]

I think the trick is to find out the true cost of any action and make sure that the person performing that action is responsible for that cost. Let supply and demand sort itself out and find a balance.

[/naive idealist mode]

Really, I have no idea. Just hope for some really major natural disasters, I guess.

 

[CougTek]

Put some well spotted dynamite bags in the Yellowstone caldera and you should have your major natural disaster.

 

[Sol]

I am a capitalist (go figure). I feel the best way to shape people's behavior is to make it in their financial best interest.

In Australia at least I think this line of thinking would be a good first step. We have a large number of people on the dole or government disability pensions who get more money based on the number of dependants they support. A lot of these people just keep having babies because they get more money from the government. Sure in the long term the whole thing backfires since kids obviously cost a lot to support, but we're not talking about people renowned for their long term financial planning prowess.

In many cases you get a couple of people on disability support pensions popping out seriously disabled kids they don't want and can't look after who subsequently need even more government support to have even a semi normal (and generally very short) life.

The first step isn't so much giving people a financial incentive not to have kids (there already is one) it's taking away the financial incentives they have to have them.

If we can stop all the people who don't want to have kids from having them then we can start looking at how much of the people who do want them need to be restricted. (In Aus I don't think anything else would be required since last I heard the population growth excluding immigration was negative).

 

[LunarMist]

Look at this - astyuiop[pxcvbm.

Somebody was drooling on the keyboard.

 

[Pradeep]

That's some heavy drool.

 

[time]

In many cases you get a couple of people on disability support pensions popping out seriously disabled kids they don't want and can't look after who subsequently need even more government support to have even a semi normal (and generally very short) life.

You absolute fucking Nazi. Actually, that's too nice a term. You disgrace to humankind?

I don't know what you've been raised on, kid, but I'd strongly recommend a medicinal dose of reality; charity or social work springs to mind. Or maybe having your own disabled kids ...

I imagine you could be prosecuted in some countires for this kind of dangerous supremacism. Please wait until you grow up enough to safely open your mouth in public.

 

[ddrueding]

Wow Time, inflammatory much?

I have to say I agree with Sol on this one. Any time the government supports (or encourages through support) actions that are not beneficial to anyone, something is wrong.

I'm not saying that anyone should be killed, or that any specific laws should be passed, but supporting this kind of action is unconscionable.

Time, I'm not sure where you are coming from to have such a strong opinion that you don't bother to back it up with...anything? I don't see any argument there at all, just a bunch of insults. Not a worthy post, IMHO.

 

[ddrueding]

dupe.

 

[Wavemaker]

Really, I have no idea. Just hope for some really major natural disasters, I guess.

But not one that involves Reno suddenly becoming a prime Pacific beachfront location.

 

[ddrueding]

But not one that involves Reno suddenly becoming a prime Pacific beachfront location.

For the betterment of humankind? Sure. Sink me.

 

[jtr1962]

I have to say I agree with Sol on this one. Any time the government supports (or encourages through support) actions that are not beneficial to anyone, something is wrong.

Same here. I don't mind the government supporting people who can't work for whatever reason (unless they have a self-afflicted "disability" like drug abuse or alcoholism). However, if you have a genetic disability that you're highly likely to pass on to your offspring then a condition of getting this support should be sterilization. And a condition for getting temporary government help if you lose your job should be that you can't have any more children while you're receiving the help. It's one thing to help someone but quite another to allow them to reproduce generations who will continue to require help.

On a more controversial note, I wish there was some minimum intelligence/skill set for people to reproduce. Not that higher intelligence necessarily guarantees anything, but as a general rule the prisons are filled with people of lower intelligence or other mental defects. The rule I mentioned might actually substantially reduce violent crime/impulsive behavoir. You can't be expected to think logically before acting if you don't possess a certain minimum intelligence to start with.

I would never advocate selectively killing people who didn't meet certain criteria just to "better the human race". Rather, by just not allowing the most dysfunctional among us to breed we can accomplish that same end within a few generations. Yes, I know none of this is PC but I couldn't care less.

 

[Handruin]

time, I have to agree that was a bit over the top. You can disagree with sol, but to call someone a nazi (and mean it seriously) and a disgrace to human kind...it was uncalled for.

 

[Sol]

O.K Time, I'm not even really proposing anything here just pointing to a problem...

As far as the section of my post you quoted it pretty much just a statement of fact. Children of two parents with disabilities caused by genetic abnormalities are often born with severe multiple physical and intellectual disabilities. Some of them live their entire lives in wheelchairs and without ever learning to speak. The amount of care these kids require generally means that they need a full time professional carer.

This is a really sad thing and I kind of see it as a microcosm of society's short-circuiting of evolution.

And I truly believe that this is a going to become a problem for humanity in the long term.

As for solutions, I'm kind of banking on genetic engineering. Sure it's playing God, but I don't believe in God and the only alternative I can see is playing Hitler, and that's not a solution I would ever even consider.

P.S. To be honest Time I'm not really sure what you thought I was proposing. It would kind of like to know what could provoke that response. (And I guess I'd also kind of rather not so feel free to say or not).

 

[ddrueding]

The bulb on my Sharp XR-20X projector burned out at only 50% of it's rated life (~1100 hours). I suspect it got moved around more than was good for it (a few special events). I found a replacement at officeworld.com for ~$340 with free shipping. Ordered it at lunch 2 days ago and it arrived yesterday.

 

[Chewy509]

(In Aus I don't think anything else would be required since last I heard the population growth excluding immigration was negative).

According to the Australian 2007 census results just released, current birth rate is 1.8 children per couple... (Population replacement rate is 2 children per couple)...

 

[Mercutio]

I've been very depressed lately.
Going home from work and immediately going to bed.
But at least I've been working a lot more.

 

[Handruin]

Has something happened to have caused the extra depression?

 

[Mercutio]

Just a lot of stupid crap that has reminded me how much my life sucks.

 

[time]

Despite my self-imposed pragmatism, I'm still somewhat quixotic. Part of me wants to stand up to the bastardry in this world.

Which is another way of saying: I meant every word, I agonized over it for ages, I sought someone else's opinion, and I don't retract any of it.

It's not a personal attack, it's a statement of fact:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/disabled.html

It may sound insulting, but there are people here who lack the attention span to actually comprehend this. I can't do anything about that, or the moral bankruptcy that seems to follow.

I can, however, avoid swimming in the sewer of ignorance. For me, this thread is closed.

 

[Mercutio]

Eugenics was an idea that had a great deal of traction among the intelligentsia in the late 1800s and early 1900s. It wasn't all Nazis. Mainstream physicians, philanthropists and social philosophers genuinely thought it was a good idea. There was a particular interest in sterilizing poor people, the idea being that if fewer poor people could breed, there would be fewer poor people and conditions would become generally better for the remaining poor people. Of course, there was also rampant racism in the practice, since in many cases Eugenics was most heavily practiced on African-descended, Roma or aboriginal peoples.

Just the same, the idea did NOT come from Hitler. Hitler was more like a student of Francis Galton, who really popularized the idea of using Eugenics for the betterment of mankind.