|
Replies: 62
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Ethical question here...
Apr 28, 2015, 3:56 PM
|
|
During my days off, I've spent a great deal of time watching documentaries on Netflix. It never fails that by the end of the film, I feel guilty of some unforeseen crime I've committed. For example...I watched one I thought was about the history of sushi. It turned into a plea to save the tuna fish and eat less sushi containing tuna. It said some 90% of the wild tuna population had been wiped out from over fishing and its high demand in the growing sushi craze.
Documentary after documentary, I find myself committing these crimes (usually against nature). I start to think back to the movie The Matrix and agent Smith's dialogue about humans being a virus as they move to an area, multiply, consume every natural resource and then move to another area to start all over.
My question is, where do we achieve a balance as our population continues to rise...
At what point will we no longer be able to support that amount of life and the idea of abundance goes away? What measures would have to be taken to reduce the impact such a population would have on this planet? Is mandating that each family can only have one child ethical? What available options are on the table?
This interests me because of some things we were discussing in ethics the other day. What do you guys think?
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [21564]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13913
Joined: 9/7/02
|
Re: Ethical question here...
Apr 28, 2015, 4:00 PM
|
|
The Kock brothers are working on this right under your nose. My great great grandchildren will be their grandchildren's slaves. There's are reason no one really talks about and comes up with a solution to help the poor that die in third world countries.
We are doomed right now because of a lack of balance of resources and the continued increase in the economic gap.
Society is on a pace to crumble. Greed will be the cause of our next extinction.
But just pull yourself up from your own bootstrap, educate yourself, work hard...and you'll be fine.....rolling my eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
The term "Koch Brothers" is a trigger warning
Apr 28, 2015, 4:02 PM
|
|
for conspiracy theory psychosis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21564]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13913
Joined: 9/7/02
|
Re: The term "Koch Brothers" is a trigger warning
Apr 28, 2015, 4:04 PM
|
|
Follow the dollars. Then get back to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
wouldnt that lead to Soros? he was a Nazi cabin boy afterall
Apr 28, 2015, 4:07 PM
|
|
Im sure he still has the plans for a "master race"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21564]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13913
Joined: 9/7/02
|
Re: How do the dollars lead to a pair of brothers plotting to
Apr 28, 2015, 4:14 PM
|
|
I'm sure they spend a billion on politics for nothing.
They play a part.
Just get back to working for your hay, sheep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
IDK. I think you have to be pretty drunk on koolaid to think
Apr 28, 2015, 4:16 PM
|
|
the same guys who advocate louder for criminal justice reform than any group on the Left wants to make slaves out of people.
Then again. Pretty sure you're drunk on the koolaid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31887]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37176
Joined: 11/22/03
|
smart money is on him not knowing much about the Koch....
Apr 28, 2015, 9:32 PM
|
|
brothers and the issues they support...not to mention their charitable activities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
#preach***
Apr 28, 2015, 10:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Tell you hippie professor to can it with the ecological
Apr 28, 2015, 4:01 PM
|
|
warfare propaganda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Haha, that doesn't do much for a debate...
Apr 28, 2015, 4:09 PM
|
|
Btw, what the heck is that in your sig...that looks hilarious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Talk to a peasant farmer from the poorest region of Asia
Apr 28, 2015, 4:13 PM
|
|
and ask to debate the ills of the industrial revolution and the explosion of prosperity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
I think the key word your missing is 'balance'
Apr 28, 2015, 4:18 PM
|
|
I don't think anyone would suggest we voluntarily return to the stone age and ditch prosperity for poverty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
There is no such thing as man-made balance in nature.***
Apr 28, 2015, 4:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Man-made and the natural world are obviously not synonymous
Apr 28, 2015, 4:32 PM
|
|
But do you believe there was ever a balance with humans?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
No, not in the context I think you're exploring.***
Apr 28, 2015, 4:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
I guess the way I see it, is pre-industrial revolution
Apr 28, 2015, 5:03 PM
|
|
it appeared the population was relatively constant, steadily rising, but much less of an outlier compared to the most recent population census. In the span of recorded history (if these numbers were fairly accurate), it's obvious that the past few centuries have experienced a population explosion. Would it be safe to say that prior to the industrial revolution, humans were much more in balance with the earth's ecosystem?
Perhaps I'm looking at this purely through numbers (may be inadequate) but is it safe to say that if we returned to that population density (pre-IR), would we return to a more balanced global ecosystem? I say this because it appears to be a numbers issue more than anything. So hypothetically, if man was to use a "man-made" means to return the population back to those numbers, would it not be achieving a sort of balance?
