In a Perfect world...

[Guest EricMM]

I'm inspired by the socialism thread.

 

I'd like people to list things that they think/know would be better for all mankind but will never ever happen. I'll go first.

 

I think it was proven somewhere that if all mankind became vegetarian we could feed the whole world, but we give massive amount of crops to cows, pigs, and chickens.

 

To save the world from starvation, we SHOULD ALL go vegetarian. Period. The population is going to double by what, 2050? Wheres the food gonna come from. It can't come from cows because that's inefficent

 

Note I'm not vegetarian. But if everyone started tomorrow, I wouldn't mind because it's really the best solution to world hunger. Plus I LIKE brocolli, peanuts, and such.

[Guest godthedog]

making everyone a vegetarian is not the answer to overpopulation, the answer is education. ballooning population is only a problem in countries that lack adequate educational resources. advanced western countries have very little to no population growth (with some countries even having negative population growth). so, if we can educate these people, instead of ignoring them or exploiting them, then the problem tends to take care of itself.

[Guest DrTom]

"To save the world from starvation, we SHOULD ALL go vegetarian. Period."

 

Sorry, I refuse to eat broccoli and beans so people elsewhere in the world can have their warlords withhold bags of grain from them. Starvation is a shame, but it's really not our job to solve the world's problems.

[Guest LesnarLunatic]

I'm not buying any of that hype about the world being doomed by 2050 due to overpopulation. Because, I know it's alot of bunk. I also figure that with disease and war, the population should be kept under more control.

 

What should the US do? encourage other countries to get off their asses and solve their problems themselves. America isn't the country overpopulating the world, talk to the Bangladeshs, Indias, Chinas and Indonesias of the world. They're the ones who are mating like mad.

 

I can't reasonably think of sending out any more foreign aid while the current problems with the economy and so all that go on. Obviously increasing spending and lowering taxes will not work, so spending has to go down. Not go down the crapper trying to get Indians to wear condoms.

 

at least the US shouldn't mimic Japan and blame the whales.

[Guest NoCalMike]

As soon as the first Nuke is dropped, then you can be assured it will be followed with plenty of retaliation, and then you can say goodbye to the population problem

[Guest EricMM]

Ok ok but what about my original question?

 

Do any of you know of things that are better than the way things are now, but it seems noone will ever do it?

 

And I didn't mean to say I advocated it as much as it's kind of logical that eating plants is more efficent you know?

[Guest TJH]

Do you know the continent with the highest birthrate in the world? Africa.

Maybe if they didn't have so many kids they could feed them all....

[Guest MrRant]

Well.. if everyone respected other's opinions the world would be better. But that will never happen.

[Guest Frank Zappa Mask]

Or if people weren't so afraid and paranoid of other people. Love your brothers and sisters. Hug a tree, or an electric guitar.......

[Guest LooseCannon]

The flaw in your Malthusian doomspeak, is that it ignores technological progress that makes food production more efficient in time, effort, and use of resources.

 

It also overlooks the fact that were the human population to exceed the planet's capacity for nourishment, those with capital would continue to consume as much food as they wanted possibly at higher prices for awhile. Those without would starve to death and an equilibrium would be reached.

 

It's somewhat Darwinian I'll agree, and perhaps you'd argue that measurements of wealth are an inappropriate characteristic when it comes to the weeding out of our species. But if you look at wealth as an indicator of an individual's contribution to society (and it often is. People get paid more for doing more valuable work for the most part, though, admittedly, there are also the testate privileged), it's not really unreasonable. Nature ensures the survival of the fittest through the allocation of resources when there are not enough resources for everybody's continued survival. And there's no sense in handwringing over how those resources are allocated.

 

And I'll be damned if I'm going to give up filet mignon, just so that some Tutu baby 50 years from now can reach adulthood.

 

But to the original question. I think that the world would be a much better place if there were unrestrained free trade on a global scale as well globally agreed upon labor standards at least as good as if not better than the U.S.'s labor standards. I also think the world would be better if corporations weren't so big and there was more competition in the marketplace, fewer chains, and more local stores.

[Guest redbaron51]

I'd say we just nuke China and be over with ...they can afford to lose 500 million

 

 

in serious terms there has to be one religion and one set of rules to be such a perfect place, if there isn't then their would be always conflict

[Guest Some Guy]

I'm not buying any of that hype about the world being doomed by 2050 due to overpopulation. Because, I know it's alot of bunk. I also figure that with disease and war, the population should be kept under more control.

 

What should the US do? encourage other countries to get off their asses and solve their problems themselves. America isn't the country overpopulating the world, talk to the Bangladeshs, Indias, Chinas and Indonesias of the world. They're the ones who are mating like mad.

