Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
6 Comments
MilkmanDansays...That was good and interesting, but not really about whether or not poverty is *necessary*... "Global Progress Through Millennium Development Goals" or something would be better.
Maybe the Novocaine made him a little loopy.
ChaosEnginesays...Yeah, agreed. I was expecting something more along the lines of "does our economy/society function without poverty?". Do we need to have (made up numbers) 20% of people be poor so that the other 80% can have a higher standard of living? Note: I'm not arguing for this, I'm saying it's an interesting question.
Also "measles vaccinations have prevented about 15 million child deaths in the last 25 years"... suck it anti-vaxxers!
Take your stupid celebrities, your vapid anti-science and quite frankly, fuck right off my planet.
That was good and interesting, but not really about whether or not poverty is *necessary*... "Global Progress Through Millennium Development Goals" or something would be better.
Maybe the Novocaine made him a little loopy.
KrazyKat42says...The next problem will be birth control. Sorry but it's true.
Mordhaussays...I think so, we seriously need to slow down pop growth.
The next problem will be birth control. Sorry but it's true.
BicycleRepairMansays...Actually, it probably wont.. All the stats point in the same direction: reducing childhood/maternal mortality, eradicating poverty and educating people seems to have an interesting side effect: People have less kids. Typically a poor, uneducated population with 10-15% child mortality theres 5-6 kids per woman, whilst rich, educated populations CM less thand 0.2% or so, 1-2 kids per woman. So the population growth slow down or stops as countries move from developing to developed.
The next problem will be birth control. Sorry but it's true.
Lawdeedawsays...1-Rename this video plz...it has nothing to do with the content. 2-Birth control, yes. Just implement social birth control and boom, we stop having kids. This means improving lives, etc.
.
BUT. C-It is also about consumption. For example, you wouldn't argue that we need to reduce the tiger population because hundreds of humans are dying to them every year when just one tiger is kept in a village that causes 95% of human to tiger deaths.
What I mean by that is the "advanced" nations certainly need population control, far greater than the zero population growth numbers we have, and we need to go in to the negatives significantly before our resources run out. As far as the populated backwoods nations, they can afford to be populated.
I think so, we seriously need to slow down pop growth.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.