Don't take that the wrong way...I'm not suggesting wiping anyone out. I'm just trying to figure if some believe it is indeed a numbers issue rather than being attributed to something else like technology or other man-made devices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
What evidence is there that we are "out of balance" at a
Apr 28, 2015, 5:09 PM
|
|
macro level?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
None as of yet...many believe the world can only sustain
Apr 28, 2015, 5:19 PM
|
|
a population of around 10 billion. We're at 7 billion right now and expected to reach 10 billion by 2100. Scientists believe that if you took all of the world's grain, redirected it away from livestock feed (much of it is used in a very inefficient way to put meat on the table) and used it to solely to feed humans, it'd be enough to feed maybe just short of 10 billion...doubt the world ever becomes unanimously vegetarian so probably well short of 10 billion actually.
As mentioned before, resources like tuna and many other fish appear to be experiencing rapidly declining populations hinting that we are no longer eating and sustaining...but eating and wiping out. Seems like it'd be better to address the problem before it gets out of hand rather than waiting and possibly reaching a point of no return.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Scientists love to posit optimum conditions for earth, but
Apr 28, 2015, 5:41 PM
|
|
they are almost always wrong. I do not believe in empowering the State to take any regulatory action based on the speculation of scientists without concrete evidence that we are quickly approaching an event horizon that can't be avoided through technological development and innovation.
For example, I hardly worry about food shortages when GMO crops are showing promise of growing in previously infertile soil.
I believe in the adaptability of humans, and the ingenuity of innovation, to solve any potential "balance" issues in the future more so than trusting government actors to "take action" today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
If you believe scientists are almost always wrong, shouldn't
Apr 28, 2015, 6:03 PM
|
|
you be a little more hesitant on the safety of GMO products after only being on the market for several years though? Does anybody know the long term effects of these engineered foods such as the possibility of cancer and other health problems? Admittedly, I don't know much about GMO foods, but it would seem odd to put faith in one area of scientific research and ignore others based solely on the premise that scientist are "almost always wrong." After all, all of this involves scientists, right?
There is a documentary on Netflix about GMO foods though...I'll have to check it out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
My advice? Stop letting Netflix think for you.***
Apr 28, 2015, 7:46 PM
|
|
Here's a good rule of thumb to start with: Wherever there is the most hysteria, there is the least amount of reason. Swindlers, hustlers, and paid shills push arguments by emotion and hysteria because they know reason won't work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
No offense dude but that's a sorry way to look at things
Apr 28, 2015, 9:08 PM
|
|
That's called burying your head in the sand. I posted this because I'm interested in what other people think, not to declare Netflix the authority on the issue. Like any sane person, I gather knowledge from the resources around me and respect the science and research that was conducted to draw their respective conclusions. I would hardly say Netflix thinks for me, but rather inspires me TO think. I'm am not an omnipotent being that summons knowledge at will...resources, like Netflix, are welcome. I've posted similar topics like this before, and it never fails that some people get offended, reason gets shunned, and somehow feelings get hurt (I think).
You don't seem very open minded to these issues. Even if you don't WANT to acknowledge these issues, most rational people can see the possibility of there being a potential problem. I was mainly curious in what people believe are feasible solutions since ethics may be intertwined in the topic. To sum up this topic as hysteria or the work of hustlers and swindlers is a bit absurd but if that's what you truly believe, more power to ya.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Call me agnostic on the issue.
Apr 28, 2015, 10:19 PM
|
|
And, I'd be much more open to discussion if it weren't for the fact that every time someone mentions global warming/population spikes/et al, it is immediately followed by calls for sweeping government action, and always justified as "ethical," "public good," or "only way to save the world." So, maybe it isn't your fault. Maybe you have a genuine philosophical interest in the issue without any ulterior motives. But, for every one of you, there are a 1,000 activists whose goal is less about the environment than it is an attack on capitalism and industrialization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
I really do have an interest and openly admit I don't know
Apr 28, 2015, 10:40 PM
|
|
the solution. Just curious what others think...purely for discussion purposes, no political agenda.
Ever since one of my ethics instructors posed a question to me, I've always been interested in seeing different sides to situations and playing devil's advocate.
