Page 1 of 4
#1
It seems to me, that the root of most of the world's problems come from conflicts of interest. Christians want people to be Christians. Muslims want people to be Muslims. Hate ensues. Big oil companies want to drill in foreign countries. The people living in these countries don't want their land to get raped. Fighting ensues.

Now, I believe there are too many people on this planet. We're nearing the 7 billion mark, and it's undeniable how much damage we are doing. Besides the obvious polution and global warming caused by littering and carelessness by this mass of humans, there are just too many of us to live comfortably. Too many beliefs, too many stereotypes.

In my opinion, the world would be a MUCH better place if we could drastically reduce the population. Maybe to 50-60 million (50-60 million people left on earth). We wouldn't use up so many resources, we wouldn't need to cut down rainforests for housing complexes, and no one would live in poverty as there would be more than enough of everything to go around.

I don't know if anyone cares, or will even read this "wall of text", but I had to get this out of my system, and I need to see if I'm just crazy, or if anyone agrees with me.

Discuss?
Last edited by 1The_Trooper1 at Jan 27, 2008,
#2
Ok well, um, you can be the first person "reduced"?
WATCH THIS

Quote by GabeT347
does anybody have a sitar?
Quote by highway62
you have to buy them from george harrison. He owns all of them
#5
yes. lets murder all the new babies. right?
<//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\>
<//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\>
<//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\>
#7
No, I'm not saying we need to kill or "reduce" people, as the 2nd post so eloquently put it. However, if people stopped having so many babies, or just stopped having kids altogether for the next few decades, the population could easily be reduced non-violently.
#8
50-60 million won't do that much. Quality of life for all of us will just get worse every year until we experience a collapse.
Breedlove Studio D25/SM Acoustic
Epiphone Les Paul Custom w/ EMGs
B-52 AT-212 Tube Amp
MXR 10 Band EQ
Digitech Bad Monkey
Boss RC-2 Loop Station
#9
how about more space research, we could move to other planets or space colonies. obviously there would still be people will have conflicting beliefs, but hopefully with more free space.

teaching the world to love one another is probably too difficult to be a good answer.

:edit:
Quote by Dirge Humani


thats... frightening. i guess the idea in practice works... kinda... but its still very unnerving that people would follow that.
Quote by lespaul#1
Indie stands for Industrial I think, like Marilyn Manson.

Ibanez RG2EX2 (Dimarzio Breed in bridge)
Epiphone Les Paul 100
Laney LV300T
Line 6 Toneport GX

The Falling Object Model
Last edited by FLNagle at Jan 27, 2008,
#10
Quote by Op3th
50-60 million won't do that much. Quality of life for all of us will just get worse every year until we experience a collapse.


What I meant was only having 50-60 million humans on earth. Not reducing the population by 50-60 million.
#12
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
What I meant was only having 50-60 million humans on earth. Not reducing the population by 50-60 million.


ah, well the Earth can comfortably support a lot more than that. Like at least a few billion is fine as long as people are smart about how to live.

edit: Also this reminds of near the beginning of Idiocracy. There's a redneck family and an intelligent family. While the rednecks are like "Damn I'm pregnant again!" the smart family is like "We're not ready for children yet," and that is how there came to be so many stupid people. A b it off topic but it reminded me of that.
Breedlove Studio D25/SM Acoustic
Epiphone Les Paul Custom w/ EMGs
B-52 AT-212 Tube Amp
MXR 10 Band EQ
Digitech Bad Monkey
Boss RC-2 Loop Station
#13
wow. seriously. thats not going to happen.

the problems not that there are too many people, its human nature thats the problem.

greed, hypocrisy, all that lovely stuff.

the only thing reducing the population will do is make all this bad stuff much farther apart, so rather than it happening everywhere, itll just happen in alot of places without affecting the rest of the world.

and even if the population was lowered, how do you propose we keep it there. nature does it by natural predators and disease.

all weve got left is war and conflict.
#14
Its a proven fact that the world's population is already much too high. This is mostly a cause of third world countries, their cultures and or just having kids because families need support.

Its a really scary thought but the world's population is at about 6 billion, and by 2050 its expected to double. What will we do then? There will be a shortage of everything, possibly global war as a result.
and i sit and wonder, falling under .
#15


In my opinion, the world would be a MUCH better place if we could drastically reduce the population. Say 50-60 million.
QUOTE]
ok.... so do you want to do another holocust to reduce the population? or are we going to kill the homless around north america, or the kids in kenya and ethiopa? you have a valid argument, but killing people isn't the awnser, theres really no awnser. we can cut down global warming, but then the stalk markets and the world economy would go into ression. it would take to much money to do. so you fighting a loosing battle.
my 2 cents
#16
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
What I meant was only having 50-60 million humans on earth. Not reducing the population by 50-60 million.


