On September 1st, 2009 at 2:04 am, BobonStatenIsland said:

Also, I do not believe lgm is one person but a staff over at Huff & Puff Post that’s sole purpose os to annoy us on different sites. Just ignore them. Ignoring them is to them what they seem to do to you…..annoy and frustrate.

I always thought of “him” as being the result of a open computer in the boy’s lavatory in a grammar school with a big sign over it saying: “write whatever you want.”

Besides, answering lgm is like shooting puppies in a barrel.

India did NOT limit its population, and has made dramatic economic progress with health/longivity improvements that go with it.

If anything, India’s experience shows that draconian social measures are NOT a necessary condition to increasing wealth and health. For one thing, India dropped socialism for capitalism, while china continues to hobble itself with state-ownership of many industries, and de facto control of the rest.

On September 1st, 2009 at 11:21 am, fulldroolcup said:
The huge problem with BOB’s argument is that in the 200 years since Malthus the human population has vastly increased, but the percentage of people still immured in poverty has DECLINED, while the rest, even “the poor”, lead lives vastly better than the lumpen Malthus wrote about. Fifty years ago sociologists like Gunnar Myrdal wrote books entitled “Asian Drama….The Poverty of Nations”, predicting that countries like India and China would NEVER escape their misery. Look what happened.
As for these “hundreds of millions of starving people”, where are they? Get gawddamn specific, will you? And then separate out the situation where the starving are NOT in that condition because of actions of their governments, NOT overpopulation.

What the hell kind of prognostication is it that has continued for 200 years now, starting with Malthus, and has yet to come to pass???? Who you gonna believe: Malthus, Brown and Ehrlich, or your lying eyes??

Both China and India now have populations of more than 1 billion. India’s population growth is about three times that of China. Even China’s population growth is higher than they want….and it didn’t get were it is today from the wealth of the average Chinese citizen. It got there by government control limiting the number of children a couple is allowed to have.

2008 population growth rates/country:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_pop_gro_rat-people-population-growth-rate

http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/academic/bts.html

This is very scary.

President Obama’s Address to Students Across America September 8, 2009

Here is the link:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10582301/President-Obama’s-Address-to-Students-Across-America-September-8-2009

We fought these people in WWII, and won. They are nothing more or less than Soulless Ghouls.

http://www.sitesatlas.com/Thematic-Maps/Death-rate.html

As for these “hundreds of millions of starving people”, where are they? Get gawddamn specific, will you? And then separate out the situation where the starving are NOT in that condition because of actions of their governments, NOT overpopulation.

What the hell kind of prognostication is it that has continued for 200 years now, starting with Malthus, and has yet to come to pass???? Who you gonna believe: Malthus, Brown and Ehrlich, or your lying eyes??

On September 1st, 2009 at 10:38 am, Roland said:
But that doesn’t mean the problem isn’t real: it is.
You are quite simply wrong. The reality is that as populations become wealthier and individuals become less dependent on having children to add to the ‘tribe’ (for its survival) and to take care of them in their old age, the people stop breeding. Sometimes entirely.

That is not a theory. We see it happening right now throughout the developed world. It is a proven FACT.

Spread freedom of enterprise (capitalism) and the prosperity it brings, and the population problem will be in the OTHER direction.

Sounds good, isn’t going to happen to the degree required to stabilize world population, let alone reduce it. The world population will continue increase to until famine, disease and/or war,… and it would take a huge event…reduce it.

That’s at least as much a “fact” as your theory of sufficent world wealth to reduce world population.