16-06-2002 23:32									#31
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by DanS "You are a selfish, immoral conservative." Again, false choice. An inherently morally repugnant one child policy such as China has had for a quite a while is no substitute for development.

Dan, for instance IW, is one who continues to troll his selfish beliefs.

	16-06-2002 23:34									#32
	Re: STRAWMAN ALERT! STRAWMAN ALERT! Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by DanS "So letting everyone reproduce like rabbits and then undergo violently nasty famines on the scale of North Korea is therefore morally correct?" Think again, strawman.

If your argument isn't to let everyone reproduce and then starrve, then tell us what it is.

quote: "More importantly, can anyone offer an alternative to the One Child Policy that would also control the Chinese population?" Economic development and urbanization has proven to be the most effective population control mechanism.

Economic development and urbanization do not happen overnight. The overpopulation crisis in China is imminent and requires immediate action.

quote: " The same old debate over Liberty vs Stability. You can only pick one. We, living in the West, picked Liberty. Someone else, in a different society, picks Stability. Simple as that." This is tripe often spewed by Asian dictators as an excuse to oppress their people. We have both stability and liberty and the people of China have a right to demand likewise.

This may be "tripe", but it is, also, unfortunately, true in many cases. Especially in overpopulated, hungry Asian countries.
Tell us how both "liberty" and "stability" can be implemented equally in the case of the One Child Policy. So we let everyone reproduce as they like, and then we feed everyone as much as they want?!
(No, this is not strawman either, considering that is exactly what you want.)

quote: "Dan and Dave, if the US had 3 or 4 billion people (roughly comparable to the population density of China) you would definitely think differently. Your comments just go to show how ignorant you are of what life is like in China." Sava, this is a ridiculous argument. You're in a world of guaranteed rights. If somebody said you could only have one child, how would you take it? I daresay I would be picking up my pitchfork and joining the revolution. And another thing. Redo your math.

Right......
Firstly, no one in China is picking up their pitchforks and joining the revolution right now.
Secondly, if you lived in China and you had any sense or compassion, you shouldn't be picking up your pitchfork and joining the revolution. (Unless you are in active support of starvation, that is.)

	16-06-2002 23:56									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Well methinks China is going to have a diiferent problem in the near future.

They have a society where being a woman is not as advantageous as a man, so many girls are aborted in favor of a male.

All of a sudden you have a large mainly male population with very few selective mates, what will this society be like?

	17-06-2002 00:06									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by November Adam All of a sudden you have a large mainly male population with very few selective mates, what will this society be like?

I just realised why mindseye moves to China....

	17-06-2002 00:09									#35
	Remove this text

An increase in kidnapping of ethinic chinese women from other south-east asian countries, and sold as wives to the "little emperors" of China.

	17-06-2002 01:04									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I have absolutely no problem with birth control, etc.

I have a major problem with forced birth control.

Food supply problem? Don't make me laugh. The US pays its farmers to burn crops because we produce too much. If China wanted to it could purchase as much food as it needed - of course, it might not be able to afford it, which is the fault of communism, not people wanting to have more than one kid.

Don't blame innocent peasants for the failings of communism.

Oh, and as Dan already pointed out, the US is probably the most free AND the most stable nation in the world (although admittedly still not incredibly free), so why can't China do the same? I think the reason is the people are conditioned to unquestioning subservience, which by my understanding is a cultural thing.

Look what centuries of despotism gets ya, eh?

	17-06-2002 01:15									#37
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

" Food supply problem? Don't make me laugh. The US pays its farmers to burn crops because we produce too much. If China wanted to it could purchase as much food as it needed - of course, it might not be able to afford it, which is the fault of communism, not people wanting to have more than one kid."

China could very easily afford food from the United States. Currently, we have an $80 billion a year trade deficit with China. The way these things work, they've gotta buy something with that money.

	17-06-2002 01:18									#38
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Well there you have it.

Maybe China should pay less attention to military expansion and upgrades in a world where there is no threat against China, and more attention to minor things such as food supply.

	17-06-2002 01:49									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Of course it is evil.

Everyone knows that only children are spoiled and arrogant. The Chinese want to create a race of spoiled and arrogant people!!!

(note: that was just a joke, don't kill me ).

	17-06-2002 02:12									#40
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I am not sure , does China want to halt pop growth of cause a pop reduction?

	17-06-2002 02:19									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

reduction

	17-06-2002 02:32									#42
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

If it wouldn't be reduction, they are really lousy at math. That's all that I wanted to point out.

	17-06-2002 03:21									#43
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Currently the food shortage problems in the world are self imposed (the food is grown, it just doesn't get where people need it). If population growth continues at the pace it has for the past half century, it would very quickly surpass our abilities to feed even without these self imposed limits.

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldpop.html

One or two selfish generations is all it would take to surpass our current food production abilities. Eventually overpopulation (and corresponding starvations) will happen unless we limit growth.

	17-06-2002 03:25									#44
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Where do you find reliable figures of our food production capability 50 years from now?

