I just wondered what kind of people developed this ecological footprint quiz, because for me its seen biased and flawed. Naïve, at best. You said that first world kids will have larger footprints that third world kids. Because poor third world kids don't travel by planes, they walk by feet because his parents don't have a car, share it houses with many of people and doesn't eat meat or industrialized food because don't have money for buy it. But I've not seen in that quiz questions about if the shanty town you live was built over a former pristine rainforest bush, how many trees must be down to build your wooden house and what the oxygen dissolved rate in the water of that river which you and your family deject your feces. This certalinly will improve the footprint of the poor third world kids. You should make all the questions. That `footprint quiz` could made first world people feels guilt. But again your eco-attitudes will be useless and short-reached if population in the tropics still rises at the rates they are. Osmar
> > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Cara Lin Bridgman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 2:29 PM > Subject: Re: population control > > >> Idiocracy, then, gets back to the 1920's and 1930's ideas of eugenics >> and 'propagation of the fit' (lampooned by Dorothy Sayers in her book >> Gaudy Night): educated people must reproduce to make sure we still have >> smart people on the planet--as if all the poor people were stupid. >> >> So far, I've really only see one or two comments on the relative weights >> of ecological footprints between those in first world countries deciding >> not to have kids and those in third world countries having lots of kids. >> Most any bunch of third world kids will have a whole lot smaller >> ecological footprint than most any first world kid or non-child-bearing >> first-world adult. A year or so ago, here on Ecolog, this point was >> raised. First world ecological footprints are huge compared to third >> world ones--even with 'only one' long-haul flight a year (that one >> flight adds a whole planet to an ecological footprint: >> www.myfootprint.org). >> >> So, the third world may be making most of the babies, but it is the >> first (and second) world that is doing most of the consumption and is >> the driving force behind most ecological disasters from mountain top >> removal for coal to logging for living room furniture to wars for oil. >> >> The arguments about having kids to maintain social security are not any >> different from the arguments about having kids to take care of you in >> your old age. In the third world, kids ARE social security. The point >> I've always wondered about is this: what sort of social security will >> these kids have? >> >> CL >> >> >> Please note my new-old email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> Cara Lin Bridgman >> >> P.O. Box 013 Phone: 886-4-2632-5484 >> Longjing Sinjhuang >> Taichung County 434 >> Taiwan http://megaview.com.tw/~caralin/ >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. >> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 30/11/2007 / Versão: >> 5.1.00/5175 >> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/ >> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.12/1162 - Release Date: >> 30/11/2007 21:26 >> >> >
