Unpopular Opinions.

prinz

loveisdivine wrote: »

How is having more people on the planet going to help this?

How is having less people going to help this, when as it is less and less people are consuming more and more? You are basically saying less people = less consumption = less environmental damage, but the fact remains that the populations in the developed world are actually falling and yet consumerism is booming. Less people does not always equal less environmental damage.

Duggys Housemate

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Philosophy should be taught in primary and secondary school.

Philosophy shouldn't be taught in universities, most of it.

loveisdivine

prinz wrote: »

How is having less people going to help this, when as it is less and less people are consuming more and more? You are basically saying less people = less consumption = less environmental damage, but the fact remains that the populations in the developed world are actually falling and yet consumerism is booming. Less people does not always equal less environmental damage.

I do actually agree with you here. Peoples attitudes/actions and the way we live in general needs to change. Which is exactly why I dont think we should be trying to increase the population, the people living here now need to change and start living in balance with the world, before we start trying to add more to it.

And as I said in my OP, do we really need to create more life when there are so many orphaned children? If children are starving in other parts of the world, and have no parents, surely they should come before creating new life?

prinz

loveisdivine wrote: »

I do actually agree with you here. Peoples attitudes/actions and the way we live in general needs to change. Which is exactly why I dont think we should be trying to increase the population, the people living here now need to change and start living in balance with the world, before we start trying to add more to it.

But having no/less kids doesn't really answer your problem. You could have a family with four kids, one car, growing their own veg etc, using hand-me-down clothes from sibling to sibling, one family TV, go camping in Wexford as holidays, no mobiles for the kids and so on..

On the other hand you could have a family with one child, both parents with cars, kid with new clothes whenever needed, the latest games console, computer games, a family TV, TV in kitchen, TV in parents room, TV in kids room, kid with the latest mobile phone, consuming everything from shops, and holidays is a airplane to Spain.

Extreme examples I know but which family has more kids....and which family is doing more damage to the environment? With that in mind why should one family be told they shouldn't have had more kids than the other?

As for people starving in other parts of the world that comes back to the distribution of resources. On the issue of orphans etc yes I agree, people should look to help that situation more IMO. I'd love to be able to look at adoption in the future if the circumstances are right.

ian87

The north should be thrown out on its on away from the south and the uk. Any nordies who wish to go to the uk or the republic respectively will be allowed go without issue. The rest can stay and live in their own autonomous region.

And if I was in charge the nordies who move south would be compelled to take accent reassignment classes. That northern whine is like a blunt drillbit in the back of the head.

loveisdivine

prinz wrote: »

But having no/less kids doesn't really answer your problem. You could have a family with four kids, one car, growing their own veg etc, using hand-me-down clothes from sibling to sibling, one family TV, go camping in Wexford as holidays, no mobiles for the kids and so on..

On the other hand you could have a family with one child, both parents with cars, kid with new clothes whenever needed, the latest games console, computer games, a family TV, TV in kitchen, TV in parents room, TV in kids room, kid with the latest mobile phone, consuming everything from shops, and holidays is a airplane to Spain.
QUOTE]

Maybe I'm wrong but I get the impression that the "norm" is somewhere between these two. Meaning a family with four kids, that have all the luxuries of the second example.

I suppose if the first example was the case, then no, the amount of children wouldnt be such a big problem. Unfortunately thats not how most families are. Everyone wants the best for their kids, and their view is that "the best" is all the luxuries you described.

Nobody seems to want a simple, self sustained life anymore.

prinz

loveisdivine wrote: »

Everyone wants the best for their kids, and their view is that "the best" is all the luxuries you described. Nobody seems to want a simple, self sustained life anymore.

Some people do.

loveisdivine

prinz wrote: »

Some people do.

You have to admit though, sometimes you feel like the only one!

smash

loveisdivine wrote: »

Nobody seems to want a simple, self sustained life anymore.

Would you not be better of teaching your kids about luxuries and the fact that you get them by working hard in school and at your career where you can make something more of yourself?

loveisdivine

smash wrote: »

Would you not be better of teaching your kids about luxuries and the fact that you get them by working hard in school and at your career where you can make something more of yourself?

I'd rather teach them that what society classes as luxuries arent really luxuries at all. I would also rather they grew up in a world where people have a real reverence for nature and not be obsessed with happiness/being succesfull having to be based on how much money/luxuries you have or what your career is.

It may be obvious at this point, but I feel we have massively over complicated life for ourselves.

Paparazzo

loveisdivine wrote: »

That attitude is exactly what I'm talking about. Just because you can afford 10 kids doesnt mean you should have them. Nobody is thinking about the effect it has on the earth and the greater population.

I suppose you should go ahead and have loads of kids and let someone else worry about unequal resource distribution.

Oh and where are we gonna put the waste created by all these extra people? Just keep adding to the land fills?

Its not just about having enough resources for everyone, its about the damage we do in the process of gathering these resources.

