Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Population Approaching 7 Billion

LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:17:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.

Capitalists out of one side of their mouth: That's not Capitalism's fault! This isn't truly a Capitalistic society!

Out of the other-side: You can thank Capitalism for that.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:20:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:17:25 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.

Capitalists out of one side of their mouth: That's not Capitalism's fault! This isn't truly a Capitalistic society!

Out of the other-side: You can thank Capitalism for that.

Well, that's because some things clearly aren't capitalism's fault, and some things clearly are because of capitalism. War, for example, is purely a government action. Advances in food production, for example, are clearly because of capitalism, because these advances in food production only happened in countries with free markets in farming. Countries that tried to collectivize farming saw famines, and countries that let the free market handle it saw huge advances in productivity, allowing population growth.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:24:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:20:37 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:17:25 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.

Capitalists out of one side of their mouth: That's not Capitalism's fault! This isn't truly a Capitalistic society!

Out of the other-side: You can thank Capitalism for that.

Well, that's because some things clearly aren't capitalism's fault, and some things clearly are because of capitalism. War, for example, is purely a government action. Advances in food production, for example, are clearly because of capitalism, because these advances in food production only happened in countries with free markets in farming. Countries that tried to collectivize farming saw famines, and countries that let the free market handle it saw huge advances in productivity, allowing population growth.

You tend to have a confusion between an industry coming under government control and an industry actually being collectivized. Can you name one that has actually been collectivized? I can, and it sure wasn't a flop.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:27:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:24:17 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:20:37 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:17:25 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.

Capitalists out of one side of their mouth: That's not Capitalism's fault! This isn't truly a Capitalistic society!

Out of the other-side: You can thank Capitalism for that.

Well, that's because some things clearly aren't capitalism's fault, and some things clearly are because of capitalism. War, for example, is purely a government action. Advances in food production, for example, are clearly because of capitalism, because these advances in food production only happened in countries with free markets in farming. Countries that tried to collectivize farming saw famines, and countries that let the free market handle it saw huge advances in productivity, allowing population growth.

You tend to have a confusion between an industry coming under government control and an industry actually being collectivized. Can you name one that has actually been collectivized? I can, and it sure wasn't a flop.

Since I don't know what definition of 'collectivized' you're using, I cannot name one. Please, elaborate. Whatever it is, that doesn't refute my point that free markets are responsible for the huge amount of food we're able to produce.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:29:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:27:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Also, what makes you so sure 7 Billion people is such a good thing?

It isn't necessarily a good thing. But it's the result of disease and starvation killing less people. Since I consider disease and starvation bad things, I consider less of them a good thing.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:29:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:27:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Also, what makes you so sure 7 Billion people is such a good thing?
It can be good and it can be bad. If we have many wars, more people will die. If we have much peace and prosperity, people will live longer, happier, and we will achieve high successes in science, technology, and much else with more brains and ideas.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:32:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:27:19 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:24:17 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:20:37 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:17:25 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.

Capitalists out of one side of their mouth: That's not Capitalism's fault! This isn't truly a Capitalistic society!

Out of the other-side: You can thank Capitalism for that.

Well, that's because some things clearly aren't capitalism's fault, and some things clearly are because of capitalism. War, for example, is purely a government action. Advances in food production, for example, are clearly because of capitalism, because these advances in food production only happened in countries with free markets in farming. Countries that tried to collectivize farming saw famines, and countries that let the free market handle it saw huge advances in productivity, allowing population growth.

You tend to have a confusion between an industry coming under government control and an industry actually being collectivized. Can you name one that has actually been collectivized? I can, and it sure wasn't a flop.

Since I don't know what definition of 'collectivized' you're using, I cannot name one. Please, elaborate. Whatever it is, that doesn't refute my point that free markets are responsible for the huge amount of food we're able to produce.

I will indirectly answer your question by pointing out that I don't oppose free-markets, I oppose Capitalism.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:33:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:29:28 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:27:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Also, what makes you so sure 7 Billion people is such a good thing?

It isn't necessarily a good thing. But it's the result of disease and starvation killing less people. Since I consider disease and starvation bad things, I consider less of them a good thing.

