OT: Tragedy

[patientrenter]

ffa? I don’t know what that means, AN.

It would take centuries to get to 500 million responsibly. So the sooner we start…..

[an]

[quote=patientrenter]ffa? I don’t know what that means, AN.

It would take centuries to get to 500 million responsibly. So the sooner we start…..[/quote]
Sorry, that was from my Starcraft days. It stands for Free For All.

[an]

[quote=patientrenter]ffa? I don’t know what that means, AN.

It would take centuries to get to 500 million responsibly. So the sooner we start…..[/quote]
Sorry, that was from my Starcraft days. It stands for Free For All.

[an]

[quote=patientrenter]ffa? I don’t know what that means, AN.

It would take centuries to get to 500 million responsibly. So the sooner we start…..[/quote]
Sorry, that was from my Starcraft days. It stands for Free For All.

[an]

[quote=patientrenter]ffa? I don’t know what that means, AN.

It would take centuries to get to 500 million responsibly. So the sooner we start…..[/quote]
Sorry, that was from my Starcraft days. It stands for Free For All.

[an]

[quote=patientrenter]ffa? I don’t know what that means, AN.

It would take centuries to get to 500 million responsibly. So the sooner we start…..[/quote]
Sorry, that was from my Starcraft days. It stands for Free For All.

[briansd1]

[quote=patientrenter]AN, I don’t honestly know what the best practical strategy would be to get to a stable global human population of 500 million. Why am I so bereft of ideas? Well, I know it’s completely impractical right now. It’s as likely to become a policy in my lifetime as practicing hygiene was in the 17th century.

But I think we’ll see it become a core component of human behavior and policy, just as hygiene did.[/quote]

I completely agree with you patientrenter.

Hygiene is still not even such a core component of human behavior today.

It’ll take several more centuries.

But if population starts to dwindle, say goodbye to real estate appreciation. Think Japan.

[briansd1]

[quote=patientrenter]AN, I don’t honestly know what the best practical strategy would be to get to a stable global human population of 500 million. Why am I so bereft of ideas? Well, I know it’s completely impractical right now. It’s as likely to become a policy in my lifetime as practicing hygiene was in the 17th century.

But I think we’ll see it become a core component of human behavior and policy, just as hygiene did.[/quote]

I completely agree with you patientrenter.

Hygiene is still not even such a core component of human behavior today.

It’ll take several more centuries.

But if population starts to dwindle, say goodbye to real estate appreciation. Think Japan.

[briansd1]

[quote=patientrenter]AN, I don’t honestly know what the best practical strategy would be to get to a stable global human population of 500 million. Why am I so bereft of ideas? Well, I know it’s completely impractical right now. It’s as likely to become a policy in my lifetime as practicing hygiene was in the 17th century.

But I think we’ll see it become a core component of human behavior and policy, just as hygiene did.[/quote]

I completely agree with you patientrenter.

Hygiene is still not even such a core component of human behavior today.

It’ll take several more centuries.

But if population starts to dwindle, say goodbye to real estate appreciation. Think Japan.

[briansd1]

[quote=patientrenter]AN, I don’t honestly know what the best practical strategy would be to get to a stable global human population of 500 million. Why am I so bereft of ideas? Well, I know it’s completely impractical right now. It’s as likely to become a policy in my lifetime as practicing hygiene was in the 17th century.

But I think we’ll see it become a core component of human behavior and policy, just as hygiene did.[/quote]

I completely agree with you patientrenter.

Hygiene is still not even such a core component of human behavior today.

It’ll take several more centuries.

But if population starts to dwindle, say goodbye to real estate appreciation. Think Japan.

[briansd1]

[quote=patientrenter]AN, I don’t honestly know what the best practical strategy would be to get to a stable global human population of 500 million. Why am I so bereft of ideas? Well, I know it’s completely impractical right now. It’s as likely to become a policy in my lifetime as practicing hygiene was in the 17th century.

But I think we’ll see it become a core component of human behavior and policy, just as hygiene did.[/quote]

I completely agree with you patientrenter.

Hygiene is still not even such a core component of human behavior today.

It’ll take several more centuries.

But if population starts to dwindle, say goodbye to real estate appreciation. Think Japan.

[zk]

[quote=patientrenter]I think our planet would be much better of with a stable population of about 500 million. Finally, open spaces, room for genuinely wild species to thrive, less trash everywhere….[/quote]

When you say, “our planet would be better off,” you mean, “the people on our planet would be better off,” right? I mean, eventually, humans will probably cease to exist, and “our” planet will, over a million or a billion years, repair itself and eliminate virtually all traces that we ever existed. So, what we’re really talking about here isn’t the Earth, but the Earth’s ability to provide people with open spaces to enjoy and trash to not see.

Or am I missing something?

[zk]

[quote=patientrenter]I think our planet would be much better of with a stable population of about 500 million. Finally, open spaces, room for genuinely wild species to thrive, less trash everywhere….[/quote]

When you say, “our planet would be better off,” you mean, “the people on our planet would be better off,” right? I mean, eventually, humans will probably cease to exist, and “our” planet will, over a million or a billion years, repair itself and eliminate virtually all traces that we ever existed. So, what we’re really talking about here isn’t the Earth, but the Earth’s ability to provide people with open spaces to enjoy and trash to not see.

Or am I missing something?

[zk]

[quote=patientrenter]I think our planet would be much better of with a stable population of about 500 million. Finally, open spaces, room for genuinely wild species to thrive, less trash everywhere….[/quote]

When you say, “our planet would be better off,” you mean, “the people on our planet would be better off,” right? I mean, eventually, humans will probably cease to exist, and “our” planet will, over a million or a billion years, repair itself and eliminate virtually all traces that we ever existed. So, what we’re really talking about here isn’t the Earth, but the Earth’s ability to provide people with open spaces to enjoy and trash to not see.

Or am I missing something?

[zk]

[quote=patientrenter]I think our planet would be much better of with a stable population of about 500 million. Finally, open spaces, room for genuinely wild species to thrive, less trash everywhere….[/quote]

When you say, “our planet would be better off,” you mean, “the people on our planet would be better off,” right? I mean, eventually, humans will probably cease to exist, and “our” planet will, over a million or a billion years, repair itself and eliminate virtually all traces that we ever existed. So, what we’re really talking about here isn’t the Earth, but the Earth’s ability to provide people with open spaces to enjoy and trash to not see.

Or am I missing something?

[Author]

Posts