HA.
i dont think thatll happen unless some sort of immense downfall occurs.
#17
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
No, I'm not saying we need to kill or "reduce" people, as the 2nd post so eloquently put it. However, if people stopped having so many babies, or just stopped having kids altogether for the next few decades, the population could easily be reduced non-violently.
How do you plan on stopping people from making babies? FORCE men to wear condoms?

EDIT: The U.S. and other developed contries are fine, almost every year our population is within 1% or 2% of the year before, some years it goes down, some up. It's developing countries that are keeping the population growing, they have children just to help with labor.
Last edited by LunchBx at Jan 27, 2008,
#18
So because there are drastically different people on Earth they should be killed and everbody should be the same?

It would be much better if no babies could be born at all. A good amount of money the government spends go's towards the next generation. What if the government just blew all that money of fun things for people alive now.
I Watched Download 07 on the internet Because I'm A poor Bastard and I'm Damn Proud!


Dave Mustaine Kill List:
Draken
WinterMadness79
Dirge Humani
MrGuitar123
RHCP94
Coins
Magnus_Maximus
Last edited by Flemfloyd at Jan 27, 2008,
#19
Here's a modest proposal: if we ate newborn babies, we'd reduce the population and solve hunger. I should write a book.
Renegade of this Time and Age.

Quote by reaume140
You Sir, have made my night, thank you.
#21
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
It seems to me, that the root of most of the world's problems come from conflicts of interest. Christians want people to be Christians. Muslims want people to be Muslims. Hate ensues. Big oil companies want to drill in foreign countries. The people living in these countries don't want their land to get raped. Fighting ensues.

Now, I believe there are too many people on this planet. We're nearing the 7 billion mark, and it's undeniable how much damage we are doing. Besides the obvious polution and global warming caused by littering and carelessness by this mass of humans, there are just too many of us to live comfortably. Too many beliefs, too many stereotypes.

In my opinion, the world would be a MUCH better place if we could drastically reduce the population. Say 50-60 million. We wouldn't use up so many resources, we wouldn't need to cut down rainforests for housing complexes, and no one would live in poverty as there would be more than enough of everything to go around.

I don't know if anyone cares, or will even read this "wall of text", but I had to get this out of my system, and I need to see if I'm just crazy, or if anyone agrees with me.

Discuss?



false. if everybody had a 6 foot by 2 foot box to themselves the entire population
could fit within the bounds of jacksonville, mississippi USA. not too many people. people just don't broaden out enough.

EDIT:
also, there is enough food. it's just that it's not getting to the right people because
of corrupt governments.
Quote by Jackintehbox
Pedophilia all the way man. Go for it.

Quote by deathbat831
hahaha i thought you wrote Philidelphia all the way, i was like yeah philidelphias cool i spose

Quote by SomeoneYouKnew
I'm always too embarrassed to buy condoms. Saran wrap is cheaper, anyway.
Last edited by clay pots at Jan 27, 2008,
#22
well europe's and china's population is going down at a rapid rate and the U.S. population is practically staying the same, so it shouldn't be that bad in the future. Plus, the people with the highest number of birth is in africa and many of those children die before they become 18. So....yeah....
"If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving is not for you"


Originally Posted by shreddin_frets
I've never played guiar before. Is it communist?
#23
My friend suggested a mandatory birth control shot until a certain age be employed....That would help stop so much of the teen pregnancies......Just spin a globe with a blind fold and the first country you hit with your finger you bomb for 3 days.......Seriously though, that's a bad idea...
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#24
I don't know that it's true that a decreased population would eliminate poverty. There was still poverty, possibly even more poverty, in the past when the population was lower. Compared to now, the population of Europe during the Middle Ages was WAY smaller, but the wealth was concentrated to a very small demographic.
The medium is the message!
#25
Holy **** you guys are dumb. When did I even mention killing people in my post? I didn't. I don't want people killing each other. I never ****ing said I wanted another holocaust, or to kill homeless people.
#26
Quote by clay pots
false. if everybody had a 6 foot by 2 foot box to themselves the entire population
could fit within the bounds of jacksonville, mississippi USA.

cmon dude, thats not even enough room for my MG half stack!

/bad joke
Quote by lespaul#1
Indie stands for Industrial I think, like Marilyn Manson.

