Originally posted by OdBodPolitics, priorities and consumption choices.
What other factors had you in mind?
Take population density for example. Cities are very efficient relative to suburbs and spread out living. But politics and social factors often results in people spreading out (at great cost in terms of resources). In my home town of Livingstone, the city council actively encourages city growth because there is corruption involved in dishing out new plots. In fact, suburban growth globally is largely a result of the obvious fact that grabbing new unused land seems easier and cheaper than building higher and more compactly in city centres. It has a short term savings at a long term cost. In fact almost all building practices fall into this trap because the builder is separate from the person that owns the property after 10 years. It is a fact that building greener, more energy efficient buildings is cost effective over many years. But it doesn't happen because it is the sticker price on building completion that matters.
Another example: In Zambia there is a tradition of burning the bush every dry season. This not only releases large amounts of CO2, but causes untold environmental damage. Yet the practice continues because a) it is tradition, and people do stuff without thinking if it is tradition and b) because it is easy to start a fire (and kind of fun too! ) , so you only need one person in a thousand to think burning stuff is good and it will happen.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI was offering a less evil option. If you want to control population, then do it naturally not by manipulating.
If I understood your earlier post correctly, you support controlling human population growth by denying people basic health care. In my mind that makes you doubly evil.
Originally posted by EladarYes, I agree that denying people healthcare is less evil than nuking them (something you known for advocating).
I was offering a less evil option. If you want to control population, then do it naturally not by manipulating.
But as far as I know, not one single person in this thread actually advocated killing anyone.
That makes you the most evil poster so far in this thread.
Of course if you really want to forcibly control population then the least evil option is birth control.
Originally posted by twhiteheadWar is an ugly thing.
Yes, I agree that denying people healthcare is less evil than nuking them (something you known for advocating).
But as far as I know, not one single person in this thread actually advocated killing anyone.
That makes you the most evil poster so far in this thread.
Of course if you really want to forcibly control population then the least evil option is birth control.