Hypothetically, if it were a very bad thing, what would Capitalism do about it?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:34:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:32:16 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:27:19 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:24:17 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:20:37 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:17:25 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.

Capitalists out of one side of their mouth: That's not Capitalism's fault! This isn't truly a Capitalistic society!

Out of the other-side: You can thank Capitalism for that.

Well, that's because some things clearly aren't capitalism's fault, and some things clearly are because of capitalism. War, for example, is purely a government action. Advances in food production, for example, are clearly because of capitalism, because these advances in food production only happened in countries with free markets in farming. Countries that tried to collectivize farming saw famines, and countries that let the free market handle it saw huge advances in productivity, allowing population growth.

You tend to have a confusion between an industry coming under government control and an industry actually being collectivized. Can you name one that has actually been collectivized? I can, and it sure wasn't a flop.

Since I don't know what definition of 'collectivized' you're using, I cannot name one. Please, elaborate. Whatever it is, that doesn't refute my point that free markets are responsible for the huge amount of food we're able to produce.

I will indirectly answer your question by pointing out that I don't oppose free-markets, I oppose Capitalism.

That really is more of non-answer than an indirect answer. And capitalism is just what happens in a free market--unless you mean that you support a free market of imaginary people that don't act at all like how real human beings act.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:35:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:33:27 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:29:28 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:27:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Also, what makes you so sure 7 Billion people is such a good thing?

It isn't necessarily a good thing. But it's the result of disease and starvation killing less people. Since I consider disease and starvation bad things, I consider less of them a good thing.

Hypothetically, if it were a very bad thing, what would Capitalism do about it?

That's impossible to answer without knowing what you mean by a "very bad thing." What specific negative effects are you referring to?
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:35:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Go to space *fixed*
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:44:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:34:10 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:32:16 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:27:19 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:24:17 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:20:37 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:17:25 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:12:53 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
You can thank capitalism for that. The vast majority of people today couldn't be alive if it weren't for the advances in food production and medicine that capitalism made possible.

Capitalists out of one side of their mouth: That's not Capitalism's fault! This isn't truly a Capitalistic society!

Out of the other-side: You can thank Capitalism for that.

Well, that's because some things clearly aren't capitalism's fault, and some things clearly are because of capitalism. War, for example, is purely a government action. Advances in food production, for example, are clearly because of capitalism, because these advances in food production only happened in countries with free markets in farming. Countries that tried to collectivize farming saw famines, and countries that let the free market handle it saw huge advances in productivity, allowing population growth.

You tend to have a confusion between an industry coming under government control and an industry actually being collectivized. Can you name one that has actually been collectivized? I can, and it sure wasn't a flop.

Since I don't know what definition of 'collectivized' you're using, I cannot name one. Please, elaborate. Whatever it is, that doesn't refute my point that free markets are responsible for the huge amount of food we're able to produce.

I will indirectly answer your question by pointing out that I don't oppose free-markets, I oppose Capitalism.

That really is more of non-answer than an indirect answer. And capitalism is just what happens in a free market--unless you mean that you support a free market of imaginary people that don't act at all like how real human beings act.

The existence of Capitalism has always been made assured by the absence of a free-market. It would be unlikely that the masses would put up with it if it weren't for the state forcing them to. Capitalism is a system where the authority in control of industry is centralized. In a free-market decentralization would follow. There's a reason why the vast majority of Anarchists have historically been Anti-Capitalist.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 10:49:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:44:21 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:34:10 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:32:16 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I will indirectly answer your question by pointing out that I don't oppose free-markets, I oppose Capitalism.

That really is more of non-answer than an indirect answer. And capitalism is just what happens in a free market--unless you mean that you support a free market of imaginary people that don't act at all like how real human beings act.

The existence of Capitalism has always been made assured by the absence of a free-market. It would be unlikely that the masses would put up with it if it weren't for the state forcing them to. Capitalism is a system where the authority in control of industry is centralized. In a free-market decentralization would follow. There's a reason why the vast majority of Anarchists have historically been Anti-Capitalist.

No. That's corporatism, or state-capitalism. Capitalism is private property rights, and doesn't imply either centralized or decentralized control of industry. Without government, most industries would probably be significantly more decentralized, but there would still be large businesses.

