The Instigator
MillerLife
Pro (for)
Winning
25 Points
The Contender
ChristianM
Con (against)
Losing
8 Points

population control

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
MillerLife
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/20/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 14,724 times Debate No: 7918
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (5)

 

MillerLife

Pro

in my arguments I am not gating my information off of any one source (books, tv, etc.) I am using only the information I have seen from my life
I believe, we should have population control and it needs to be in place before we end up in china's current condition.

If we control growth, we can have a more stable life and more peaceful since we can have the time to design an area for living space, instead of this random clutter.

we can also control our resources more effectively since we would know how much

most people also dont like to be crowded conditons

if I'm wrong improve my logic
ChristianM

Con

First off, I would to thank my opponent, and tell him about the SHIFT key on his keyboard. Press it. It works.
Also, I would like the following questions answered.
1) How do plan to control the population?
2) What is the current population?
3) What is supply and demand?
Debate Round No. 1
MillerLife

Pro

thank you opponent for you questions
nah I don't care for votes or grammar so my shift key can go away I'm just here cause I like to debate and improve my thanking this is also my first debate so kind of just guess what I do.

1) My idea of population control is to fix growth though education. you teach the dangers to our kids about over populating. if you have to many one animal in the wild it clasps. even thow I wont be alive in 200 years I know someone will and ever mistake we make will hurt them down the line. and growth until claps isn't a good idea. but if the situation got bad enough guess who would be forced to step in (like china) the government because the people cant be responsible. I have seen many people have more kids then just two every extra child after two kids is population growth.

2) 272,690,813 July 1, 1999
303,824,640 is the current population
the population looks like its growing to me

3) supply is resources and demand is a person. you can never have more persons then supply are one day it wont work

I ask u how is the current way right??
if I'm wrong improve my logic
ChristianM

Con

First off, I would like to turn to John Steinbeck in his book "The Grapes of Wrath", he states that although population can be controlled, it is imminent either way that the world will become overpopulated. Therefore, there is no point in population control.

Now to my second point, if you look around the world today, there is plenty of land for people to flourish, the only thing that is segregating peoples, is race and patriotism. Chinese people live in China, Americans live in America, and for some strange reason, Smurfs live in Oompa Loompa Land? Yes, I added that in there because John Steinbeck from his earlier book stated that same thing. Because the oompa loompas and the smurfs got along well, they were able to live peacefully TOGETHER. We have 1 empty continent, Russia, despite its somewhat large population, is practically empty, Greenland has a population less of that of England. When we develop more technology, we will be able to live anywhere in the world.

Now for the food shortage, in recent times, the Aeronautics and Space Administration have been reseaching how to farm, on the sea. Companies in India have been farming for more than 50 years and have not experienced a food shortage since WWII. More than 50 years ago.
www.ejfoundation.org/pdf/farming_the_sea.pdf

Therefore, I urge a CON Ballot
Debate Round No. 2
MillerLife

Pro

I am starting to notice that planning works backwards instead of planning for a problem then fixing it before it becomes an issue. the world waits for one to start and then finds a solution.

since this is my first debate and my first time wanting to right something I don't know what I am doing kind of. I am sorry con.
I did kinda mean the whole world's population when I was referring to this but since I'm a us citizen I am more concerned about the U.S. But anyway they go both hand and hand if people will not be responsible until it fails people for ever burden humanity with issue after issue that's why I have so many stupid issues because the people before my generation thought they were right and look where its leading.
what about smurfs you do know smurfs I never met one . and no it doesn't matter if one civilization believes in the same thing crowded places always have more issue then a uncrowned place. this is fact you can see for your self by driving from a high populated area to a low populated area. most people fear what they do not know and I don't know a lot of people around me.

why do people keep posting comments about the U.S. population dwindling I stated the us population now read this: Birth rate:
U.S. population: 307,212,123 (July 2009 est.)
14.18 births/1,000 population (2008 est.)
Death rate: 8.27 deaths/1,000 population (2008 est
so please stop being wrong and admit its growing.

world population: 6,790,062,216 (July 2009 est
Birth rate: 20.18 births/1,000 population (2008 est.)
Death rate: 8.23 deaths/1,000 population (2008 est.)

lets see here what else does over populating an area do lets read :)

The ecosystem's capacity for humans has been exceeded by a factor of ten, according to the logic of Overshoot by William Catton: the amount of stored energy from the sun (including fossil fuels) humans use is the equivalent of ten earths' intake of usable solar energy for photosynthesis.

