A while I sent an article on population levels in the U.S. Did not get a =
great number of responses. The ones I did get are summarized below. =
Thanks.
Mike Nolan
I thought this was an interesting article.. A bit long, but worth =
reading.
Imagine Earth without people
12 October 2006
Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition.=20
Bob Holmes=20
Humans are undoubtedly the most dominant species the Earth has ever =
known.
In just a few thousand years we have swallowed up more than a third of =
the
planet's land for our cities, farmland and pastures. By some estimates, =
we
now commandeer 40 per cent of all its productivity. And we're leaving =
quite
a mess behind: ploughed-up prairies, razed forests, drained aquifers,
nuclear waste, chemical pollution, invasive species, mass extinctions =
and
now the looming spectre of climate change. If they could, the other =
species
we share Earth with would surely vote us off the planet.
"15,589 Number of species threatened with extinction"Now just suppose =
they
got their wish. Imagine that all the people on Earth - all 6.5 billion =
of us
and counting - could be spirited away tomorrow, transported to a
re-education camp in a far-off galaxy. (Let's not invoke the mother of =
all
plagues to wipe us out, if only to avoid complications from all the
corpses). Left once more to its own devices, Nature would begin to =
reclaim
the planet, as fields and pastures reverted to prairies and forest, the =
air
and water cleansed themselves of pollutants, and roads and cities =
crumbled
back to dust.
Full story at http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/mg19225731.100
Griswold of the Cato Institute writes:
"A rising population is entirely consistently[sic] with a higher quality =
of
life. "
He then cites improved longevity and lower infant mortality without
acknowledging that many European countries with more stable populations =
have
better longevity and even lower infant mortality rates. He says that =
the
air we breath and the water we drink are far cleaner than when we were a
less populous country -- but this is due to government regulation, =
something
the Cato Institute opposes.
He writes:
"We could give every American household an acre of land and still fit =
all
300 million of us in the states of Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri-with the
rest of the country set aside as one giant national park." Great idea!
Let's do it.
But he doesn't acknowledge the biggest problem: Consumption. We may be =
a
growing population, but we are a population of burgeoning consumption. =
This
rate of consumption is not sustainable and could be disastrous (e.g., =
the
global warming side effect).
You can probably tell that the Cato Institute is very libertarian in its =
philosophy and outlook. The usual "free market solves all problems" kind =
of stuff.=20
Seems to me that they conveniently forget that "free markets" are not =
free unless they are carefully regulated. Otherwise, as happened =
repeatedly in the 18th and 19th Centuries, you get corruption and =
insider deals that defeat the ideal of free exchange.
Part of the libertarian/conservative view, at least since Reagan's terms =
as President, is that population growth is good, and more growth is =
better. I'm not sure how they view the likes of the "tragedy of the =
commons" overuse of resources, or the fact that our country tends to use =
more of its population-proportional share of the resources of the world. =
In spite of the optimism of the likes of the Cato Institute, at some =
point we're going to reach limits to one or more of our biological =
resources and the ugly mathematical realities of Malthus are going to =
intrude on the happy free market.=20
I'm also concerned by the trend of our current leadership to adopt =
policies that, as Lou Dobbs of CNN puts it, are essentially an attack on =
the middle class of this country. The assertion that illegal immigrants =
"take jobs that Americans don't want" and are therefore essential to =
this country's economy doesn't seem to recognize the "free market" of =
labor supply/demand. Americans would want some of those supposed =
unwanted jobs should the employers pay enough for them. Opening the =
country to unlimited immigration tends to depress wages, and I've seen =
serious arguments that the minimum wage should be abolished, not raised. =
Is it the intention of our conservative/libertarian leaders to turn this =
country into another Third World kind of economy, with most of the =
population near poverty, while a few elite are excessively wealthy? =
Seems that way some times.
I know that the world population exceeds the carrying capacity of the =
planet for humans..so yeah, its concerning that people do not recognize =
that our extravagent style of living (which, in terms of percieved =
happiness, has not increased since the 1950's- as per a study I think I =
found at the Center for a New American Dream-) is bound to crash =
downwards as the strain on ecoysytems gets translat
