Geary, I like and agree with your views on limiting population growth in the USA. Let the population explosion occur on the rest of the planet but not here. Adults should be encouraged and given an incentive to have smaller families. Two children should be enough for most citizens. I like your tax suggestions relating to children. Our system is terribly broken (in many areas) when the tax paying and voting citizens allow our governments to reward unwed mothers for having children. This is not compassion but stupid intervention into personal lives which promotes decay in our society and unreasonable taxation to support it. Unfortunately, this and other intelligent actions and choices will not occur, at least not in my lifetime. The US has far too many entitlements that need reform. That includes social security and medicare for future generations. Geezers like me, and you if you are lucky, have paid all of our adult lives and have earned the benefits. But what about those who have yet to pay into the system? They could be taxed less on their future earned wages with a lesser entitlement benefit and encouraged to have individual retirement plans in the private sector. Due to misguided government policies we cannot (will not) stop the flow of illegal immigrants which are violating our federal immigration laws. The feds and states should vigorously enforce our laws and make them more stringent. Even I could come up with a fair way to deal with those currently in our country illegally. The law (liberally interpreted) making children of illegal aliens born here citizens should be changed immediately. I believe the USA is the only nation with this policy. Some argue that this policy is not really a hard and fast written law. I think my soap box just collapsed so I will get back to work on something more productive to earn some money to help the "poor folks".
Fritz ________________________________ From: Geary Schindel [mailto:gschin...@edwardsaquifer.org] Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 9:07 AM To: 'Rod Goke'; texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: RE: [Texascavers] where a man can breathe free, and relevance to caves Rod, Thanks for the wonderful analysis on population growth, you are right on the money. For folks that are interested in this area, I would refer you to a video lecture by Dr. Albert Bartlett, retired professor from the University of Colorado in Boulder titled Arithmetic, Population, and Energy. You can purchase it for about $20 from the Univ of Col. Bookstore or can down load it in segments from YouTube. Scary stuff, we showed it as a Bexar Grotto program one night. I have a copy if anyone wants to borrow it. Garrett Hardin also has some very well written papers on this subject. You can view them all on line at the Garrett Hardin Society. Couple of interesting facts from the video. Bartlett talks about the rule of 70 for doubling of exponential growth (any growth over zero). That is, take the yearly growth rate of a city, say San Antonio at approximately 2.8 percent and divide that in to 70 and you get the doubling rate. That is, in 25 years, the San Antonio area will double its population to around 4 million people. That means we'll need twice the roads, schools, water supply, land area, food, police force, court, jails, parking spaces, energy, etc. This is not sustainable. The U.S. doubling rate is approximately 60 years if I remember correctly, which means we'll have 600 million people by 2070. China is the only major country that has addressed its population problem by limiting growth to a one child policy (they are thinking about dropping this policy - big mistake). Currently, immigration is the major driving force in population growth in the U.S. as I believe we are the only first world country with an increasing population. Births for native born citizens is at zero population growth. Maybe the U.S. should start to limit Its population growth through economic means. If you believe that some people on welfare have more kids for an increased welfare check, it is reasonable to believe that the middle class has more kids for an increased tax break. If we remove the tax breaks for kids, and actually have a tax increase for having kids with a graduated rate for having more than 2, it will help to decrease the population growth. The tax rate should also be an exponential number, have more than 3 and you probably can't afford it. So, we should also limit immigration if we want to limit population growth. There are consequences to limiting immigration such as it limits the best and brightest that want to come to this country, and also removes a cheaper labor source, but it also decreases all of the problems associated with growth as noted above. This year, the world will pass the 7 billion mark after passing the 6 billion mark in 1999. Scary stuff, I've been concerned about population growth for more than 20 years and it is why I'm a Neo Social Darwinist - I believe that we have way too many people on the planet and anything we can do to eliminate some of the dummies, I'm all for. That is why I'm opposed to mandatory seat belt laws, child car seats, texting bans, and helmet laws. If you aren't smart enough to do these things out of common sense, you probably shouldn't be reproducing. Population and population growth has a major negative impact on our quality of life and natural resources, including cave and karst regions. G From: Rod Goke [mailto:rod.g...@earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 5:51 AM To: bmorgan...