And just to be clear, what exactly would your "free-market" look like?
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 11:12:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:49:15 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:44:21 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:34:10 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:32:16 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I will indirectly answer your question by pointing out that I don't oppose free-markets, I oppose Capitalism.

That really is more of non-answer than an indirect answer. And capitalism is just what happens in a free market--unless you mean that you support a free market of imaginary people that don't act at all like how real human beings act.

The existence of Capitalism has always been made assured by the absence of a free-market. It would be unlikely that the masses would put up with it if it weren't for the state forcing them to. Capitalism is a system where the authority in control of industry is centralized. In a free-market decentralization would follow. There's a reason why the vast majority of Anarchists have historically been Anti-Capitalist.

No. That's corporatism, or state-capitalism. Capitalism is private property rights, and doesn't imply either centralized or decentralized control of industry. Without government, most industries would probably be significantly more decentralized, but there would still be large businesses.

And just to be clear, what exactly would your "free-market" look like?

First of all, property in a concrete form doesn't exist without the state. It would be open to interpretation for no one is forced to obey a property rule. The Capitalist form of property rights would most likely not prosper in a free-market. Different property models would be up for "competition", if you will. I , and most Anarchists, don't think the Capitalist model would prosper well seeing as how it centralizes power in industry. If we are to look at a business like it's own political system, which it is, it would be apparent that Capitalism is the dictatorship model, with an un-elected supreme leader to command the will of the workers or else un-employment(instead of prison).

Believe it or not, I'm not a Collectivist. I just favor the Collectivist model to the Capitalist one, that is to say, Democracy to a Dictatorship. I favor a Libertarian model which gives complete individual freedom within the working environment.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 11:40:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 11:13:37 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 11:08:34 PM, wjmelements wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
What stops it?

Natural instinct. The rising costs of food. Birth control.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2010 9:59:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Go to space . . . you can create colonies upon other worlds in order to help solve the large population on earth issue . . . http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.nutri.com... http://www.exampleessays.com... http://www.booksaboutthefuture.com... http://spacecolonization.wikia.com...
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
wamba
Posts: 688
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2010 10:01:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 11:40:52 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 12/17/2010 11:13:37 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 11:08:34 PM, wjmelements wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
What stops it?

Natural instinct. The rising costs of food. Birth control.

Nothing because unlike other species we have intelligence that is constantly enlarging our ceiling for overpopulation.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2010 12:29:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 10:33:27 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:29:28 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 12/17/2010 10:27:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Also, what makes you so sure 7 Billion people is such a good thing?

It isn't necessarily a good thing. But it's the result of disease and starvation killing less people. Since I consider disease and starvation bad things, I consider less of them a good thing.

Hypothetically, if it were a very bad thing, what would Capitalism do about it?

As incomes rise, people reproduce less. Even semi-capitalism is already doing it. It's the third world backwaters with all their history of labor laws that essentially outlaw employment that are pumping out the babies.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2010 12:32:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I explain here why industrialized nations are actually facing a de-population problem: http://www.debate.org...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2010 10:30:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/18/2010 12:32:39 PM, bluesteel wrote:
I explain here why industrialized nations are actually facing a de-population problem: http://www.debate.org...

Greece, Italy, and Spain have this problem the worst, last I checked.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2010 11:37:08 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/20/2010 10:30:30 AM, wjmelements wrote:
At 12/18/2010 12:32:39 PM, bluesteel wrote:
I explain here why industrialized nations are actually facing a de-population problem: http://www.debate.org...

Greece, Italy, and Spain have this problem the worst, last I checked.

Most of the world population does not live in the industrialized and modern world . . . plus depopulation is only occurring due to more focus upon life than social interactions with others . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2010 12:41:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/20/2010 11:37:08 AM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 12/20/2010 10:30:30 AM, wjmelements wrote:
At 12/18/2010 12:32:39 PM, bluesteel wrote:
I explain here why industrialized nations are actually facing a de-population problem: http://www.debate.org...

Greece, Italy, and Spain have this problem the worst, last I checked.

Most of the world population does not live in the industrialized and modern world . . . plus depopulation is only occurring due to more focus upon life than social interactions with others . . .

But overpopulation is only a global problem if it occurs in industrialized countries because of the vast amount of resources they use per person.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)