He set up this dilemma...you were going on a cave exploring expedition with family and strangers when suddenly a rock slide occurred trapping nearly everyone in the cave, including yourself. The only person that isn't trapped in the cave is your mom/dad or family member closest to you. They are trapped among the rocks but are able to breath with their head poking outside the entrance...completely safe till help arrives. The cave is quickly flooding with water as you and this group of people struggle to move monstrous boulders out of the way. You soon realize you can't move them and remember you brought a stick of dynamite with you (you know, cuz you never know!). The people behind you ask, "What are you waiting for, blow up the entrance!" You now have a choice to destroy the entrance freeing yourself and these strangers, but killing your kin in the process...or letting you and a handful of others drown so that your family member may survive.
What would you do and why?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
This is the biggest thing usually ignored...
Apr 28, 2015, 6:13 PM
[ in reply to Talk to a peasant farmer from the poorest region of Asia ] |
|
by "environmentalists" of all stripes, whether liberal traditional environmentalists or more conservative localists. Global capitalism has lead to an explosion of prosperity, even while creating an ideology of unlimited progress and growth that is untethered from place and nature. They'd like us to cut back on many of the things that have allowed us to become exponentially richer than we were 30 or 40 years ago, and I'm just not sure that's politically plausible even if it was possible socially.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
amen.***
Apr 28, 2015, 10:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23693]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36824
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Well obviously, a lot of those 'other' people...
Apr 28, 2015, 4:02 PM
|
|
need to go away.
'Other people' meaning 'them' not 'us'.
For the #### retentive a caution, this is the lounge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49171]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 27599
Joined: 8/10/02
|
I think
Apr 28, 2015, 4:04 PM
|
|
you should spend your days off differently. Go outside.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
while there is still an Outside to go to!
Apr 28, 2015, 4:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
I do, right now I'm having to hit the books....can't wait
Apr 28, 2015, 4:11 PM
[ in reply to I think ] |
|
to spend more time out though, especially with this weather....but thanks for the advice lol 
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56062]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31634
Joined: 8/27/02
|
Some say the end is near.
Apr 28, 2015, 4:13 PM
|
|
Some say we'll see Armageddon soon. I certainly hope we will. I sure could use a vacation from this bull#### three ring circus sideshow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [135569]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 91618
Joined: 12/6/98
|
Actually....
Apr 28, 2015, 4:28 PM
|
|
This morning at dawn, you will take a new form – that of a fleshless, chattering skeleton when Zorp the Surveyor arrives and burns your flesh off with his volcano mouth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Is this on Netflix?
Apr 28, 2015, 4:33 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [135569]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 91618
Joined: 12/6/98
|
NBC.
Apr 28, 2015, 4:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [73]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 210
Joined: 7/1/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17454]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5892
Joined: 7/1/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97704]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64844
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Never fear. We are long overdue for a flu pandemic
Apr 28, 2015, 4:26 PM
|
|
Get a bad one and things will reset. Or Ebola will go airborne, or AIDS will mutate into something worse. Or something entirely new will wipe us off the planet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
That's another one I've yet to watch...'Superbugs'
Apr 28, 2015, 4:36 PM
|
|
or something like that...antibiotic resistant bacteria. You can see the dip in that population graph from the plague. I wouldn't doubt something like this happens...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30152
Joined: 9/9/06
|
I actually agree with this.
Apr 28, 2015, 5:12 PM
[ in reply to Never fear. We are long overdue for a flu pandemic ] |
|
As we move back to cities and the problem of overcrowding continues to grow, viral/bacterial diseases will probably do a number on us at some point.
Ironically, the lack of hygiene that helped lead to previous outbreaks won't necessarily be the case with the future outbreaks, rather, being too sterile will lead to superbugs that will be resistant to our drugs and that will kill us all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97704]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64844
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Point is mother nature will take care of us long before we
Apr 29, 2015, 12:01 PM
|
|
take care of ourselves. This is why, even if global warming was true, it is not going to be what kills us all. Overpopulation will not kill us all either. Long before we overpopulate to the point where we destroy the Earth...or outgrow the ability to feed ourselves, Yellowstone will erupt, a meteor will hit, or a yet unknown virus will wipe billions of people off the planet. The last scenario is the most likely...dare I say probable, within the next 100 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10157]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13970
Joined: 7/31/04
|
Border control has to come into play at some point
Apr 28, 2015, 4:33 PM
|
|
A box has but so much space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 56116
Joined: 9/13/04
|
www.vhemt.org: May we live long and die out
Apr 28, 2015, 5:24 PM
|
|
Why would mandating that each family only have one child unethical? I'd bet at least 40% of those who have children are ill equipped to do so. At least another 20-30% of those probably did it by accident. The old adage "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should." seems to fit there.
