Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

Devils'Advocate · 06-03-2009, 08:20 PM

The best way to reduce population is more human rights for women. Once women have equal access to education, have the ability to read and learn, AND HAVE ACCESS TO SEXUAL HEALTH INFORMATION AND FAMILY PLANNING EDUCATION, population rates go down. In Mexico there used to be 7 children per mother. The government invested heavily in sex education and in urban areas where there is equal access to education and family planning services, that has dropped to 2.5 children per mother. In rural areas where schooling is optional there has been far less success.

But population is a tiny part of the problem. The US has 5% of the worlds population and yet it consumed $10 trillion worth of goods last year. China and India combined have a third of the worlds population and yet only consumed $2 trillion worth of goods. So we can't shake our finger at them and say "stop screwing up our planet". Each person in the industrialized world consumes about 50 to 100x the resources that a person in a third world country would.

I am a vegetarian for environmental reasons. I do not own a car and use only public transportation for environmental reasons. I was deeply involved in several environmental groups, addressed Halifax City Council on several occasions, slept in a tent at Elizabeth May's house more than once attending conferences developing policy suggestions and sharing ideas on how to mobilize people to be more involved, organized Earth Day classroom outreach programs in the schools. But I stopped being involved in these things about 5 years ago when I realized that it was a complete waste of time and effort. For each person like myself forgoing a vehicle in favor of public transportation, there are 8 people driving Hummers, most of whom do not need a vehicle half that size. As I said in my post at the beginning of this thread, people will not make the changes we need to make until there is an absolute catastrophe. No amount of environmental education and lobbying is going to beat human nature. In the words of Don Henley, "here, in the land of the free, the first words a baby learns is MORE". Until there is an absolutely brutally clear self-interest at stake, other self-interests will always take priority.

---------------------
I didn't get much out of the program that I didn't get out of "The Fire Next Time", a movie staring Craig T Nelson about global warming and water shortages causing an increase in hurricanes and crop failures and people trying to escape into Canada (as was the same in Earth 2100). The movie was made in 1993. Here we are 16 years later and we're in a worse situation now than what we were then. Most countries have ignored Kyoto. Fossil fuel use is way up, not down. Resources are being depleted at a faster rate, not slower. And I certainly believe with every fibre of my being that we will be in worse shape 16 years from now....

06-03-2009, 08:20 PM	#16
Devils'Advocate #1 Goaltender Join Date: Jul 2005 Exp:	The best way to reduce population is more human rights for women. Once women have equal access to education, have the ability to read and learn, AND HAVE ACCESS TO SEXUAL HEALTH INFORMATION AND FAMILY PLANNING EDUCATION, population rates go down. In Mexico there used to be 7 children per mother. The government invested heavily in sex education and in urban areas where there is equal access to education and family planning services, that has dropped to 2.5 children per mother. In rural areas where schooling is optional there has been far less success. But population is a tiny part of the problem. The US has 5% of the worlds population and yet it consumed $10 trillion worth of goods last year. China and India combined have a third of the worlds population and yet only consumed $2 trillion worth of goods. So we can't shake our finger at them and say "stop screwing up our planet". Each person in the industrialized world consumes about 50 to 100x the resources that a person in a third world country would. I am a vegetarian for environmental reasons. I do not own a car and use only public transportation for environmental reasons. I was deeply involved in several environmental groups, addressed Halifax City Council on several occasions, slept in a tent at Elizabeth May's house more than once attending conferences developing policy suggestions and sharing ideas on how to mobilize people to be more involved, organized Earth Day classroom outreach programs in the schools. But I stopped being involved in these things about 5 years ago when I realized that it was a complete waste of time and effort. For each person like myself forgoing a vehicle in favor of public transportation, there are 8 people driving Hummers, most of whom do not need a vehicle half that size. As I said in my post at the beginning of this thread, people will not make the changes we need to make until there is an absolute catastrophe. No amount of environmental education and lobbying is going to beat human nature. In the words of Don Henley, "here, in the land of the free, the first words a baby learns is MORE". Until there is an absolutely brutally clear self-interest at stake, other self-interests will always take priority. --------------------- I didn't get much out of the program that I didn't get out of "The Fire Next Time", a movie staring Craig T Nelson about global warming and water shortages causing an increase in hurricanes and crop failures and people trying to escape into Canada (as was the same in Earth 2100). The movie was made in 1993. Here we are 16 years later and we're in a worse situation now than what we were then. Most countries have ignored Kyoto. Fossil fuel use is way up, not down. Resources are being depleted at a faster rate, not slower. And I certainly believe with every fibre of my being that we will be in worse shape 16 years from now....