60 mpg by 2025

[sdduuuude]

[quote=davelj]My solution to the world’s pollution and energy problems (for the billionth time): Stop procreating. Stop having kids.

Population shrinks while technology improves and – voila – both pollution and energy use decline.

It’s so simple. But too few are willing to make the sacrifice. (Personally I don’t consider it a sacrifice, but most do, so…)

I’ll let folks legislate what kind of car I can drive as soon as the same folks legislate away all procreation for the next century.

Pollution and energy constraints are a result of increasing population. Legislating increased mpg is only addressing a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself. Why don’t we address the root of the problem instead? Oh, I forgot… because THAT would be too inconvenient.[/quote]

Speaking objectively (with no judgment regarding the merits of the idea): This idea will never get off the ground. People with this inclination will be bred out of existence by natural selection.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme]Again, that’s called Democracy. Deal with it.[/quote]

Is this argument any better than “It’s called a ‘market.’ Deal with it.”

Or “It’s called ‘other people’s rights.’ Deal with it.”

I’m thinking “no.”

If you want to believe that rights can be voted on, then you do not believe they are inalienable, which is my original point. You want to make other people behave how you want them to behave. It’s that simple. No different than a Republican voting that you can’t smoke pot or engage in odd sexual behaviors because they think there should be more morality in the world.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme]Again, that’s called Democracy. Deal with it.[/quote]

Is this argument any better than “It’s called a ‘market.’ Deal with it.”

Or “It’s called ‘other people’s rights.’ Deal with it.”

I’m thinking “no.”

If you want to believe that rights can be voted on, then you do not believe they are inalienable, which is my original point. You want to make other people behave how you want them to behave. It’s that simple. No different than a Republican voting that you can’t smoke pot or engage in odd sexual behaviors because they think there should be more morality in the world.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme]Again, that’s called Democracy. Deal with it.[/quote]

Is this argument any better than “It’s called a ‘market.’ Deal with it.”

Or “It’s called ‘other people’s rights.’ Deal with it.”

I’m thinking “no.”

If you want to believe that rights can be voted on, then you do not believe they are inalienable, which is my original point. You want to make other people behave how you want them to behave. It’s that simple. No different than a Republican voting that you can’t smoke pot or engage in odd sexual behaviors because they think there should be more morality in the world.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme]Again, that’s called Democracy. Deal with it.[/quote]

Is this argument any better than “It’s called a ‘market.’ Deal with it.”

Or “It’s called ‘other people’s rights.’ Deal with it.”

I’m thinking “no.”

If you want to believe that rights can be voted on, then you do not believe they are inalienable, which is my original point. You want to make other people behave how you want them to behave. It’s that simple. No different than a Republican voting that you can’t smoke pot or engage in odd sexual behaviors because they think there should be more morality in the world.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme]Again, that’s called Democracy. Deal with it.[/quote]

Is this argument any better than “It’s called a ‘market.’ Deal with it.”

Or “It’s called ‘other people’s rights.’ Deal with it.”

I’m thinking “no.”

If you want to believe that rights can be voted on, then you do not believe they are inalienable, which is my original point. You want to make other people behave how you want them to behave. It’s that simple. No different than a Republican voting that you can’t smoke pot or engage in odd sexual behaviors because they think there should be more morality in the world.

[davelj]

delete

[davelj]

delete

[davelj]

delete

[davelj]

delete

[davelj]

delete

[davelj]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=davelj]My solution to the world’s pollution and energy problems (for the billionth time): Stop procreating. Stop having kids.

Population shrinks while technology improves and – voila – both pollution and energy use decline.

It’s so simple. But too few are willing to make the sacrifice. (Personally I don’t consider it a sacrifice, but most do, so…)

I’ll let folks legislate what kind of car I can drive as soon as the same folks legislate away all procreation for the next century.

Pollution and energy constraints are a result of increasing population. Legislating increased mpg is only addressing a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself. Why don’t we address the root of the problem instead? Oh, I forgot… because THAT would be too inconvenient.[/quote]

Speaking objectively (with no judgment regarding the merits of the idea): This idea will never get off the ground. People with this inclination will be bred out of existence by natural selection.[/quote]

I agree. And I’ll take it a step further: I think humans will be forced out of existence because the principal trait that has suited them well for survival up to this point (a heavy bias toward procreation without any concept of consequences) is the very trait that will eventually doom them.

