Basicly Sex is to blame which leads to Overpopulation,But how do we ethically control overpopulation?
It is suspected that controlling factors have been in play already for quite a while .
And ethically is not possible .People are to vain or to proud ,Many many cultures rate men by the number of children they got ,In India,Africa,Mexico and USA amongst others
Our natural resources and especially food production are reaching critical levels as well as fresh water supplies .
People use and need land,so more and more is being changed to accomodate human growth and devellopment.
Over the last half century,
Population growth & rising incomes have tripled world grain demand from 640 million tons to 1,855 million
In the near future the global farming community will not be able to feed every body ,food prices will continue to rise. .
Each year pressures on water supplies are increasing with 70 million more people drinking cooking and washing ,not to mention Irrigation for agriculture which consumes 70% of all water supplies.
SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS
At a Bilderberg(UN)meeting in Kopenhagen in 1998 it was suggested to bring the world population down by 60%,one cannot help but wonder at how this would be archieved
And the Americans manauvring for a nuclear war is suspicious
Population control in the past and present and suspected
War (past .present and future)
All along native peoples have been suplied with arms and encouraged to wipe each other out ,(such as all over Africa )
Natures way disease(today,past and future)
Manufactured disease(suspected today)
Cures that kill(suspected today)
Poisoned consumer goods (suspected today)
Making children infertile or gay,by raising the PH level in drinking water or even drinks (suspected today)
Birth control,(in the past the Olmecs women ate yams to make them infertile
Today we have several methods but most reach only the educated ,i handed out condoms to an native Mazatecca comunity in Oaxaca ,and the church retrieved them all )
Education on birth control(not enough,again the poor regions are excluded )
Laws that limit childbirth per family(China)
remember Soylent green , ??????
Human sacrifice(Mayas ,Aztecs,druids),may be the best option ,it would remove the strain on Natural resources and make more available for survivers ,stop expanding populations from deforresting because of settlement and expanding farming
Take the pressure of drink water supplies ,There would be less need for Wars ,We could use the blood and remains to compost fields that were destroyed by irresponsible agriculture
At the end of the day if we did it in a dignified manner we could have lots of religious parties ,better then bombing societies across the world making everybody angry ,and the Gods would be over the Moon Source
We would only sacrifice Enemies of the planet or society if we run out of them.
And the general public would be much more repectfull towards Nature
2007-06-08 07:22:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Cars, cheap gasoline and a desire to buy a house and to avoid the problems of the inner city.
In Los Angeles, Where Urban sprawl was invented, Gasoline prices has sky rocketed, and now the outer surburbs has a high foreclosure rate and there is growing development in the city. Urban sprawl is reversing because of high gas prices.
I also think the government incourage developers, because construction creates jobs, but I have no proof in that, just speculation.
2007-06-08 07:26:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
What I have seen in the Raleigh-Durham (Triangle) Area of North Carolina is this: People want new stuff!
Instead of the population (be it local or imported) wants to live in new houses, wants new malls, and luxury. They do not want to live or refurb older areas, instead they would rather abandon those areas, which become lower income and run down. When the new malls open, people want to be close to them, the new malls want cheap land, so they buy farm land a mile or so from major population. The population then moves to that area and fills in the rest.
Luckily these places are now being seen as bargains with coniences being added to downtown and urban areas so people will move in. I live in one such area and I am glad to say people are moving back into the older areas, fixing it up and doing well. Because more people want to be in the area than living permits, they are building up instead of out, with condos and apartments. They are putting shops and dining within walking distance, now if they can move more jobs in, it will cut down on the amount of people facing long commutes.
2007-06-08 09:34:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by chuckreis 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Urban sprawl = people having houses built further and further from the center of the city. This leads to people having to drive further and further to get to work or to go to the store.
Because of urban sprawl, the small, low range, slow, electric cars (google "Xebra electric car") don't have the range or speed needed to be practical for daily use.
2007-06-08 07:27:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
The interstate system was built, businesses relocated, families bought cars, developers built suburbs. That is a very simplistic representation of the begining of urban sprawl.
Now the reason alluded to by the poster above regarding "minorities", that is almost completely untrue. To assume that everyone who moves to or lives in the suburbs is bigoted is a little narrowminded, wouldn't you say?
Now, a case could be made for people fleeing cities due to the high crime rates and urban blight, but I must say for someone to assume that it is only minorities who live in cities and create the hostile, crime-ridden environment that drives people out is a bit prejudicial for a liberal.
2007-06-08 08:00:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by dohcraw 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
urban spraw, shopping malls, big box stores, suburban subdivisions that are built without sidewalks or without any of the typical conveniences like grocery stores or a post office. This forces people into their cars to go to the mall, go to the grocery store, etc.
The answer is to build communities that are vertical, not horizontal. A highrise with a nice park in the back--everyone's backyard and a grocery store, dry cleaner, post office, hardware store, etc. on the ground level of the high rise. We have to stop building those ugly McMansions that are in the middle of nowhere and are ugly and just cause more traffic and more water use for stupid crap like their big ugly lawns. There is nothing stupider than a perfect lawn.
2007-06-08 12:34:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Urban sprawl is cities being mass expanded without much planning. The lack of planning tends to lead to it being done in a wasteful manner.
2007-06-08 07:23:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tom :: Athier than Thou 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
People moving from urban settings to the suburbs, now the suburbs are becoming overpopulated, so developers move out to country settings buy land a build ugly, unaffordable McMansions.
2007-06-08 07:22:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Global warming ain't cool 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
people moving from in town to out of town - cities anexxing more area. growth to a particular area due to instrudry changes. a number of reasons can lead to urban sprawl.
2007-06-08 07:24:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Fossil fuels! The ozone layer has very little to do with AGW. The ozone layer protects the Earth from the damaging cosmic rays from the Sun. Decreases in the thickness of the layer was caused by CFC's, and that problem has been successfully addressed.
2016-04-01 10:18:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