BF2S Forums Limiting the number one gets to have.

Snorkelfarsan wrote:

xBlackPantherx wrote:

You are joking right? Please tell me that you are because otherwise, that it the least intelligent question/statement I've heard in a while. How do you expect to move forward in technology, and pure human limits if you are moving backwards. Also, you are suggesting that you are 100% all for abortion, not at all welcome to the possibility of human cloning or space colonization. Also, what happens if a couple is only allowed to have one kid and they accidentally have another? You are saying that the said couple would be forced to get an abortion/kill he kid once born/give it to another couple and go to jail.

And why would I be against space exploration/colonization? Just because the population on this planet decreases to 3 or 4 billion instead of 6 doesnt mean that the only humans left are gonna be a bunch whackos.. Or is that not what you meant?

Because a main big reason that we look for space colonization and go through all the effort is because we have an increasing population and a increasing depletion of resources and if half of our population there would be no more need for that. Actually, since you brought it up, there would also be less smart minds as the population decreased: especially if you decrease it in certain areas of the world.

What an absurd government intrusion. People should be thinking of ways to support an increased population, not how whittle it down to the nubs.

CommieChipmunk wrote:

xBlackPantherx wrote:

HITNRUNXX wrote:

1) Then I guess you better start figuring out how to colonize mars...

2) And replace the things that are exhaustible..

3) And my parents only had 2 kids and couldn't afford to put either of us through college... By your rules I shouldn't exist... But I worked my ass off and got scholarships and put myself through a very expensive private college... And then got a 2nd degree from a state college... And needed only about $2,000 in loans for 5 years of school...

1) They already have started to and, for the most part, have figured out how to colonize mars within the next decade or two.

2) They already have, are, and will be replacing exhaustible resources

3) Thats very true. Nothing says the amount of kids you have limits their potential.

1) said the same thing about the moon years and years ago.

2) Still using gasoline.  If this "global warming" farce ends up being true, there goes massive amounts of freshwater.  Forests take a long time to regrow.

3) I've got $300,000 dollars worth of scholarship offers so far from 7 different colleges, I'm still working my ass off looking for more little scholarships and I still will end up with student loans.. and I'm not bragging or anything, but I'm not really an "average" kid.  I've worked for 4 years at an eye clinic, I volunteer at a hospital every sunday, I have over a 4.0 GPA got a 1970 on the SAT.. my point being, if I'm still going to end up with student loans, your average kid will probably end up with some student loans too..  But beyond college, there aren't a ton of people who can support 2 kids and retire successfully.  Throw five kids into the equation and you'll be working until your 90.

1) Just because they figured out how to doesn't mean they will. The moon is small, and has no beneficial value.

2) Using gasoline is your own fault. Its very easy to convert any diesel car to use vegetable oil or ethenal(? on spelling). Hell, they already have perfectly working hydrogen (water) fueled cars and "pumps" in Germany.

3) Also depends what college you are trying to go, where it is, how many years you'll be there/what degrees you are working to get.

4) I'm sorry that you're very high standards for college/work are keeping you back/distorting your view but you don't have to be a neuro-surgeon from Yale to be successful.

xBlackPantherx wrote:

Snorkelfarsan wrote:

xBlackPantherx wrote:

You are joking right? Please tell me that you are because otherwise, that it the least intelligent question/statement I've heard in a while. How do you expect to move forward in technology, and pure human limits if you are moving backwards. Also, you are suggesting that you are 100% all for abortion, not at all welcome to the possibility of human cloning or space colonization. Also, what happens if a couple is only allowed to have one kid and they accidentally have another? You are saying that the said couple would be forced to get an abortion/kill he kid once born/give it to another couple and go to jail.

And why would I be against space exploration/colonization? Just because the population on this planet decreases to 3 or 4 billion instead of 6 doesnt mean that the only humans left are gonna be a bunch whackos.. Or is that not what you meant?

Because a main big reason that we look for space colonization and go through all the effort is because we have an increasing population and a increasing depletion of resources and if half of our population there would be no more need for that. Actually, since you brought it up, there would also be less smart minds as the population decreased: especially if you decrease it in certain areas of the world.