The rate of population growth has slowed markedly over the last many decades, but there appears to be a gap several decades out into the future between sources and uses of energy (and potential environmental consequences). I’m not worried about my lifetime, but beyond 50 years, absent some major technological breakthroughs, the population issue will become the major problem in the world. Dicking around with mpg for cars is just rearranging deck chairs and pretending to address the issue.

[davelj]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=davelj]My solution to the world’s pollution and energy problems (for the billionth time): Stop procreating. Stop having kids.

Population shrinks while technology improves and – voila – both pollution and energy use decline.

It’s so simple. But too few are willing to make the sacrifice. (Personally I don’t consider it a sacrifice, but most do, so…)

I’ll let folks legislate what kind of car I can drive as soon as the same folks legislate away all procreation for the next century.

Pollution and energy constraints are a result of increasing population. Legislating increased mpg is only addressing a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself. Why don’t we address the root of the problem instead? Oh, I forgot… because THAT would be too inconvenient.[/quote]

Speaking objectively (with no judgment regarding the merits of the idea): This idea will never get off the ground. People with this inclination will be bred out of existence by natural selection.[/quote]

I agree. And I’ll take it a step further: I think humans will be forced out of existence because the principal trait that has suited them well for survival up to this point (a heavy bias toward procreation without any concept of consequences) is the very trait that will eventually doom them.

The rate of population growth has slowed markedly over the last many decades, but there appears to be a gap several decades out into the future between sources and uses of energy (and potential environmental consequences). I’m not worried about my lifetime, but beyond 50 years, absent some major technological breakthroughs, the population issue will become the major problem in the world. Dicking around with mpg for cars is just rearranging deck chairs and pretending to address the issue.

[davelj]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=davelj]My solution to the world’s pollution and energy problems (for the billionth time): Stop procreating. Stop having kids.

Population shrinks while technology improves and – voila – both pollution and energy use decline.

It’s so simple. But too few are willing to make the sacrifice. (Personally I don’t consider it a sacrifice, but most do, so…)

I’ll let folks legislate what kind of car I can drive as soon as the same folks legislate away all procreation for the next century.

Pollution and energy constraints are a result of increasing population. Legislating increased mpg is only addressing a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself. Why don’t we address the root of the problem instead? Oh, I forgot… because THAT would be too inconvenient.[/quote]

Speaking objectively (with no judgment regarding the merits of the idea): This idea will never get off the ground. People with this inclination will be bred out of existence by natural selection.[/quote]

I agree. And I’ll take it a step further: I think humans will be forced out of existence because the principal trait that has suited them well for survival up to this point (a heavy bias toward procreation without any concept of consequences) is the very trait that will eventually doom them.

The rate of population growth has slowed markedly over the last many decades, but there appears to be a gap several decades out into the future between sources and uses of energy (and potential environmental consequences). I’m not worried about my lifetime, but beyond 50 years, absent some major technological breakthroughs, the population issue will become the major problem in the world. Dicking around with mpg for cars is just rearranging deck chairs and pretending to address the issue.

[davelj]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=davelj]My solution to the world’s pollution and energy problems (for the billionth time): Stop procreating. Stop having kids.

Population shrinks while technology improves and – voila – both pollution and energy use decline.

It’s so simple. But too few are willing to make the sacrifice. (Personally I don’t consider it a sacrifice, but most do, so…)

I’ll let folks legislate what kind of car I can drive as soon as the same folks legislate away all procreation for the next century.

Pollution and energy constraints are a result of increasing population. Legislating increased mpg is only addressing a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself. Why don’t we address the root of the problem instead? Oh, I forgot… because THAT would be too inconvenient.[/quote]

Speaking objectively (with no judgment regarding the merits of the idea): This idea will never get off the ground. People with this inclination will be bred out of existence by natural selection.[/quote]

I agree. And I’ll take it a step further: I think humans will be forced out of existence because the principal trait that has suited them well for survival up to this point (a heavy bias toward procreation without any concept of consequences) is the very trait that will eventually doom them.

The rate of population growth has slowed markedly over the last many decades, but there appears to be a gap several decades out into the future between sources and uses of energy (and potential environmental consequences). I’m not worried about my lifetime, but beyond 50 years, absent some major technological breakthroughs, the population issue will become the major problem in the world. Dicking around with mpg for cars is just rearranging deck chairs and pretending to address the issue.

[Author]

Posts