So people shouldn't have kids because landfills are getting to big? Get real. :rolleyes:
How many brothers and sisters do you have? Do you ever tell your parents they were selfish for having you?

smash

loveisdivine wrote: »

I'd rather teach them that what society classes as luxuries arent really luxuries at all.

That's subjective. I mean some of what society deems as luxuries, I'd deem as necessities.

loveisdivine wrote: »

I would also rather they grew up in a world where people have a real reverence for nature and not be obsessed with happiness/being succesfull having to be based on how much money/luxuries you have or what your career is.

You can have both you know.

loveisdivine wrote: »

It may be obvious at this point, but I feel we have massively over complicated life for ourselves.

We live in a complicated world, complicated lives are needed to get through it.

Leeg17

smash wrote: »

Would you not be better of teaching your kids about luxuries and the fact that you get them by working hard in school and at your career where you can make something more of yourself?

Reminds me of a thread in R+R recently entitled "No recession here".

You work hard all through your life, reap whatever rewards/luxuries you want imo.

loveisdivine

Paparazzo wrote: »

So people shouldn't have kids because landfills are getting to big? Get real. :rolleyes:
How many brothers and sisters do you have? Do you ever tell your parents they were selfish for having you?

Yes thats one of the reasons. If we cant properly dispose of the waste we are creating now, how will we cope with ever increasing amounts of waste?

I have 1 half brother and a half sister. They were both born in the late sixties/early seventies and I dont think there was as much awareness about these issues then, as there is now.
Unsurprisingly, no, I have never told my parents that they were selfish to have me. I have no desire to hurt peoples feelings, but I have no problem telling my parents that I wont be having children because of the reasons I have already outlined.

Duggys Housemate

Did you know LoveIsDivine, that the world has reached replacement level - 2 children for couple, and has for a while now. Rejoice, and have a burger.

Duggys Housemate

Also with regards to population, living in Ireland means you are living in one of the few, and quite possibly the only, part of the world where the population is below its historical peak by a long way. Its fairly empty, but not quite Russia.

loveisdivine

smash wrote: »

We live in a complicated world, complicated lives are needed to get through it.

But its only a complicated world because we have created it that way. I just sometimes think its a bit sad. Some of the things we complain about, are things that along the line somewhere were created by humans, in an effort to create a better world.

Do you not think we have lost touch with what its really all about?

smash

loveisdivine wrote: »

But its only a complicated world because we have created it that way. I just sometimes think its a bit sad. Some of the things we complain about, are things that along the line somewhere were created by humans, in an effort to create a better world.

Do you not think we have lost touch with what its really all about?

I think you have lost touch with what it's really all about. We don't live in a hippy commune in a forest and bath once a week in a natural spring and live off the falling fruit of a wild orchard. The world has moved on leaps and bounds and the way I see it, you move with it or you fall behind.

If you wish, it's your choice to move to a forest and live like people did hundreds of years ago but to start, it's not your land and it's also in no way comfortable or beneficial really.

Paparazzo

loveisdivine wrote: »

But its only a complicated world because we have created it that way. I just sometimes think its a bit sad. Some of the things we complain about, are things that along the line somewhere were created by humans, in an effort to create a better world.

Do you not think we have lost touch with what its really all about?

Perhaps you should put away the computer, you're wasting valuable resources. I assume you don't own a car and you never fly anywhere. You should check how your forest/crops are getting on. :rolleyes:

sbsquarepants

cloptrop wrote: »

So whats the problem , if you go back to my original post on this matter you will see I said if they wanna get married ceremoniously they should start their own religion , if they want to sign a piece of paper all power to them I think its legal now ,
You cant mention gay marriages without everyone attacking you without even thinking about what your saying .

I've no problem with the ceremoniously part, the church are free to make their own rules and accept or decline membership as they see fit.
It's the legal part i disagree with, that and your statement that marriage is a religious thing, it's not. Civil partnership is not the same as marriage, if it was the same, it would be called marriage.

Electro shocks could work i suppose, we should give it a bash anyway!!:D

loveisdivine wrote: »

That attitude is exactly what I'm talking about. Just because you can afford 10 kids doesnt mean you should have them. Nobody is thinking about the effect it has on the earth and the greater population.

I suppose you should go ahead and have loads of kids and let someone else worry about unequal resource distribution.

Oh and where are we gonna put the waste created by all these extra people? Just keep adding to the land fills?

Its not just about having enough resources for everyone, its about the damage we do in the process of gathering these resources.

Prinz has more or less made my points for me. Thanks for that:D
Overpopulation is not the problem, over consumption and a throw away society are. There is plenty of room and resources for us all, we just need to stop squandering them. In the developed world we probably throw away as much food as we eat, yet half of us are still fat as fools, that's before we even look at the ridiculous levels of packaging, fuel consumption and so on. We're a society of wasters, that's the problem!
We pay people to produce food, then destroy it to keep prices artificially high rather than give it away to those who are starving. It's morally wrong and economically stupid, apart from for the few at the top of the pile who treat us with contempt, somehow we accept this!!

loveisdivine wrote: »

I'd rather teach them that what society classes as luxuries arent really luxuries at all. I would also rather they grew up in a world where people have a real reverence for nature and not be obsessed with happiness/being succesfull having to be based on how much money/luxuries you have or what your career is.