The matrix thing was right; we are a virus upon the earth, and teh inevitable end to that will happen one day. But those above who said greed would take us out are only partially correct--its the debt from our unbridled greed that will eventually do us in. When the bill comes due for everything, somebody will have to pay. And that's when the fighting will start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
It may not be...some value free choice and desire large
Apr 28, 2015, 5:39 PM
|
|
families though. I could see some not willing to accept that. I guess it would be just as unethical for them to HAVE children if it came to a point were there was a war on population and numbers had to be reduced for the sake of survival.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I would not want to live in a world where "free choice" was
Apr 28, 2015, 5:45 PM
|
|
considered unethical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 56116
Joined: 9/13/04
|
a blanket statement of "free choice".
Apr 28, 2015, 5:58 PM
|
|
Do you think you have that now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Yes.***
Apr 28, 2015, 7:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 56116
Joined: 9/13/04
|
"I'm not talking about the morality of the choices made..."
Apr 28, 2015, 9:05 PM
|
|
Any choice can be considered a moral choice.
You're deluded if you think you have free choice. You have limited choices...that you are allowed to have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
As long as the mind is free, free will exists.***
Apr 28, 2015, 10:57 PM
|
|
To be sure, this is far different the criminal punishment of choices made. But, punishment for choices, and the free will to make choices, are not the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I'm not talking about the morality of the choices made...
Apr 28, 2015, 7:47 PM
|
|
I'm talking about the freedom to even have a choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
If a choice subsequently leads to harming others or
Apr 28, 2015, 9:16 PM
|
|
themselves, then why should it remain a choice? If overpopulation becomes an actual problem, continually to freely allow procreation doesn't really sound like a solution at all...it just sounds like a continuation of the situation that caused the problem in the first place. A head in the sand approach, if you will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Because I do not believe overpopulation is a rational
Apr 28, 2015, 10:24 PM
|
|
fear at this time, and I take issue with those who immediately jump to the State control of reproduction as the foremost solution to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
I see, if it were up to me, I'd go the route of least
Apr 28, 2015, 10:46 PM
|
|
resistance/least invasive first. Education about the subject can go along way rather than resorting to law to accomplish the task. As of right now, I don't believe it is a popular issue because it will be some time before problems begin arsing. But I do think if this is a real risk, it isn't too soon to start thinking about it.
I've seen other research suggesting the population may level off before it reaches those numbers anyway and begin regressing...possibly due to sterility (reminds me of Children of Men). If the population curve begins trending the other direction, this may become a moot point and we may have the opposite problem if something contributes to our sterility that we aren't yet aware of...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
It also denies human dignity
Apr 28, 2015, 6:17 PM
[ in reply to It may not be...some value free choice and desire large ] |
|
There are more positions here than the libertarian ("free choice"), the environmentalist/ liberal (state controlled rationing), and the environmentalist/ post-human ("we're a virus upon the Earth").
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 56116
Joined: 9/13/04
|
People derive their dignity from how many children
Apr 28, 2015, 6:20 PM
|
|
they spawn?
Really?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 56116
Joined: 9/13/04
|
lulz..say the king of being obtuse and redirection.
Apr 29, 2015, 9:29 AM
|
|
I only responded to what you said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
People could probably live more modestly
Apr 28, 2015, 5:51 PM
|
|
Part of the problem with the way most people think about the environment is that they mostly are worried about doing or not doing particular things, rather than thinking about an overall ethic or about the way many of the things that enable our prosperity change our environment. We want to know what the one or two things are we can do to "save our environment," and we think somebody else will take care of the rest. So we tend to outsource our care for the environment in the same way we outsource just about everything that we need. While this kind of global capitalism enables greater prosperity, it also encourages a continually expansionist thinking that has to be managed by people far away- NGOs or bureaucracies. For another way of thinking about environmentalism, see Roger Scruton's work, especially "How to Think Seriously About the Planet," "On Hunting," and "News from Somewhere: On Settling.
Also, pretty much anything Wendell Berry has written addresses the subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Thanks, I'll have to check those out.***
Apr 28, 2015, 6:20 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93658]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95409
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I think that discussion is way over my pay grade.***
Apr 29, 2015, 8:22 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3590]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 6987
Joined: 11/30/12
|
Before you go off the deep end, do a little research
Apr 29, 2015, 2:56 PM
|
|
on the impact that capital investment has had on food production in the world. Thomas Malthus predicted in 1798 that the population would outgrow the food supply. Hasn't happened.
Better yet, stop listening to the tree huggers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 62
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
