Italy to ban plastic bags

[LMNO]

Are you seriously disputing that we consume a lot more per capita than Chinese people,Indian people or Africans?  I can source if I have to, but I know there's no way you're going to read the sources.

Honestly, I'm more curious how you'd accurately measure something like this, considering the scant amount of information available on some of the societies in question.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Yeah.

I can get behind that.  Population control = necessary.  Population reduction = Horrorfun involving removing humans from the planet en masse.

Negative population growth is a potential solution, but it would have to be a very slow and controlled decline because currently every economy on Earth is not only dependent on growth, but based on the assumption of growth.

The only reason the US population is currently growing is because of immigration. I don't think Tea Partiers understand what would happen to our economy if we ended immigration. But then, there's a lot they don't understand.

DEY'RE TAKIN' MAH JARB!
\

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Lowering the population in underpopulated areas such as Canada and the United States will have zero impact on the overpopulation problem.  China, India, and parts of Africa are hopelessly fucked, due to deforestation, poor farming techniques, and the desertification that results from the aforementioned bad practices.

Lowering the population of Montana won't do SHIT to solve that issue.  The notion that it will is the same sort of thinking that gave us the concept of "Green Technology", useless sops to be thrown at a species-threatening issue.

Americans consume far more, per capita, than Indians, Africans or Chinese.  If we were actually producing locally and not part of a globally interconnected economy then I'd agree with you, but since we are actually a globally interconnected economy every extra American is about as bad as 15 extra Africans.

Um, double check your info about the Chinese. They have been making great strides recently.

That's part of why I wasn't specific. I don't think we consume as much as 15 Chinese any more, I know we don't consume as much as 15 average Indians, I just know we consume a lot more than they do.  The Africans are still living in shitholes so I figured 15 to 1 was a safe ratio when it came to them even if the info is a bit old.

So you made your figures up, just like every other argument you take part in.

You fucking fraud.

Are you seriously disputing that we consume a lot more per capita than Chinese people,Indian people or Africans?  I can source if I have to, but I know there's no way you're going to read the sources.

the question is not whether we consume more than they consume, but whether we consume more than we produce.

Most years, we export more food than we import.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Are you seriously disputing that we consume a lot more per capita than Chinese people,Indian people or Africans?  I can source if I have to, but I know there's no way you're going to read the sources.

Honestly, I'm more curious how you'd accurately measure something like this, considering the scant amount of information available on some of the societies in question.

http://babylonhoruvsass.com

[BabylonHoruv]

From this source

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Americas/United-States-of-America-AGRICULTURE.html

There have been dramatic improvements in agricultural technology in the United States. Improvements include increased use of computers, scientific soil and crop analysis, and more sophisticated machinery. Genetic engineering of seeds has also increased crop yields but created controversy over the safety of genetically altered products. There has subsequently been a decrease in soil erosion caused by over-farming and an overall decline in the use of pesticides and fertilizers. However, the pesticides used are much more powerful and lethal than earlier chemicals. About two-thirds of the states have had deep reductions in agriculture. Agriculture has declined most significantly in the New England states and New Jersey. In the West and southern plains, some states have had minor declines, while others have had small increases. The only regions of the nation that have seen major expansion of agriculture have been the middle-Atlantic area and the Pacific Northwest. The states with the largest increases in output were Arkansas, Washington, Delaware, Florida, and Georgia.

There has been a decline means that it is still occurring, albeit at a reduced rate.  

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Are you seriously disputing that we consume a lot more per capita than Chinese people,Indian people or Africans?  I can source if I have to, but I know there's no way you're going to read the sources.

Honestly, I'm more curious how you'd accurately measure something like this, considering the scant amount of information available on some of the societies in question.

Which Africans are we talking about? There's plenty of data on some countries.

