We have moved! This board is no longer functional!
Please join us at our new forum: http://s1.zetaboards.com/PMF2
Please join us at our new forum: http://s1.zetaboards.com/PMF2
| Welcome to PMF inc.. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Food Crisis and related matters | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Apr 29 2008, 08:04 PM (90 Views) | |
| Shed | Apr 29 2008, 08:04 PM Post #1 |
Don't go in the Shed!
|
I read the BBC article "How to solve the global food crisis" and had the following to say about it. (I submitted this as a comment, but it probably won't show up since it's so long.) Make sure to read the original story and the comments on it before eading what I have to say. Feel free to comment on or discussing things that I, the author of the original article or any other commenters had to say. ------- Ah, the food crisis. It's been all over the news, recently, hasn't it? But of course, what's on the news isn't necessarily what's most important, and in fact it rarely is. We, as citizens of the world must pay prime attention not to what's on the news, but to their underlying causes. I was glad to see that several other readers noticed some of this. The really big problem we face today is one: overpopulation. Solving and controlling this will be a huge step towards solving most (if not all) other worldwide problems. The humans have reached—or, if not quite yet, are on the verge of reaching—our planet’s carrying capacity. That means there are already too many humans to fit properly in Earth. Now, this has several implications: most importantly the several crises related to food supply, energy, ecological matters and violence. How? According to basic economic theory, the size of a population is one of the main determinants of demand for any product. Thus, an overpopulated area, be it a town, country or planet, will invariably have over-consumption, and all over-consumption will, in the long run, lead to some crisis. That is how all of those crises have arisen, except that of violence (in part). As we have been seeing in the news, we are running short on food. Although, as Mr. Basu wrote, there are several side factors to the crisis, the main cause remains as overpopulation, which leads to “over-eating”. Cutting down the world population would simply make all current food supply go to less people, which with efficient transportation and storage will increase supply per capita all over the world. Energy has seen much less airtime, as several changes in energy policy harm large businesses like oil producers. In fact, part of the energy crisis is due to the unwillingness of big firms to change, on the grounds that changing would cause them to lose money. Anyways: we use too much energy. Of course, reducing energy use and, most of all, energy waste is not enough due to the ecological implications of producing energy. In fact, although ecological implications have seen quite a bit of airtime with Al Gore and others, the fact is that little has been done to get over these problems. To begin with, why isn’t cutting down energy usage enough to solve the energy problems? The answer is simple: we use polluting (and otherwise ecologically harmful) energy sources. Oil and other fossil fuels are the dirtiest, emitting tons of CO2 every year; hydroelectric plants destroy entire river- and like-side ecosystems by flooding the lakes. Biofuels aren’t that much better off, either, as they also depend on finite resources and emit CO2—and contribute to the food crisis. A commenter suggested going for algae as an alternate oil source, but that is much like biofuels: carbon fuel based on finite resources; it avoids only the food problem. There are a series of clean and efficient energy sources that just need some extra investment to be fully developed and implemented, like wind power, nuclear energy and even hydrogen power. Energy isn’t the only source of ecological problems, of course. Urbanization, industrialization, and cattle ranching and several other practices cause the reduction of our natural resources. In Brazil, for example, cities have taken over most of the area originally occupied by the Atlatic Forest, and the Amazon is being removed to give space to (often illegal) cattle ranchers. Reducing the population will decrease (if not eliminate) the demand for extra urban space, as well as for extra cattle ranching. Finally, let us address the problem of urban violence. Although it is not related to over-consumption, overpopulation is the base of this crisis as well. Unfortunately I am referring to this from memory and thus cannot give proof, but laboratory experiments have shown that mice—which, remember, are very much like humans in several aspects—expose increasing amounts of stress as the population density increased, which led to several instances of needless violence. Quite clearly, we have gone the same way. Since the planet is only one, a fall in population levels will definitely decrease the worldwide population density, stress levels and violence levels. Forgive me for having gone out on so many different tangents, but I believe my point has been made clear: overpopulation is the base of world problems. How to solve that, you ask? Efficient government policies to encourage birth control and family planning should limit the growth of populations and eventually decrease its size as the larger, past generations die out. These policies would have to be maintained for very long periods, of course, if not forever, as to prevent another population boom. But that is in the long run. Is there a short run way to assist in the solving of this problem? Definitely: ignore the food crisis. Those who can’t afford enough food will die relatively quickly and those who can will live on. A heartless though, perhaps, in the eyes of the current generations, but it is a sacrifice that must be done to assist generations and generations to come. Unfortunately I cannot see this happening: we are all too selfish. Perhaps that is another great problem of the humans. |
 |
 
|
| Leviathan | Apr 29 2008, 10:39 PM Post #2 |
http://abscure.net
|
All I saw was the last 2 lines, but I agree with them. We only care about ourselves, and maybe a few people really close to us like family and stuff. But who HONESTLY gives a **** about people starving in Africa? Not a lot of people... or at least not enough. |
|
|
|
| Ilex | Apr 29 2008, 11:03 PM Post #3 |
Hillary '08!
|
Sadly, there is no other solution other than to let darwinism take its path. Even if we somehow find away to feed everybody, that will lead to more overpopulation and the problem will only accelerate. There's nothing we can do for those people who are starving to death other than tell them that it has to be done for the greater good. |
|
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Debates · Next Topic » |