There would most likely be the same percentage of "smart people" as there is today. And since the population would be smaller, then the demand for these "smart peoples" ideas and inventions will be as big or as small as they are today.
If there are 100 people in a room and 20 out of those 100 are considered "smart", then when you decrease the amount of people in that room to 50, there will be only 10 smart people (statistically). There would indeed be fewer smart people, but also fewer people in total, so the demand would stay the same.

xBlackPantherx wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

xBlackPantherx wrote:

1) They already have started to and, for the most part, have figured out how to colonize mars within the next decade or two.

2) They already have, are, and will be replacing exhaustible resources

3) Thats very true. Nothing says the amount of kids you have limits their potential.

1) said the same thing about the moon years and years ago.

2) Still using gasoline.  If this "global warming" farce ends up being true, there goes massive amounts of freshwater.  Forests take a long time to regrow.

3) I've got $300,000 dollars worth of scholarship offers so far from 7 different colleges, I'm still working my ass off looking for more little scholarships and I still will end up with student loans.. and I'm not bragging or anything, but I'm not really an "average" kid.  I've worked for 4 years at an eye clinic, I volunteer at a hospital every sunday, I have over a 4.0 GPA got a 1970 on the SAT.. my point being, if I'm still going to end up with student loans, your average kid will probably end up with some student loans too..  But beyond college, there aren't a ton of people who can support 2 kids and retire successfully.  Throw five kids into the equation and you'll be working until your 90.

1) Just because they figured out how to doesn't mean they will. The moon is small, and has no beneficial value.

2) Using gasoline is your own fault. Its very easy to convert any diesel car to use vegetable oil or ethenal(? on spelling). Hell, they already have perfectly working hydrogen (water) fueled cars and "pumps" in Germany.

3) Also depends what college you are trying to go, where it is, how many years you'll be there/what degrees you are working to get.

4) I'm sorry that you're very high standards for college/work are keeping you back/distorting your view but you don't have to be a neuro-surgeon from Yale to be successful.

1) Don't count on it in the near future.

2) Actually I do run on E85 (ethanol).  $2.69 a gallon.

3) College isn't the only factor... but what if they want to go to a nice college?  Tough luck I guess.  It's no easy task getting into a med-school with a degree from a state school these days to be honest.  And yes, I know there are other careers outside of medicine...

4) True.  But most private colleges cost upwards of $30,000 a year (plus room and board)

Snorkelfarsan wrote:

Call it unfair, unjust, but that doesn't take away the fact that it is necessary.

Necessary where and according to who? The United States population growth is less than 1% per year. The average family in the United States has less than 2 children per the 2000 Census and 2002 IRS figures. That is a DECLINING population when you take immigration out of the picture. Lock down the borders and hey, problem solved for us!

It might not be a big problem right now for us in the western world. But in time, it will be. And just think about the amount of resources that we use up as well. America, compared to population with other countries in the world, uses way more resources than it should. Oil is only one example. And of course, America isn't the only country gulity of this, most western countries are. So if we reduce our population as well, and not only demand that Asia and Africa does it, we will be setting an example and helping the world in many ways.

HITNRUNXX wrote:

So let's not worry about fixing the problems and just worry about limiting ourselves?

Limit America to 2 kids per family and guess what? You still run out of oil. Instead, eliminate the need for oil. Population is not a disease that has these other symptoms that will go away simply by "curing" it... Those other problems are already here. Cut our world population by what? 20%? 50%? We are still going to have these problems in one form or another, they just get postponed a while. If we have 100 years of oil left at the current rate, and we kill half the population, but nothing else changes, then we still just have 150-200 years of oil left... It still is going to be going away faster than it is created.

Instead, fix the real problems. Lose the dependency on exhaustible resources. Give us somewhere else to expand to. Lose the dependency on the government's money. Fix education. Fix medical care. Fix the economy. Now you have fixed the world without taking away rights, and made it a BETTER place for EVERYONE.

You're right.  Population is not the problem.

I would karma you again, but I can't.

2 kids until we find a solution to the following things.

• Pollution
• Clean Fresh Water
• Food
• Over crowding
• Resource depletion.

Pollution: The population size does not really matter, its only the raw amount of pollution which does. If we can reduce pollution per capita the population can theoretically grow with no further effect on the environment. And I'm not just talking air pollution or carbon emissions, I'm talking all kinds of pollution.