 

I can't reasonably think of sending out any more foreign aid while the current problems with the economy and so all that go on. Obviously increasing spending and lowering taxes will not work, so spending has to go down. Not go down the crapper trying to get Indians to wear condoms.

 

at least the US shouldn't mimic Japan and blame the whales.

Whoa, I agree with you.

The population of the world has doubled countless times and we're still here.

 

Decrease spending and taxes and you'll have more jobs open up. If teh governmetn didn't tax businesses so much they would have more money to create jobs, creating jobs generally equals more profit for the company. Also if teh middle and upper classes didn't get fucked so bad by teh Gov'y then they woudl be able to spend and put more money into the economy, rather than the Gov't taking it and wasting it for the most part.

 

I think the voucher system is a good way to promote education, I don't really like that it also can promote religion, but those kids need to learn and their overfunded, underproducing public schools aren't the answer. competition is. If teh private schools can get mor popular and pose a threat to the public ones then the public schools will get better or get out. Plus there would be more secular private schools opening if there were a demand.

 

Making everyone in the world a vegetarian would not work. First off you'd have massive under-nurishment, not everyone can afford the vitimans necessary for suport a vegatarian diet and their just aren't enough crops. If we all went vegetarian, there would be 6 billion people who would need to eat massive ammounts of vegetables, we'd run out.

 

I'm not a religious person but i do beleive that "mother nature" has a way of taking care of it's own problems. Africa is becoming very overpopulated, so AIDs, disease and starvation increase. It seems to me that if they stoped reproduciong at such a high rate, tehn disease would go down, AIDs would stop spreading so fast, and food would be more plentiful.

 

In order to really improve the world we would need true Democracies in in these countries run by corrupt warlords and religious zealots.

 

Some one said that if everyone had teh same relirion then tah world would be better, I say if their were no religion then the world would be better. Most of the world's fighting is over religion, Israel/Palestine, India/Pakistan, teh Balkins, etc.. if we got rid of all that shit, in theory there would be less to fight over.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I hate religion, but the voucher system wouldn't promote it. If parents want to send their kids to religious schools they'll give their kids religious instruction anyway. Vouchers will just allow the kids to get a better education at the same time.

[Guest Some Guy]

I said it can promote religion. Meaning that a non-Christian might feel that best way to educate their children is in a Christian school where the children would need to take Christain religous classes. But is tehy don't have a problem with doing that then I don't either, it's really not my business.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

True, but if they're getting non-Christian beliefs from their parents, I can't see the kids suddenly converting on the strength of a couple of classes. I mean you're not a socialist, right? <g>

[Guest Some Guy]

True, but the former is possible, while the latter is not. Kids are young and impressionable, they may at teh very least get confused. "Mommy why do the kids at school call me a 'Christ Killer'?" or whatever.

[Guest dreamer420]

the way i look at it is the world has gone to shit so badly that it isn't even worth fixing anymore. as sad as that is there is lot of truth to that. there are too many stupid people out there with way too much power and eventually it's all going down anyway.

[Guest EricMM]

And I'll be damned if I'm going to give up filet mignon, just so that some Tutu baby 50 years from now can reach adulthood.

And you don't feel the LEAST bit like a complete and utter asshole for saying that? Really? Think of what you're saying!

 

Making everyone in the world a vegetarian would not work. First off you'd have massive under-nurishment, not everyone can afford the vitimans necessary for suport a vegatarian diet and their just aren't enough crops. If we all went vegetarian, there would be 6 billion people who would need to eat massive ammounts of vegetables, we'd run out.

1) People have been being vegetarians longer than Centrum has been around. There is plenty of nuitrients from plants. All the vitamins, proteins, etc. can be found in plants, plus I think milk is okay too. Vitamins aren't necessary. And neither is ANY meat technically.

2) If we feed animals, we get 1/10th of the caloric amount we feed them in their meat. 1/10th! So if we ate that food, we would get 10/10ths. Many many many farms in America and elsewhere don't provide food for humans they provide food for animals. If these farms were feeding humans there would be more food not less food...

3) We'd run out of vegis but not cows? How fast do you think you can make new vegitables vs. new cows?

 

Its just a biological fact that vegetarianism is more efficent. But christ if cows don't taste good. mmm

[Guest GenerationNever]

Speaking of improvements being made to our world, who supports and who doesn't support the death penalty?

[Guest EricMM]

I don't. There's too much beaurocracy. I don't support the way it's worked now. Maybe if it was faster?

