Change?.

[Ricky87]

Love that verse, and the song, and especially the album...Beautiful Struggle was a great!. Not quite as good as High Quality, which was my favorite, but it's definitely right up there..Favorite verse is of his is off of 'Everything Man' (Eardrum), even though it's a short one: "What becomes of a dream deferred, who never makes it to the world to be seen or heard, Do it breathe? Do it got a heartbeat? Is it alive? Do it leave, only to become a star in the sky? I believe, scratch that I know, this ain't my full potential, only usin' 10 percent of my mental on instrumentals, but incidentally my, energy heavenly, can he be so ill there ain't no, pill or no remedy?, The, maker of memories possess the recipe to your fate, make no mistake there ain't no escapin' your destiny, especially when, 'til death do us part, like wedding rings, I'll be here forever put that on everything."..So smart that man is..Not Tupac, but then again; who is ?.

LOL....My bad...Pasted this under the completely wrong tab lol...Sorry about that!...My post to this thread was the other one...

 

[Ricky87]

I think it is too late to solve the population. If you say all right 2 kids per couple from now on. By the time all the under 18 kids grow up and have their pair we will be down to standing room only.

We are not running out of natural resources. That is all enviro whacko propaganda. When we get sick and tired of buying oil from terrorists we have enough oil right here at home to keep us supplied. I you take your facts from Al Gore types we will all be flooded out by the melting ice caps long before fuel becomes a problem. We have the biggest uranium deposits in the world right here in the western US. We just need to tell the enviro whackos to sit down and shut up.

It doesn’t matter what kind of energy we use, there are too many of us. We won’t be worried about green house gases when we are knee deep in our own feces. We need a good old testament plague or two to thin out the weak ones, then we will be fine. Which brings me back to my original statement that we need to reduce the number of people who can not produce and be productive, who rely on the products of others.

But eventually Uranium will run out, though, right?, and if it doesn't over a long period of time it will destroy the ecosystem..Same with oil, or any other fossil fuels. The world may sustain for a little while, maybe even hundreds or even thousands of years, but eventually it will go due to pollution or industrialism. The world is just too small, so long term we're in for some way harder times than what we have now if things go at this rate: that is unless we construct change on a larger scale. What that entails, I don't really know, but it will require much conflict and drastic changes..Also, by then most of the natural world will have fallen, and that remains will be in captivity. No wilderness of any sort if we keep relying on natural resources, because eventually they all run out.

 

[Ricky87]

Actually, the evidence STRONGLY indicates that when people have the most basic needs met AND a generation or so of high child survival rates, they voluntarily reduce family size to 1-3 children. Very large families are either due to religious beliefs banning contraception or due to high child mortality requiring people to have a lot of kids in order to be sure SOME survive to adulthood. Since not everyone has any kids, and some people can't, 1-3 kids usually winds up being about the replacement level. This demographic transition has been observed in a number of different countries.

I have also read that the poorest families with the least education generally have the most kids. That seems to be true in the US, and also worldwide. My guess is that less information or access to birth control is part of the cause. But bigger families are may also be encouraged in lower income groups because of a feeling that kids are less likely to reach adulthood, or be successful, or be able to support the old folks later, or maybe they even provide needed help on the farm, or to beg in the streets, or whatever else kids can do to help support a poor family. Higher income, better educated parents tend to have smaller families. That can be a real financial disaster, and a downward spiral towards more poverty for the countries facing this dilemma.

Ya, that is interesting..I suppose I was seeing it from a rate of wealthy people having on average 3 or 4 kids due to having the means, but good point about poor families in other countries and even in America..Great point about birth control too, and that is a major reason. Not sure what the numbers are for unexpected pregnancy, but I bet even in America it's pretty bad. Education is definitely key too, and I would say mainly to parents. Kids learn from their parents, so I think they should have conferences starting in high-schools where parents are given information on talking with their kids, as well as avenues where kids can go if they don't feel comfortable going home to talk about it. I know at my high-school it wasn't really pushed at all, and I went to a pretty quiet school with only about 800 students. Surprising now when I go on Facebook to see so many of my classmates with babies, and some have kids older than 3 or 4. Just weird to see being I'm only 22 so they must have been around 18 when they had their kids...Just seems really young.