Clean fresh water: There is plenty of water on this planet, but most is salt (sea) water and undrinkable without distillation. And most of the fresh water on the planet is trapped in ice or underground rocks inaccessible at our current time. Future technologies will probably uncover theses sources of water but currently lots of countries have a large shortage of clean drinking water which must be addressed.

Food: Many places don't have the soil for decent farming land, and those that do, see urban sprawl competing for the best land, with the farmer almost always losing. And again water comes into this as much as anything. Growing crops or herding animals takes a lot of water and without a water source there is no possibility of growth. Also growing crops grazing animals take up huge amounts of land and are subject to weather conditions. Ocean fish are being caught much faster then they can reproduce so fish as a source of food is also going to decline without better more sustainable methods. With water comes irrigation and renewed lands suitable for farming.

Over crowding: There is plenty of physical space on the earth, the only problem is everyone wants to live in the same areas. Cities are over congested and are a great source of wasted time, resources and space, due logistical problems of so many people is so small a space. A lot of the time cities are built on the coast or river, which is also the best farming land. Time spent going anywhere in traffic is a huge waste of time and pollution and reduces ones standard of living. But the overcrowding of humans is not the only factor. Deforestation, mining, urban sprawl, farming lands, pollutions have continuously encroached and destroyed the natural environment and the ecosystems of native animals, upsetting the natural chain of events.

Resource depletion: The deepest mines today go 5 km into the Earths crust, which in terms of an apple is not even breaking the skin. There are plenty of resources in the earth to sustain a much bigger population, there's is just not the technology nor the cost/profit need to extract these resources. Future technologies to remove the human element to mining should enable us to mine to much deeper depths for lower costs.

Have as many as you want. It wont change the fact you're all scared of dying so you must leave a memorandum of yourself to make the pain easier.

(Especially with a knife in your neck)

He means living vicariously through children...  which actually is a good point...

CommieChipmunk wrote:

xBlackPantherx wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

1) said the same thing about the moon years and years ago.

2) Still using gasoline.  If this "global warming" farce ends up being true, there goes massive amounts of freshwater.  Forests take a long time to regrow.

3) I've got $300,000 dollars worth of scholarship offers so far from 7 different colleges, I'm still working my ass off looking for more little scholarships and I still will end up with student loans.. and I'm not bragging or anything, but I'm not really an "average" kid.  I've worked for 4 years at an eye clinic, I volunteer at a hospital every sunday, I have over a 4.0 GPA got a 1970 on the SAT.. my point being, if I'm still going to end up with student loans, your average kid will probably end up with some student loans too..  But beyond college, there aren't a ton of people who can support 2 kids and retire successfully.  Throw five kids into the equation and you'll be working until your 90.

1) Just because they figured out how to doesn't mean they will. The moon is small, and has no beneficial value.

2) Using gasoline is your own fault. Its very easy to convert any diesel car to use vegetable oil or ethenal(? on spelling). Hell, they already have perfectly working hydrogen (water) fueled cars and "pumps" in Germany.

3) Also depends what college you are trying to go, where it is, how many years you'll be there/what degrees you are working to get.

4) I'm sorry that you're very high standards for college/work are keeping you back/distorting your view but you don't have to be a neuro-surgeon from Yale to be successful.

1) Don't count on it in the near future.

2) Actually I do run on E85 (ethanol).  $2.69 a gallon.

3) College isn't the only factor... but what if they want to go to a nice college?  Tough luck I guess.  It's no easy task getting into a med-school with a degree from a state school these days to be honest.  And yes, I know there are other careers outside of medicine...

4) True.  But most private colleges cost upwards of $30,000 a year (plus room and board)

1) Define near future. Plus I said the next 10-20 years if you look back.

2) What percentage of it is Ethanol, most "ethanol" fuels rarely have more than 3-5%

3) There is not really "good and bad" colleges, persay. The best college is one that has what the individual needs/desires. So, therefor, the term "good college" is very very loose.

4) Exactly, you said you have $300,000 worth of scholarships when most really good private colleges even only cost $30,000 (according to you).

I have also been researching colleges a lot recently the last few weeks.