Human's share of the planet's resources

[quinton]

It is morally wrong in my opinion for humans to expand indefinitely; taking more than their share of the planet's resources away from all other living things.

Have humans taken too much of the earth for themselves?

There is no "right" answer to this question. It is a matter of opinion.

There are scientific facts that support my position however.

[quinton]

Ultimately your answer may depend on your interests. i.e. whether you like malls and skyscrapers, or whether you long for more vast unspoiled habitable spaces.

I believe human's have already taken way more than their share. The population of humans on earth is too high and consequently too much of the earth's resources become consumed by humans.

Every country, religious group, and corporation has the same goal: growth of their people and growth in how much each one of their people consumes.

Eventually we'll have to ask the question of how much space and resources earth's other inhabitants deserve. If we agree that we need to stop expanding humans on earth, we'll need a complete paradigm shift of values to something other than economic growth.

[geoffrey]

Well quinton, I think we are making progress. With soaring costs of nearly all commodities, many people are looking to be more conservative in their use of the Earth's resources. It's a natural progression of sorts.

Prices go up, people buy less. Inflation is the ultimate tool of the environmentalist.

[quinton]

To even consider the idea that the economy will take care of the environment is ridiculous.

(You should look for the nearest rock to crawl under and hide in shame)

[Canuck E Stan]

I believe human's have already taken way more than their share. The population of humans on earth is too high and consequently too much of the earth's resources become consumed by humans.

Quinton,

If you're not part of the solution,

then you're part of the problem.

What are you personally doing other than complaining?

[quinton]

What am I doing?

Not owning or operating a car.

Educating others.

Trying to further my understanding of nature by learning about local wildlife before it becomes extinct.

Trying to plan for a fulfilling lifestyle that is environmentally friendly.

As far as proposing a solution the the overpopulation problem, it is futile because the public is too wrapped up in the economy to recognize the problem.

Without recognizing the problem, the solution will seem extreme.

If the public recognized the problem, I would propose the solution to reduce breeding and reduce consumption. (Both have to be done, not just one)

Unfortunately all countries, religious groups and corporations have the opposite goal (increase their numbers and increase their consumption).

Economic Growth as a goal must be stopped to avoid mass extinctions and war from overcrowding.

Life becomes quite cheap when there are 6.5 billion of us, over half living in poverty, rapid species extinctions, low resources per capita, huge gap between rich and poor, and the numbers keep growing.

Humans have the power to either destroy or save the planet's natural integrity.

They can't save it all because some has been irreparably damaged (many species already extinct, much toxic and nuclear waste, etc)

[ClearWest]

It is morally wrong in my opinion for humans to expand indefinitely; taking more than their share of the planet's resources away from all other living things.

Have humans taken too much of the earth for themselves?

There is no "right" answer to this question. It is a matter of opinion.

There are scientific facts that support my position however.

Quinton, I sympathize with your views. I think it's great how you're taking steps to adjust your own lifestyle and to raise awareness so that other people will consider adjusting their lifestyles. This is the best way for us to do our part to maintain and improve our environment. It should always be a personal choice and not a government force.

This is why I become hesitant when governments start talking about environmental issues. They have the best intentions, but in going through with their agenda they often affect our freedoms. For instance, if the government implimented food rations to reduce our consumption. That would be going too far. Or taxing gasoline rather than asking people to cut down on their consumption and find more cost-effective ways of travelling. I think we need to be doing things like causing awareness and asking (not forcing) people to consider making changes to their lifestyle for the sake of the environment.

[quinton]

Sure, the more angles we look at this problem the better.

I think it should be in the news everyday.

Overpopulation is in my opinion the world's biggest, worst, most serious issue.

We have to start with public education.

Further, people must develop an appreciation for nature and its diversity of plant and animal life in order for that biodiversity to be protected proactively.

[geoffrey]

How do we reduce the population?

[quinton]

1) Get the public aware of the problem and debating solutions.

I vote for government to pay people to sterilize themselves.

That won't work until the majority of the public is on board and recognizes that this is the biggest problem in the world.

[geoffrey]

1) Get the public aware of the problem and debating solutions.

I vote for government to pay people to sterilize themselves.

That won't work until the majority of the public is on board and recognizes that this is the biggest problem in the world.

Interesting. So poor people that need the money will no longer reproduce. A great form of eugenics, bravo.

[Renegade]

1) Get the public aware of the problem and debating solutions.

I vote for government to pay people to sterilize themselves.

That won't work until the majority of the public is on board and recognizes that this is the biggest problem in the world.

Interesting. So poor people that need the money will no longer reproduce. A great form of eugenics, bravo.

Is it any different that paying people baby bonuses to have kids? The poor who need the money the most will reproduce the most. Is that eugenics too?

Unless you can somehow show that the poor have a different genetic makup than the population at large, it can't really be considered eugenics.

[quinton]

Good points Renegade.

Geoffrey think twice before making such extreme statements.

I believe the human population should be reduced in the most humane way possible.

This is by lowering the birth rate, not by killing or shortening the lives of the living.

[betsy]

1) Get the public aware of the problem and debating solutions.

I vote for government to pay people to sterilize themselves.

That won't work until the majority of the public is on board and recognizes that this is the biggest problem in the world.

Canada's population is miniscule compared to third world countries. How will you get powerful countries to control their own population growth...while other countries continuously multiply?

Do you mean pay people in third world countries to sterilize themselves?

[betsy]

To even consider the idea that the economy will take care of the environment is ridiculous.

(You should look for the nearest rock to crawl under and hide in shame)

As for the environment....how sure are we that this thing such as "global warming" is actually caused by man? For all we know the world is just going through its natural cycle. There were indications that same thing happened in ancient history.

How reliable and accurate are the information datas and research findings propelled by special interest groups?

[betsy]

I vote for government to pay people to sterilize themselves.

And I would not support any Canadian government who would pay Canadians to sterilize themselves!

If we can afford to support and give aids to foreign countries...we can then more than support our own population! If it comes to choosing which ones to support...I would rather we continue producing children and support our own!

Just think....if countries in Europe as an example, follow the sterilization program you suggests, how would they face China's hordes if it ever becomes aggressively hostile?

[quinton]

betsy, how would you achieve a lowered birthrate?

I would advocate all countries pay their citizens to become sterilized. (Not just Canada)

I would also stop immigration (because allowing people to move from areas of high to low concentration would allow us to use up all of the wilderness)

Countries with wilderness left should protect it by not allowing it to be plundered for building materials to support the next wave of immigrants.

betsy, Global Warming is very benign compared to the loss of wilderness caused by road building and other population pressures.

Species extinctions caused by lack of roadless areas is far worse than global warming.

If every country has the same philosophy as a religious cult to expand their own numbers to create the largest army of their own kind, the world's biodiversity and endangered species are doomed.