[Cramulus]

Human population growth rate in percent, with the variables of births, deaths, immigration, and emigration - 2006


from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation#Food

The amounts of natural resources in this context are not necessarily fixed, and their distribution is not necessarily a zero-sum game. For example, due to the Green Revolution and the fact that more and more land is appropriated each year from wild lands for agricultural purposes, the worldwide production of food had steadily increased up until 1995. World food production per person was considerably higher in 2005 than 1961.[91]

As world population doubled from 3 billion to 6 billion, daily Calorie consumption in poor countries increased from 1,932 to 2,650, and the percentage of people in those countries who were malnourished fell from 45% to 18%. This suggests that Third World poverty and famine are caused by underdevelopment, not overpopulation.[92] However, others question these statistics.[93] From 1950 to 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the world, grain production increased by over 250%.[94] The world population has grown by about four billion since the beginning of the Green Revolution and most believe that, without the Revolution, there would be greater famine and malnutrition than the UN presently documents.[30][95]

The number of people who are overweight has surpassed the number who are undernourished. In a 2006 news story, MSNBC reported, "There are an estimated 800 million undernourished people and more than a billion considered overweight worldwide." The U.S. has one of the highest rates of obesity in the world.[96]


The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations states in its report The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2006, that while the number of undernourished people in the developing countries has declined by about three million, a smaller proportion of the populations of developing countries is undernourished today than in 1990–92: 17% against 20%. Furthermore, FAO's projections suggest that the proportion of hungry people in developing countries could be halved from 1990-92 levels to 10% by 2015. The FAO also states "We have emphasized first and foremost that reducing hunger is no longer a question of means in the hands of the global community. The world is richer today than it was ten years ago. There is more food available and still more could be produced without excessive upward pressure on prices. The knowledge and resources to reduce hunger are there. What is lacking is sufficient political will to mobilize those resources to the benefit of the hungry."

Is there an overpopulation problem now? No. Will there be in the future? Maybe. But I think a lot of the ills we are worrying about are actually economic, agricultural, or industrial problems which are exacerbated by a high population.There is no shortage of food - we just have trouble getting it into everybody's mouths. If we could fix things like absurd wealth inequality we would have starvation beat too.

[Adios]

From this source

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Americas/United-States-of-America-AGRICULTURE.html

There have been dramatic improvements in agricultural technology in the United States. Improvements include increased use of computers, scientific soil and crop analysis, and more sophisticated machinery. Genetic engineering of seeds has also increased crop yields but created controversy over the safety of genetically altered products. There has subsequently been a decrease in soil erosion caused by over-farming and an overall decline in the use of pesticides and fertilizers. However, the pesticides used are much more powerful and lethal than earlier chemicals. About two-thirds of the states have had deep reductions in agriculture. Agriculture has declined most significantly in the New England states and New Jersey. In the West and southern plains, some states have had minor declines, while others have had small increases. The only regions of the nation that have seen major expansion of agriculture have been the middle-Atlantic area and the Pacific Northwest. The states with the largest increases in output were Arkansas, Washington, Delaware, Florida, and Georgia.

There has been a decline means that it is still occurring, albeit at a reduced rate.  

From 2000? FFS.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There has subsequently been a decrease in soil erosion caused by over-farming and an overall decline in the use of pesticides and fertilizers.

A decrease from what level?  How bad was it?

I mean, I know Kansas and Nebraska are both deserts now, but besides that.  

But according to that link, your argument is that we're bad people because we're constantly improving our farming techniques, or bad because we aren't utterly perfect?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

From this source

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Americas/United-States-of-America-AGRICULTURE.html

There have been dramatic improvements in agricultural technology in the United States. Improvements include increased use of computers, scientific soil and crop analysis, and more sophisticated machinery. Genetic engineering of seeds has also increased crop yields but created controversy over the safety of genetically altered products. There has subsequently been a decrease in soil erosion caused by over-farming and an overall decline in the use of pesticides and fertilizers. However, the pesticides used are much more powerful and lethal than earlier chemicals. About two-thirds of the states have had deep reductions in agriculture. Agriculture has declined most significantly in the New England states and New Jersey. In the West and southern plains, some states have had minor declines, while others have had small increases. The only regions of the nation that have seen major expansion of agriculture have been the middle-Atlantic area and the Pacific Northwest. The states with the largest increases in output were Arkansas, Washington, Delaware, Florida, and Georgia.

There has been a decline means that it is still occurring, albeit at a reduced rate.  