 

[wade]

But eventually Uranium will run out, though, right?, and if it doesn't over a long period of time it will destroy the ecosystem..Same with oil, or any other fossil fuels. The world may sustain for a little while, maybe even hundreds or even thousands of years, but eventually it will go due to pollution or industrialism. The world is just too small, so long term we're in for some way harder times than what we have now if things go at this rate: that is unless we construct change on a larger scale. What that entails, I don't really know, but it will require much conflict and drastic changes..Also, by then most of the natural world will have fallen, and that remains will be in captivity. No wilderness of any sort if we keep relying on natural resources, because eventually they all run out.

That is silly short sighted thinking Ricky, sorry to be blunt. I have a friend that is a geologist. He says there is enough Uranium in Utah alone to power the US for thousands of years. There is more off shore oil in US water than in all of the middle east. When all of the animals have been killed or captured and all of the wilderness is industrialized, polluting the atmosphere will not be a problem. Humans will all be long dead from disease and famine long before that becomes a problem. There are countries right now like India and Russia that cannot produce enough food to feed their people. People require 4 square feet each to stand on. It takes 10 times that much space to produce the food to feed that person. The natural resource that we are going to run out of is room to stand. Simple as that.

 

[Ricky87]

That is silly short sighted thinking Ricky, sorry to be blunt. I have a friend that is a geologist. He says there is enough Uranium in Utah alone to power the US for thousands of years. There is more off shore oil in US water than in all of the middle east. When all of the animals have been killed or captured and all of the wilderness is industrialized, polluting the atmosphere will not be a problem. Humans will all be long dead from disease and famine long before that becomes a problem. There are countries right now like India and Russia that cannot produce enough food to feed their people. People require 4 square feet each to stand on. It takes 10 times that much space to produce the food to feed that person. The natural resource that we are going to run out of is room to stand. Simple as that.

lol...I don't doubt that's so far off either. Some people just believe the world will end in 2012, but that would be too easy. I think space is an issue, and your probably right it's more of an issue than resources at this point, but either one doesn't have a happy ending. Just very sad when you look at all the places that are being lost out to landfills or real estate. My grandfather was telling me when he was a kid in Connecticut he would go miles into the woods with no sound, and now his favorite swamps and marshlands are all gone. Zero have been spared to nature, including the place where he picked up his very first turtle and was inspired to be a naturalist. New Hampshire is really the same way, and he has to do so much work just to spare small pieces of land. It's crazy thinking that this country is losing it's wilderness being that it's really so big, but everywhere you look there's a new house or lot being constructed. We're even possible putting up a KFC in Warner, my home town, even though there's already a Dunkin Donuts, a Pizza Hut, a McDonalds, and a Market Basket all in the same area..Just bizzarre and sad to see, especially when you consider how wonderful of a town Warner is. It's the epitome of what a good New Hampshire town is, but it's becoming just another rest stop for the highways and commuters...Just awful!.

 

[wade]

My son and I collect insects. We have been doing it since he was about 6 years old, he is thirty now. Almost all of the places I took him as a kid are now golf courses. What do you do. Somebody owns that property. How can you tell him that planting grass and making millions of dollars is wrong? If it were your property how would you like being told?

That's the deal, nobody wants to be told what they can and can't do. We all want to be free to do it my way. Here's the deal, you guys (I mean everyone) stop having babies, stop using oil and plastic, stop making garbage, and don't poop or pee, you're just going to have to hold it. Me and mine will go on as though nothing is different. We will drive our cars and build our houses and all of the other people will make sacrifices. Hey, I should like a politician.

 

[Ricky87]

My son and I collect insects. We have been doing it since he was about 6 years old, he is thirty now. Almost all of the places I took him as a kid are now golf courses. What do you do. Somebody owns that property. How can you tell him that planting grass and making millions of dollars is wrong? If it were your property how would you like being told?

That's the deal, nobody wants to be told what they can and can't do. We all want to be free to do it my way. Here's the deal, you guys (I mean everyone) stop having babies, stop using oil and plastic, stop making garbage, and don't poop or pee, you're just going to have to hold it. Me and mine will go on as though nothing is different. We will drive our cars and build our houses and all of the other people will make sacrifices. Hey, I should like a politician.

Well it's a happy balance though..I mean what my grandfather is doing is getting farm land-owners to give their land to conservation for a sum of money. They still get to work the land, and make a living, but they can't ever sell it to be subsidized. It works out for both parties very well, and allows there to be places for nature to exist without too much human involvement. You collecting insects is a great thing, and if I had a golf course I'd absolutely allow you and your son to use it to collect insects. People have a right to property, but they should never take it to the extent where they treat it like it's no ones but theirs. Nothings more fun than natural activities like hiking, exploring, etc., and there should always be vast amounts of places for people to go to do those things. For some people it's the only bit of nature they get to see, and it shouldn't disappear for any reason. It should be preserved to allow for some wildlife to live and remain unchanged, and where people can enjoy but not alter. It's as important as anything, because once those ecosystems go you can never really get them back.