Ibanez RG2EX2 (Dimarzio Breed in bridge)
Epiphone Les Paul 100
Laney LV300T
Line 6 Toneport GX

The Falling Object Model
#28
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
No, I'm not saying we need to kill or "reduce" people, as the 2nd post so eloquently put it. However, if people stopped having so many babies, or just stopped having kids altogether for the next few decades, the population could easily be reduced non-violently.
People don't want to make sacrifices like not having kids for other people that don't even matter after they're dead.
#29
The conflicting of interest thing is very Hobbesian of you but yeah people aren't just gonna let you kill them who decides who lives and who dies do you want that position? So yeah it would be nice if there was a way to reduce population without just killing people but qwuite frankly there isn't but I honestly think it won't be that bad in the future you see we will eventually start colonising other planets so yeah.
Due what you want as long as you vote Due!
#30
So you're suggesting mass genocide? That's a fantastic idea...
Quote by mountain2012
I want a Fender because they are THE American rock sound. I'm proud to be an American.



Gear:
1981 Gibson Les Paul Firebrand

Mesa/Boogie DC-3
Dunlop Crybaby
Boss SD-1
Boss NS-2
Boss DD-7
EHX LPB-1
#31
Quote by Incuboy49
Here's a modest proposal: if we ate newborn babies, we'd reduce the population and solve hunger. I should write a book.


very clever... who knows, maybe your book will be used to help out ireland.
#32
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
Holy **** you guys are dumb. When did I even mention killing people in my post? I didn't. I don't want people killing each other. I never ****ing said I wanted another holocaust, or to kill homeless people.


Tell me your completely logical plan for reducing the population without murder.
I Watched Download 07 on the internet Because I'm A poor Bastard and I'm Damn Proud!


Dave Mustaine Kill List:
Draken
WinterMadness79
Dirge Humani
MrGuitar123
RHCP94
Coins
Magnus_Maximus
#33
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
Holy **** you guys are dumb. When did I even mention killing people in my post? I didn't. I don't want people killing each other. I never ****ing said I wanted another holocaust, or to kill homeless people.

Then how do you propose the way to make the global population decrease? Ban sex?
#34
Way to state the obvious Mr Threadstarter.

You can't just have everyone give up having babies 'for a few decades' no economy on this planet could support an ever aging population for 20-30 yrs.

Think about it, if there are no more babies for 20 years in 20 years time the youngest people will be 20, and everyone who is currently over the age of 45 would be retired/dead.

That means that right now all the people alive between 0-45 would have to financially support all those who are currently over 45.

Once those people hit 20 and start having babies again its another 20 years before those kids are capable of working. so not only do our current 0-45 yr olds. (by then the 20-65 yr olds) have all the +65s to support, they have the 0-0's to support too.

that's ignoring the human rights aspect. How are you going to stop me ****ing my girlfriend without a condom?
#35
Quote by Flemfloyd
Tell me your completely logical plan for reducing the population without murder.


Stop having babies. Or stop having so many babies. One baby policy for the whole world.


Also I'M NOT SUGGESTING GENOCIDE OR MASS MURDER, ALRIGHT? So stop telling me that I did.
#36
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
No, I'm not saying we need to kill or "reduce" people, as the 2nd post so eloquently put it. However, if people stopped having so many babies, or just stopped having kids altogether for the next few decades, the population could easily be reduced non-violently.


I completely agree. You should set an example by not ever having children.
Dear God, do you actually answer prayers?

Yes, but only in a way indistinguishable from random luck or the result of your own efforts.
#37
Banning sex isn't gonna do it anyways... No procreation isn't going to make 6.9 billion people magically disappear.
Quote by mountain2012
I want a Fender because they are THE American rock sound. I'm proud to be an American.



Gear:
1981 Gibson Les Paul Firebrand

Mesa/Boogie DC-3
Dunlop Crybaby
Boss SD-1
Boss NS-2
Boss DD-7
EHX LPB-1
#38
We should heavily research space travel and colonizing/terraforming other planets.

Population of Earth is reduced from people moving to settle, Humanity begins to conquer the galaxy, technology is increased, its pretty much win-win.
Is it a bad thing if one of your testicles is larger then the other two?
#39
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
Stop having babies. Or stop having so many babies. One baby policy for the whole world.


Also I'M NOT SUGGESTING GENOCIDE OR MASS MURDER, ALRIGHT? So stop telling me that I did.

That's going to take a LONG time for that to unfold. By that time, you'd be dead, and wouldn't care what the fuck happens to the world.
#40
Quote by 1The_Trooper1
Stop having babies. Or stop having so many babies. One baby policy for the whole world.
Well, that theory is cute and all, but it's about as far away from the adjective of "realistic" as you can get. That's basically banning people from having sex after their first child, and good luck enforcing that. Or forcing women to get abortions against their will, which many people will b*tch about.
Page 1 of 4