	17-06-2002 03:33									#45
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I support this 1-child policy.

Even though to "the West", it sounds rather barbaric and infringes on their individuality, I think they are going the right way. Their population is skyrocketing and they are trying to curb it the best way they know how. The introduction of contraceptives as well as this policy will hopefully stabilize their rampant growth.

At least their trying to curb population growth. I think the U.S. only thinks they are.

(ducks for the incoming flaming)

	17-06-2002 03:38									#46
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

"Their population is skyrocketing"

The US population is growing faster than China's.

	17-06-2002 03:46									#47
	Remove this text

well.....you get the idea.

They got more people than we do right now and if pop. growth is exponential.....whooo!....i don't even wanna think about those numbers.

	17-06-2002 03:55									#48
	Tired of ads?

I've been looking for a link.. can't seem to find any from reliable sources yet. Here is a report on the grain production for the last century. (have no idea about the validity of the source though)

http://wwwwp.mext.go.jp/ekg2000/index-4.html

It shows a linear increase in production since the 50's at a pretty good rate. The problem lies in the fact that population growth is not linear, but exponential.

Also notice that since the early 70's the growth rate has been dropping quite nicely. When was China's 1 child policy implemented again?

The point about a selfish generation or two would relate to the numbers in the 60's. In 50 years at those rates we would have over 15 billion people. Our food production capacity would need to keep pace. Maybe it would, but at some point the food production will have to drop off. There is only so much room on this planet to plant crops.

Moving away from meat products which aren't very efficient, and developing aquaculture can delay the inevitable. At some point though, people have to wake up and realize that there are limited resources on our earth. We can't support an exponential increase in population indefinitely.

	17-06-2002 04:11									#49
	Tired of ads?

There seems to be a lot of people arguing for china's one-child policy that also belive in a zero-sum world.

If you have more people you also have more bodies to work the land and, much more crucially, more minds to think up better ways of working the land.

What china's policy has done is to rapidly change the desired number of children - far more rapidly than would have happened 'naturally' during the rapid industrialization of the last 20 years - I think that this can be used as a partial justification of the policy which, as has been pointed out, is mainly enforced by monetary fines.

Mass starvation due to overpopulation almost never happens - people adjust their behaviour long before that happens.
Almost all famines are caused by war or bad government policies - and they usually only happen when you get a combination of both.

I cannot think of one famine that has been caused entirely by overpopulation - indeed i'm not sure i've come across a good definition of 'overpopulation'.

	17-06-2002 04:28									#50
	Got spare money?

Overpopulation - where the population exceeds the ability of the environment to provide for.

Global overpopulation is a point we haven't reached yet, of course there will be no good examples. Local overpopulation has occured, and usually results in migrations. Unless we have the ability to migrate to other planets, global overpopulation would entail malnurishment or starvation.

Giving birth to children assuming 'they will figure out a way to feed themselves in ways we can't do now' is a ludicrous gamble. Population needs to be limited by current abilities to feed that population, not by speculative abilities that might be possible in the future. If those abilities change in the future, then the population limits can safely change with them.

	17-06-2002 04:31									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

My gods...

Okay, so I've only read this last page, but from the looks of things no one has pointed something important out. Everyone here is assuming that population growth will continue to be exponential indefinitely. This is already not the case. Population growth has leveled off for much of the first world, and it's definitely slowed overall.

IIRC, the last decent estimates I heard were that the world population would stabilize somewhere between 8 and 11 billion people, which is well within our capacity to support.

Remember, middle-class people don't want a lot of kids. It's bad enough driving them around town to clubs and sports when you've only got one or two...

Wraith
Earth is 90% full. Please delete anyone you can.

	17-06-2002 04:42									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Wraith, el freako. Exactly right!

Famines are dead thanks to capitalism. Adjustments are made well before it gets that bad.

And yes, the world population will stabilize. When countries hit industrialization, it is only natural that population skyrockets. Medicines drop the death rate and keep the birth rate high. In the next period of development, the people tend to have less children, because their time is worth more (higher paying jobs, etc.). This is why Europe is having negative population growth rates.

The closest tie to lessening population growth rates? More economic freedom for women. Why? Because when women's time is more valuable (they can go out there and make good cash), who wants to spend their lives inside with 8 children? Why not have 2 children and spend 80% of your working life doing something economically productive and making some good cash. The solution is to increase the rights for women across the world. Then, this exponential growth will fall.

	17-06-2002 04:48									#53
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Aeson Overpopulation - where the population exceeds the ability of the environment to provide for.

A good definition, however there is an implicit assumption in it - namely that the resources of that enviroment are being exploited with the best available methods.

quote: Originally posted by Aeson Local overpopulation has occured, and usually results in migrations.

Could you give a couple of examples?
If there was overpopulation then you would expect their population to fall and stay below it's peak (at least untill there was an improvement in technology)

quote: Originally posted by Aeson Giving birth to children assuming 'they will figure out a way to feed themselves in ways we can't do now' is a ludicrous gamble.