 

[kathylove]

...but they should never take it to the extent where they treat it like it's no ones but theirs...

I agree that the ETHICAL way to treat land is as if you are the steward for just a brief period in the history of the earth, which is true. BUT - I find it strange that when a person wants to USE their land to build something, it must partially belong to the government, since one has to ask permission, follow instructions, and buy permits. Yet, when it is time to pay property tax, there is nobody standing in line to help - now the property belongs SOLELY to the owner, but for tax purposes only. Interesting...

 

[diamondlil]

You collecting insects is a great thing, and if I had a golf course I'd absolutely allow you and your son to use it to collect insects.

Ricky, golf courses are relatively sterile environments, thanks to the pesticides, herbicides, fungicides used to keep the greens green. Worms mean wormcasts, so they are poisoned. Beetle grubs eat grass roots, so they are poisoned.

 

[wade]

Very true J9, we don't go to golf courses to collect.

 

[diamondlil]

Very true J9, we don't go to golf courses to collect.

My boys' dad was a greenkeeper, otherwise I'd never have guessed how bad golf courses are, I'd have just though they were green, open spaces.

 

[Ricky87]

...but they should never take it to the extent where they treat it like it's no ones but theirs...

I agree that the ETHICAL way to treat land is as if you are the steward for just a brief period in the history of the earth, which is true. BUT - I find it strange that when a person wants to USE their land to build something, it must partially belong to the government, since one has to ask permission, follow instructions, and buy permits. Yet, when it is time to pay property tax, there is nobody standing in line to help - now the property belongs SOLELY to the owner, but for tax purposes only. Interesting...

Touche..I don't think people should have to pay property tax if they don't have anymore than their homes on the property. If it's mostly land than that should be encouraged IMO, because it keeps the ecology healthy and also increases the natural beauty of a town/city which in some ways creates revenue for that town/city. I know people come from all over to this part of NH every fall to see the foliage, and theirs a lot of business around that time. It's a very good thing that there should be more of..Great points, though, and it is a bit of a double-standard. Property tax is bogus, and works against people often to the point where they can't afford their property. That's just wrong in every way, and not what should be happening.

Ricky, golf courses are relatively sterile environments, thanks to the pesticides, herbicides, fungicides used to keep the greens green. Worms mean wormcasts, so they are poisoned. Beetle grubs eat grass roots, so they are poisoned.

Didn't know that, but great point. Kind of weird, because you would think that would do way more harm than good, but I guess cry-babies like Tiger Woods can't deal with any beetles making any noise..Sad too, because they look so nice and natural. Never been to one myself, I'm more of a mini-golfer..The funner of the two for sure!.

 

[wstphal]

Actually it depends on the golf course. There is a small but growing number of courses that are minimizing use of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, etc. I think there are even a few that have gone organic (no artificial anything although I think they can use, say, sulfur dust for fungus). Golf courses operated that way would not be sterile.

 

[wade]

Unfortunately golf courses destroy the diversity of the habitat. The only animals to be found are going to be grass eating animals. All others have had to find greener pastures.

 

[mike17l]

Unfortunately golf courses destroy the diversity of the habitat. The only animals to be found are going to be grass eating animals. All others have had to find greener pastures.

Greener pastures? :roflmao:

 

[wade]

Pasture
noun
1. an area covered with grass or other plants used or suitable for the grazing of livestock; grassland.
2. a specific area or piece of such ground.
3. grass or other plants for feeding livestock.

 

[mike17l]

Unfortunately golf courses destroy the diversity of the habitat. The only animals to be found are going to be grass eating animals. All others have had to find greener pastures.

Pasture
noun
1. an area covered with grass or other plants used or suitable for the grazing of livestock; grassland.
2. a specific area or piece of such ground.
3. grass or other plants for feeding livestock.

Golf courses destroy the diversity of habitat, just as a pasture does. You said that other (animals) have to find "greener pastures", pastures are just as monoculture as a golf course and thus would provide little more than a golf course would, for the displaced organisms. I thought it was pretty ironically funny. I found much humor in it, thats all.

 

[wade]

Well I'm glad you are enjoying yourself Mike.