@aol.com; texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: Re: [Texascavers] where a man can breathe free, and relevance to caves Regarding Gainesville Florida, Sleaze wrote, "We don't want no stinking roads either." Austin tried that for about 2 or 3 decades, during which the attitude of local "environmentalists" towards roadway construction/expansion was: Don't build it, and hope they won't come. They opposed road building on the theory that more roads would encourage more people to move here. The problem was that people came here anyway, resulting in severe traffic congestion problems, as bad or worst than those often found in much larger cities. Unfortunately, this kind of failure to provide workable long range solutions often results when people practice superficial environmentalism, addressing only the local effects and symptoms of population growth while shying away from any discussion of the underlying causes of these problems. It's not hard to see why people find this approach tempting. It's relatively easy for activists groups to drum up support and claim political victories by promoting petty "feel good" measures with no powerful opposition and little, if any, beneficial effect. It takes far more courage and perseverance to address the fundamental underlying population issues, since almost any measure that would really help to alleviate overpopulation is likely to encounter strong opposition from one or more influential groups. Different interest groups tend to object to different measures on various grounds, involving political, religious, ideological, and/or business interests, but almost any suggested solution is liable to get you attacked and demonized by someone. Consequently, most groups with environmental interest prefer to focus on the symptoms and ignore the cause, as if population growth were an inevitable force of nature, beyond the control of human beings. Never mind the obvious fact that population growth is entirely due to human action. How many times have we heard people quote population growth projections as inevitable facts about our future and then proceed to talk about how they think we should deal with the consequences of that growth? Why does no one seriously discuss the possibility of limiting population growth to prevent undesirable consequences? If any of you are wondering what this has to do with caves or are tempted to think of it as "off topic" then think again about the various cave related environmental and access issues that clearly are "on topic" for Texascavers. A large portion of these issues, probably most of them, are directly related to human population. For example, do you care about the effects of development near caves, including both environmental impacts and the effects of development on cave access? What do you think drives the demand for that development? Do you care about the effects on caves of quarrying, mining, or oil and gas production? What do you think drives the demand for these resources? Do you care about the quality and quantity of ground water, including that found in caves? What do you think influences the amount of pollution entering the aquifer and the amount of water that is pumped from it? Do you care about the effects of human visitation on caves and about the access restrictions that sometimes are imposed to limit those effects? What do you think affects the number of people seeking access? All of these, and undoubtedly more, cave related issues are directly affected by human population density. If these cave related effects of population growth are considered "on topic", how can we possibly dismiss the underlying cause as "off topic", unless, of course, it's just a cowardly attempt to avoid controversy about a relevant, but potentially contentious, issue? Rod P.S. By the way, Sleaze, I was one of those graduate students who moved from Gainesville to Austin in 1973 for my first full time job in my profession. I would not say that "Gainesville is the Austin of Florida", because, although both are university towns, Austin is much more. Even at that time, Austin was (and still is) the state capitol, a center for high tech industry, and a regional music center, attracting musicians from many surrounding states in addition to Texas. The population of Austin at that time was approximately a quarter million (much smaller than it is now), but the University of Texas was so large (about 50,000 students) that it still gave Austin a university town atmosphere. At that time, I was impressed with the exceptional variety of influences and activities available in Austin for a city that small. I moved away from Austin in early '74 and returned in '84, finding that it had grown surprisingly larger but still was not a bad place to live. Now Austin still has advantages over many other cities its size, but in my opinion, it has grown far beyond its optimal size, and quality of life in the entire central Texas region continues to deteriorate from excessive population growth. I'm sure there are business interests who, like the purveyors of pyramid schemes, equate exponential growth with prosperity. For ordinary citizens, however, it means worse congestion, greater pollution, higher taxes, less freedom, and greater competition for limited natural resources. -----Original Message----- From: bmorgan...@aol.com Sent: Aug 5, 2011 3:49 PM To: texascavers@texascavers.com Subject: [Texascavers] where a man can breathe free In a message dated 8/5/2011 4:12:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, texascavers-digest-h...@texascavers.com<mailto:texascavers-digest-h...@texascavers.com> writes: If all the people fretting over the numerous environmental and social problems resulting from overpopulation were to focus instead on the primary underlying cause, we might reverse this trend and see real progress towards long range solutions and improving quality of life for future generations Amen! Here in Hogtown the living is still easy, the moss hangs from the live oaks and all is well until the Students return. Gainesville is the Austin of Florida, but the big difference is that there are damned near two million Texacans in Austin but only about 250,000 gators in the Hogtown metro area. The reason for that is that we don't want no stinking jobs or new businesses unless they are directly related to University of Florida biotech spinoffs. As soon as they become successful they move to Austin taking the redundant grad students with them. We make it a point to screw every developer who sticks his head out of a hole. We often lose, but we still cost the developers millions every time they try. We don't want no stinking roads either. The bad news is the dawning of the age of biomass. It seems we have way too many trees, so the plan is to burn them in place of coal. After they cut down all the trees maybe I'll move to Detroit. I hear there are wide open spaces out there where a man can breathe free. Sleaze --------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit our website: http://texascavers.com To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com<mailto:texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com> For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com<mailto:texascavers-h...@texascavers.com>