From 2000? FFS.

Yeah, I think we should go back to 1800 for proof that we currently use bad farming techniques.

[LMNO]

Are you seriously disputing that we consume a lot more per capita than Chinese people,Indian people or Africans?  I can source if I have to, but I know there's no way you're going to read the sources.

Honestly, I'm more curious how you'd accurately measure something like this, considering the scant amount of information available on some of the societies in question.

Which Africans are we talking about? There's plenty of data on some countries.

He said "Africans".  I can only assume he meant "all".

Because, you know, they all look alike.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

From this source

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Americas/United-States-of-America-AGRICULTURE.html

There have been dramatic improvements in agricultural technology in the United States. Improvements include increased use of computers, scientific soil and crop analysis, and more sophisticated machinery. Genetic engineering of seeds has also increased crop yields but created controversy over the safety of genetically altered products. There has subsequently been a decrease in soil erosion caused by over-farming and an overall decline in the use of pesticides and fertilizers. However, the pesticides used are much more powerful and lethal than earlier chemicals. About two-thirds of the states have had deep reductions in agriculture. Agriculture has declined most significantly in the New England states and New Jersey. In the West and southern plains, some states have had minor declines, while others have had small increases. The only regions of the nation that have seen major expansion of agriculture have been the middle-Atlantic area and the Pacific Northwest. The states with the largest increases in output were Arkansas, Washington, Delaware, Florida, and Georgia.

There has been a decline means that it is still occurring, albeit at a reduced rate.  

Did you read what you just quoted? It says "About two-thirds of the states have had deep reductions in agriculture." Do you understand what those words mean? 

Do you know about farming subsidies? Do you understand the reasons they were introduced?

Yes, in many areas US farms still engage in unsustainable farming practices. However, that is very very different from overfarming.

Do you know what "overfarming" means?

[Adios]

From this source

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Americas/United-States-of-America-AGRICULTURE.html

There have been dramatic improvements in agricultural technology in the United States. Improvements include increased use of computers, scientific soil and crop analysis, and more sophisticated machinery. Genetic engineering of seeds has also increased crop yields but created controversy over the safety of genetically altered products. There has subsequently been a decrease in soil erosion caused by over-farming and an overall decline in the use of pesticides and fertilizers. However, the pesticides used are much more powerful and lethal than earlier chemicals. About two-thirds of the states have had deep reductions in agriculture. Agriculture has declined most significantly in the New England states and New Jersey. In the West and southern plains, some states have had minor declines, while others have had small increases. The only regions of the nation that have seen major expansion of agriculture have been the middle-Atlantic area and the Pacific Northwest. The states with the largest increases in output were Arkansas, Washington, Delaware, Florida, and Georgia.

There has been a decline means that it is still occurring, albeit at a reduced rate.  

From 2000? FFS.

Yeah, I think we should go back to 1800 for proof that we currently use bad farming techniques.

I think he should come here and try that shit on the K-State campus. Agricultural colleges don't like made up bullshit about this kind of thing.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Are you seriously disputing that we consume a lot more per capita than Chinese people,Indian people or Africans?  I can source if I have to, but I know there's no way you're going to read the sources.

Honestly, I'm more curious how you'd accurately measure something like this, considering the scant amount of information available on some of the societies in question.

Which Africans are we talking about? There's plenty of data on some countries.

He said "Africans".  I can only assume he meant "all".

Because, you know, they all look alike.

[BabylonHoruv]

There has subsequently been a decrease in soil erosion caused by over-farming and an overall decline in the use of pesticides and fertilizers.

A decrease from what level?  How bad was it?

I mean, I know Kansas and Nebraska are both deserts now, but besides that.  

But according to that link, your argument is that we're bad people because we're constantly improving our farming techniques, or bad because we aren't utterly perfect?

My arguement was that we are overfarming.  Not that we are bad people. Good for us for improving, unfortunately we improved with some very toxic pesticides and GM crops,  both of which are dangerous in ways that we don't even fully understand (especcially the GM crops)  the ideal solution would be lower intensity farming, but that is not possible while feeding a high population.