If you think that's a ludicrous gamble then I assume you would think it a safe one to bet against the sun rising tomorrow - just because it's happened so many times before is no guarantee for the future eh?

Improvements in food production have been happening almost continuously for the last 300 years and have accellerated during the last 50 - there are many area's of the world which could increase their food production by several multiples just by adopting the best practices available today.

	17-06-2002 04:59									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Wraith, el freako. Exactly right! Famines are dead thanks to capitalism. Adjustments are made well before it gets that bad. And yes, the world population will stabilize. When countries hit industrialization, it is only natural that population skyrockets. Medicines drop the death rate and keep the birth rate high. In the next period of development, the people tend to have less children, because their time is worth more (higher paying jobs, etc.). This is why Europe is having negative population growth rates.

Um....i don't wanna seem as sarcastic...but Africa is one place that still suffers from famine and malnourishment. True, foreign aid comes in and helps, but famine is not dead.

But you are right on world pop stabilization. Example-
In a psychology experiment done on rats, a food source was made abundant and the rat population did "pop-boom". However, over time reproduction failed and the population eventually stabilized.

However, I don't want humanity to go to the edge where we just keep on reproducing until we consume every last natural resource available.

Here's something from a certain movie that I found rather prophetic:

quote: Agent Smith: I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure.

	17-06-2002 05:04									#55
	Put an end to popups!

Population 'growth' is exponential by nature, regardless of what the exponent is. Any exponent over 1 will increase population, anything under 1 will decrease it. If you change the number of children per generation the difference compounds with each generation. That's all that's meant by exponential. The growth of world population is dropping off, which is a good thing. China's one child policy is one of the reasons for that.

Limits on population growth can be by personal choice of course, and that is the best case scenario. If people aren't willing to limit themselves through personal choice, that's were we run into problems. China was having population growth problems, and their government stepped in and did something about it.

Just because humans have the ability to avoid overpopulation doesn't mean overpopulation is not a potential problem. It's through understanding that it is a potential problem that we can avoid it.

quote: Remember, middle-class people don't want a lot of kids.

Middle class doesn't guarantee that people won't want a lot of kids though. Living in Utah this is readily apparent, most Mormon families have a high standard of living and several children. On their own Mormon's could achieve overpopulation eventually (many generations) with what probably is around 4 children per family average. Hopefully common sense would take hold before then.

In the case that people don't limit population growth themselves, I think we have to reserve the right to limit it as a society.

	17-06-2002 05:07									#56
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: but Africa is one place that still suffers from famine and malnourishment. True, foreign aid comes in and helps, but famine is not dead.

Silly me... forgot that . Yet, in those states, you will see a lack of a capitalist economic order.

quote: Population 'growth' is exponential by nature, regardless of what the exponent is. Any exponent over 1 will increase population, anything under 1 will decrease it.

And in places like Europe and the US (if you exclude immigrants from the equation) the growth UNDER 1. Population growth does not continue forever. It does stabilize.

	17-06-2002 05:09									#57
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: but Africa is one place that still suffers from famine and malnourishment. True, foreign aid comes in and helps, but famine is not dead. Silly me... forgot that . Yet, in those states, you will see a lack of a capitalist economic order.

got me there.

	17-06-2002 05:10									#58
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I misposted up there... what I meant to say that capitalism has eliminated famines, wherever capitalism has taken hold... not that it eliminated all famines.

But thanks for the catching the mistake.

	17-06-2002 05:32									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Could you give a couple of examples?

As a population grows near the limit of it's food production capacity (or that capacity falls for whatever reason), excess population moves on. It doesn't have to be the only migration pressure, but it has factored in many. When there isn't enough food, people will go where they can find it.

It doesn't stop the progression of our ability to provide for more people through agricultural advancement. Populations continue to grow as the ability to support that growth does.

In some cases the food source moves or is diminished. The plains Indians followed the buffalo in almost a constant migration. Without the buffalo they didn't have the means to provide food (among other things) for their population. The migration into the Americas from Asia was much the same thing.

The dust bowl in America is another change in environment that produced human migration. The potato famine another. These types of uncontrollable events produced the more visable/extensive migrations.

A migration based on a constant food source and expanding population is going to be less exstensive. It may be moving to the next valley because there is no more farm land in the current one. A much smaller migration in terms of scale, and probably coupled with a desire for exploration most often. The homebodies stay and work the current area, and the restless move off to find new homes.

	17-06-2002 05:40									#60
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui And in places like Europe and the US (if you exclude immigrants from the equation) the growth UNDER 1. Population growth does not continue forever. It does stabilize.

One way or the other, yes it does stabilize. I never claimed differently.

The west has stabilized population growth through personal choice. China was having population growth problems and it was government intervention which stabilized their population growth. If there were a circumstance where neither the population nor the government were willing to limit population growth, then the environment would stabilize the population through it's own means.