🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan2.194139.16483@sactoh0.sac.ca.us>,
 kberry@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Kim A. Berry) writes:
>In article <01JAN93.01077145.0061@VM1.MCGILL.CA>,
> CXIR000 <CXIR@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA> writes:
>>- Population control does not solve anything in itself. Our resource
>>gobblers in the "first world" use up over one hundred times as much of t
>>he earth's resources and energy as those in the third world. And history
>>teaches that we in the first world did not limit our population voluntar
>>ily until we had acheived a raised standard of living which included med
>>ical care that raised average life expectancies to a high level and insu
>>red the survival of most children born into adulthood. No ethnic group a
>>anywhere or at any time in history has ever lowered its "fertility rate"
>>before infant mortality rates are reduced, additionally, educational lev
>>els have to be raised. So history teaches that it is precisely the other
>>way around: FIRST you educate and raise living standards, reduce poverty
>>THEN population can be controlled. To expect the third world to do it an
>>y other way is unrealistic and, in fact, it could not be done without a
>>fascist dictatorship world wide, which I don't think anyone would advoca
>>te.
>>Yours, Ian Ritchie,
>>CXIR@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA
>
>The problem with your proposal that we solve the population problem
>by providing education, reducing poverty, and raising living
>standards is that is nearly impossible on a global scale.

	I'm not at home, but a recent issue of the Whole Earth Review con-
tained a fascinating article called "What the World Wants - and How to
Pay for It".  The article basically summarized several studies of world
needs, and concluded that global health care, reforestation programs,
free birth control, etc., could be bought for one third what the world
currently spends on the military.  That doesn't sound "nearly impossible"
to me.  The United States has begun to discuss reductions in military
expenditures on this order of magnitude.  Of course, the U.S. has internal
problems, too.  But I believe that American internal problems will
eventually be addressed.

>The U.S. cannot even curb these problems within its own borders,
>and the global economy depends upon the exploitation of poorer
>countries. Automated factories flood the world with consumer
>goods while providing relatively little employment opportunities.
>Economists generally agree that the U.S. could not survive if it
>severed all trade in and out. So why should we believe a global
>economy comprised entirely of first-world countries could exist? 
>
>You correctly stated that individuals in the first world consume
>100 times the earth's resources and energy as third world
>individuals. And I hope you agree that this level of consumption
>is a crisis. Yet your proposed solution would perhaps triple the
>number of first world individuals in the world.

	This is why we not only need to stop population growth, we 
need to reverse it.  Yes, I'm aware that there will be significant
social problems associated with an aging population supported by 
a dwindling labor base.  But hey, it beats mass unemployment and
starvation in my book any day.

>     (Mr.) Kim Berry              kberry@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US

-- 
== John J. Ladasky II ("ii") ========================= ladasky@netcom.COM ==
"Great composers do not borrow -	     "Talking about music is like
 they steal."  - John Ladasky	      ~ -     dancing about architecture."
(quote stolen from Stravinsky, who    o o     - Elvis Costello?  Laurie
 stole it from a statement made by     >        Anderson?  Frank Zappa?
 Pablo Picasso about painting, who    \_/    -------------------------------
 stole it from...)			     "Property is theft." - Groucho
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A man w/o charity in his heart - what has he to do with music?" - Confucius
============================================================================