0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I have long thought that a 5% tax refund for parenting a first child sounds good, and 10% for the second - parents are great!Of course, you lose the lot if you have a third; responsible parents are even better!
I have long thought that a 5% tax refund for parenting a first child sounds good, and 10% for the second - parents are great!Of course, you lose the lot if you have a third; responsible parents are even better!Not gonna win a lot of votes with that one. Responsibility?My own gut feeling is that we could probably support the current 7 billion sustainably if the resources were distributed responsibly. That isn't going to happen any time soon and the poor old girl shows signs of creaking at the seams. Academically I'd be fascinated to hear learned opinions discuss the question and look forward to the show. Still, a more pressing question, from my point of view, is what happens when we reach the limit? Maybe we have already but, either way, I see no chance now of implementing any reasonable solution before we do. The alternatives are unpleasant.Granted, neither tax nor sociology have a real place in a scientific discussion on global "capacity", but a bit of ominous is always good for the mix .
How many mouths can an average corpse satisfy and how many corpses can we expect per day?
And believe it or not food is 100% sustainable.
Greed is what limits sustainability,
Greed is what 'over populates' the planet,
'Greed' is what stops us developing new, lifesaving technology, Greed is what stops us being able to cure diseases,
Greed is what stops us exploring the stars.
Think about it.. why are things 'too expensive'?
how can energy coming out of plastic holes in our houses be not considered artificial? so how can this energy be sustainable if you consider artifical to be unsustainable? be this from burning a tree or by a fan blowing in the wind.
The conspiracy theory of the "cure for cancer that exists but the pharma companies wont give it as they make more money out of treating the disease than they would for curing it" is all too believable.
Greed for all to live as you say a 'western' lifestyle, rather than live as a sustainable community where everyone puts in and everyone gets what they need and want.
You state physics and chemistry limit us.. do they? the technology to populate Mars exists and is even being put into practice.. but we are not doing it large scale even though popular belief is we cant all live on this planet..
Something that is rare or hard to get may be considered expensive to be fair, but what about digging a mile long ditch, this is considered expensive.. but its not hard to get or in limited quantities.. irrigating a desert.. not particularly hard, not particularly expensive, but too expensive to provide desalination plants to ensure water gets there in sufficient quantities.. this would save thousands if not millions of lives over the average life of a plant.. but its not done.. as there is no payback to the greed of the people of the world.
if the maximum was strictly enforced,
physics and chemistry show what is possible.. it does not show what is impossible..
Nuclear fusion may save the day if we're lucky -