 

I just don't like our entire system of justice in that it doesn't actually prevent any crime... But I don't know how to do that.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"Do you know the continent with the highest birthrate in the world? Africa.

Maybe if they didn't have so many kids they could feed them all.... "

 

Yeah, but AIDS is killing them all off.

 

As for the Death Penalty, I'm against it because I'd rather torture the convicted instead of giving them free housing and health care.

[Guest SupaTaft]

I take this approach to life in general.

 

Be nice to me, and I will be nice to you unless I don't like you, in which case I will kill you.

 

It works for me, and I believe that the world should go back to tribal warfare. One group doesn't like another group so they kill them and take their land. Its great.

 

Death penalty all the way. You kill a pregnant mother and rape her, take out the fetus, and rape it, then you deserve to die. The sick fucks in prison deserve to die, because they can no longer help the populous as a hole. The people that kill people and don't get caught are helping by thinning out the population.

[Guest EricMM]

But there's a difference between the penalty of death and the American Death Penalty. One is the killing of convicted criminals. the other takes fooooooooooorrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeevvvvvvvvveeeeeeerrrrr.

Guess which one is which?

 

I think instead of killing rapists they should be like castrated and then forced to work in backbreaking labor jobs. They don't deserve death.

 

Instead today they spend time in prisons which are supposed to be for the um rehabilitatable (word?) and take millions of taxpayer dollars for specialized death penalty hearings because of the implication of killing someone and the risk of killing even one innocent.

 

Because wouldn't that suck, killing an innocent?

[Guest LooseCannon]

And I'll be damned if I'm going to give up filet mignon, just so that some Tutu baby 50 years from now can reach adulthood.

And you don't feel the LEAST bit like a complete and utter asshole for saying that? Really? Think of what you're saying!

 

[

filet mignon vs. theoretical Tutu baby fifty years from now.

 

You can do your own cost-benefit analysis.

 

Kindly allow me to do mine.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

"Tutu?" Would this be the long-lost African tribe with a predilection for ballet?

[Guest LooseCannon]

It's actually a disparaging contraction of Tui Tongas. Just something I picked up.

 

 

EDIT: Grammar

[Guest KoR Fungus]

<<<<<<And I'll be damned if I'm going to give up filet mignon, just so that some Tutu baby 50 years from now can reach adulthood.>>>>>>

 

<<<And you don't feel the LEAST bit like a complete and utter asshole for saying that? Really? Think of what you're saying!>>>

 

What's he saying? I agree with him, I've gotta say, and I don't feel like a complete and utter asshole for doing so. While I think people should use some discretion in what luxuries they consume (ie I despise SUVs), I'm not going to give up something as basic as eating food that tastes good in order to save other people from themselves. If people think that they need eight kids, then they're making a choice and they can deal with it. I say provide overpopulating countries with education and birth control, and if they don't use it, let them live with the consequences.

[Guest KoR Fungus]

<<<I think instead of killing rapists they should be like castrated and then forced to work in backbreaking labor jobs. They don't deserve death.>>>

 

Uhhhm weren't you lashing out against everyone's cruel ways of killing Osama bin Laden? This is as cruel as some of that stuff...

 

As for the death penalty, I'm against it for many of the reasons already mentioned. You've got to make sure that innocent people don't die, but doing that requires millions of dollars per person and ten years or so of appeals before anyone actually gets killed. It's not worth the effort. Life in prison is cheaper anyway, and more reversable, and it has the same effect in keeping the people off the streets, so to me it's better in every way.

[Guest RetroRob215]

Over population can be blamed on two man factors, lack of education as pretains to birth control in certain parts of the world and Catholicism.

 

If African's don't know of birth control or aren't given any what do you expect them to do?

 

As for Catholicism, it is considered a sin to use birth control. Basically the only reason for a Catholic to have sex is to conceive. There are many Catholic's in the world who are probably affected by this rule. Do you really think all of those soccer mom's wanted 6 kids?

 

Fix those two problems and the population probably won't double by 2050.

[Guest KoR Fungus]

Agreed, that's why I say provide everyone with education and birth control. It's relatively inexpensive and, if people actually listen, very effective. And if they don't listen, then we don't have to feel guilty about their plight.

 

As for Africans, in many cases, in trying to stop the AIDS "epidemic", we have given them birth control and provided education, but they just ignore it and refuse to use the birth control. At that point it becomes their problem. I think we have a moral obligation to try to help, but if our help isn't wanted, then I don't feel we need to have a guilty conscience.

 

Catholicism is a bigger problem, because it comes from stubborness as opposed to lack of education, and if people let religion brainwash them, I don't know what you can do.