If one tenth of today's population is what thereby could survive sustainably, that would have to be in a healthy ecosystem. But when the ecosystem has been poisoned, trashed and depleted´┐Że.g., millions of tons of topsoil are lost daily due to modern agricultural practices´┐Żthen the survival rate would only be perhaps one tenth of the one tenth! Intrinsic is the role of petroleum, which is going to "be history" early this century.

http://www.culturechange.org...
I do know the first paragraph off this web page to be true. here's an example what happens if you bring a rabbit to a continent with no predators.
First step: rabbits make many rabbits
second step: rabbits flourish
Third step: the rabbits all starve leaving only a couple left to carry on the rabbit name

population control must be in place at one time or another and beside its really not control its being responsible humans. Just because we as a people know a lot, there is balance to everything, until humanity has the means to support more human life people should not make more.
but no Mr/ or Mrs person who posted a comment killing everyone is not moral. and its not right to tell people they cant have as many kids as they want, but its way better then one day everyone around u is starving and trying to eat your feet. no wait your kids feet since you prolly wont be alive then, or maybe you will.

populatin control must be in place for more reason then just limt of land and over populated areas its a fact if the planet ca't support all of human life it will downsize in a much worse way. (But we can alway rebuild after that)
I urge con is wrong
ChristianM

Con

ChristianM forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MillerLife 8 years ago
MillerLife
thank you cyrus, but yes that was the point i was ging for. i whould hate to be the one alie in one of are dwindling periods. and i thank you for your other comment as well
Posted by Cyrus_the_great 8 years ago
Cyrus_the_great
Also just to point out those dwindling North American population statistics still leave the problem of population control wide open. The earliest recorded humans on earth are dated back 200,000 thousand years ago so I am sure from that point until today the population has dwindled and exploded many times. From what I gathered pro is trying to point out that maybe there needs to be some kind of education instilled in our youth to advert potential problems. To negate the problem would be naive of humans much like all issues we fail to acknowledge.
Posted by Cyrus_the_great 8 years ago
Cyrus_the_great
I see a lot of comments on here that seem to imply if you can conjure up bigger words that your perception of intelligence will be greater. I disagree with this whole heartedly just because someone can't articulate to some superior standard does not mean they can't convey their message. Look at cave paintings for instance they're so simple and primitive yet their stories can be understood by many. Lame analogy I know but I came up with it on a whims; all I am trying to say is that it seems people have this idea that looks are everything. It seems to apply strongly to the fashion world and it seems that intellectual perceptions apply strongly in the intellectual world. Maybe I am just ranting lol sorry, if you feel strongly about something just ignore the negative comments. Bettering yourself isn't a bad thing though so use the criticism to your advantage.
Posted by MillerLife 8 years ago
MillerLife
oh well sry i thought u were makeing fun of me. i havent really wrote anythang in three yrs im tryin to rember how so be pacient pls
Posted by alto2osu 8 years ago
alto2osu
You miss the point entirely, but whatever you like. And, actually, I had to read that a few times to understand your point.
Posted by MillerLife 8 years ago
MillerLife
ay if u cant read it how do u know what its about?? and grammer to the fullist why use a big word when theres a smaler one thats out there that anyone can understand. god why does eveyone need to be so wankery <-- Look made up word and u know what it means amazeing
Posted by MillerLife 8 years ago
MillerLife
one mr smart person its going up read the numbers and if u thank im stupid go somewhere i can insult about anythang i want i just know current way of life is wrong and ned to be fixed its not fun and if u want to rue that go for it like i said i dont care to win im learning even thow i cant wright i can read but seen how
Posted by alto2osu 8 years ago
alto2osu
PS- on the grammar issues. Dude, if we can't read your debate, then we can't properly argue your debate. Hence, any educational benefit this website has for you will be eliminated. Not only that, but it's your language, man! Be proud and utilize it to its fullest extent. On this website, typing is your only mode of communication, and people will take you more seriously and have worthwhile debates with you if you don't come off dumber than you probably are.
Posted by alto2osu 8 years ago
alto2osu
"Does PRO not realize that North American populations are dwindling? That means - going down?!?! Secondly, does PRO not realize the extreme ETHICAL issues posed by population control?"

This is a good point to make, as the Pro appears to be citing US population stats, which is a problem. First world countries, statistically, are seeing reductions in birth rates for a number of development-related reasons. If the Pro had prefaced this debate as being about the ENTIRE world, this would be a different debate entirely, as third world countries are experiencing population explosions, not to mention the problems with population in West and East Asia (I won't go so far as to call India or China third world).

However, the Pro doesn't present a case is inherently unethical. Education, rather than mass sterilization or extermination, is pretty much legit. It isn't even as contentious as giving condoms overpopulated nations. Had Pro said "kill them all!," there might be ethical issues.
Posted by RoyLatham 8 years ago
RoyLatham
Pro like to debate, but has no idea what either a resolution or a shift key is. That poses problems.

Anyway, here is some relevant population trivia. Japan is roughly the size of California and has 150 million people, half the United States. However, only about 4.5% of the area is occupied by cities, industry, highways and the rest. About 25% is agriculture, and the rest is largely uninhabited mountains. They are about 60% self-sufficient in food and have a large export surplus. Scaling that up to the US, I would guess that the US could sustain a couple billion people. That's not likely to happen.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by DrumBum1234 8 years ago
DrumBum1234
MillerLifeChristianMTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by The_Booner 8 years ago
The_Booner
MillerLifeChristianMTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by pewpewpew 8 years ago
pewpewpew
MillerLifeChristianMTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by fresnoinvasion 8 years ago
fresnoinvasion
MillerLifeChristianMTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by MillerLife 8 years ago
MillerLife
MillerLifeChristianMTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41