It may be obvious at this point, but I feel we have massively over complicated life for ourselves.

Couldn't agree with you more. Not one ever lies on their deathbed and wishes they'd done more overtime, or that they'd owned a bigger telly. Spent more time with their kids, yes, took more walks in the mountains, yes, seen more sunsets from a secluded beach bar, absolutely, had more sex with more hot women, definitely - bought more crap, hardly!!

Consumerism is the problem and education is the answer, have loads of kids, as many as you can afford, kids are the best thing in the world - just teach them proper values!

loveisdivine

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Couldn't agree with you more. Not one ever lies on their deathbed and wishes they'd done more overtime, or that they'd owned a bigger telly. Spent more time with their kids, yes, took more walks in the mountains, yes, seen more sunsets from a secluded beach bar, absolutely, had more sex with more hot women, definitely - bought more crap, hardly!!

Consumerism is the problem and education is the answer, have loads of kids, as many as you can afford, kids are the best thing in the world - just teach them proper values!

Again I agree to an extent. But whos going to teach the people that are currently having all these children proper values?

I never said anything about a hippy commune, I actually said a simpler life. However what you, smash, described sounds pretty cool. I'm gonna save up some money, buy a small piece of land and create the eutopia you have described

smash

loveisdivine wrote: »

Again I agree to an extent. But whos going to teach the people that are currently having all these children proper values?

Why are you assuming that everyone who's having children is uneducated?

loveisdivine wrote: »

I never said anything about a hippy commune, I actually said a simpler life. However what you, smash, described sounds pretty cool. I'm gonna save up some money, buy a small piece of land and create the eutopia you have described

Ok, well make sure you pay the property tax :P

sbsquarepants

loveisdivine wrote: »

Again I agree to an extent. But whos going to teach the people that are currently having all these children proper values?

I never said anything about a hippy commune, I actually said a simpler life. However what you, smash, described sounds pretty cool. I'm gonna save up some money, buy a small piece of land and create the eutopia you have described

People like you could teach them?? No
I'll do my bit with my own kids and my own circle of friends, i'm not really the Martin Luther King type though, someone else will have to lead the masses!!

I never said anything about a hippy commune either, but hey, you set it up and i'll visit. Sounds kinda cool!!

loveisdivine

smash wrote: »

Why are you assuming that everyone who's having children is uneducated?


Ok, well make sure you pay the property tax :P

I dont assume they are all uneducated. But you have to assume, based on the evidence of over consumerism and the amount of waste we create, that these values were talking about arent currently being passed on as much as they should be. If everyone was already teaching their kids how to life a more sutainable life thats in balance with the planet, then we wouldnt have this problem, so its obviously not currently happening.

Do I still have to pay the property tax if I make my house out of say, sticks and mud?

Duggys Housemate

Thats it, no more bought lunches for me!!

sbsquarepants

loveisdivine wrote: »

I dont assume they are all uneducated. But you have to assume, based on the evidence of over consumerism and the amount of waste we create, that these values were talking about arent currently being passed on as much as they should be. If everyone was already teaching their kids how to life a more sutainable life thats in balance with the planet, then we wouldnt have this problem, so its obviously not currently happening.

Do I still have to pay the property tax if I make my house out of say, sticks and mud?

Surely then by that logic, it would make sense for you to address the balance by popping out a tribe of well trained sprogs??

Also we'll all be living in stick and mud dwellings soon enough. Angela will still want her pound of flesh:mad:

smash

loveisdivine wrote: »

I dont assume they are all uneducated. But you have to assume, based on the evidence of over consumerism and the amount of waste we create, that these values were talking about arent currently being passed on as much as they should be.

No you don't. You just have to assume that it's not being managed correctly.

loveisdivine wrote: »

If everyone was already teaching their kids how to life a more sutainable life thats in balance with the planet, then we wouldnt have this problem, so its obviously not currently happening.

There'll always be a 'problem' with people not living a 'life thats in balance with the planet' but only if you make it a problem. We should probably stop driving cars too, because they kill a lot of insects!

loveisdivine wrote: »

Do I still have to pay the property tax if I make my house out of say, sticks and mud?

Well you'll have to pay a tax on your land. Including the water charges too.

loveisdivine

smash wrote: »

Well you'll have to pay a tax on your land. Including the water charges too.

Hang on a minute I thought I had a natural spring?

prinz

loveisdivine wrote: »

If everyone was already teaching their kids how to life a more sutainable life thats in balance with the planet, then we wouldnt have this problem, so its obviously not currently happening.

Too busy looking forward to the next phone that will replace the one that was released two months ago, that will be replaced by one a couple of months after that, made from raw materials raped from West Africa and assembled by not much better than slave labour in China... and then marketed to fools here as a lifestyle statement.

smash

prinz wrote: »

Too busy looking forward to the next phone that will replace the one that was released two months ago

There's a new model :eek:

Where's my wallet.....