Solution to what problem?
One problem is extrapolation from inappropriate or untested assumptions. Malthus is one the best known of those who produce essays on population growth and in using an inappropriate model, came to all the wrong conclusions. There is an assumption in the graph in post #1 that the population will grow as depicted. It may, it may not. The problem is that the derivation of the data has not been provided and the hypothesis/es upon which it is based has not been explicated.
The other problem is that there is an assumption that the global infrastructure can support growth at this rate. It might and it might not. Surface area is not a problem. You could assign every living being on the planet their very own two square feet of land and fit us all into an area 330 sq. miles. Physical resource is not a problem. There is sufficient natural resource for all to have adequate shelter, clothing, food & water.
What screws this delightful utopia up is the errant nature of mankind in being born where they’re born. Some choose the most god-forsaken parts of the planet to arrive into their lives. And then make it difficult for others to help sustain them.
Then there’s distribution. Where road, rail and shipping can easily reach, there’s little problem with supply and distribution for support of any size of population. Where these infrastructure do not exist or no longer exist, getting stuff to those who most need it is a problem.
Then there’s the issue of current distribution of the means to provide and acquire the necessary for life. It is concentrated into a relatively small percentage of the population and represents power. Many of these few, understandably, do not wish to part, willingly, with any of their stuff.
And finally (for this little snippet of a review) is the control of the national and global means of distribution: governments and commercial interests of significant size and power.
These are just a few of the problem areas and this is by no means exhaustive. But, having highlighted these few problem areas, I’ll suggest some possible solutions to them. You may not like all of them, but it’s a pick and mix type thing – take your choice.
The first solution requires simply ignoring the data in the graph on the assumption that it’s just plain wrong, or even if it isn’t, things will sort themselves out naturally (vv Correlation of Fox & Chicken population), or that the increasing malnutrition and disease in those populations which suffer most from their decision to live where they live, will eventually rob them of the ability to continue to reproduce at their current rate, if at all. This first solution requires no effort whatsoever from anyone and it my choice as the one most likely to be adopted, by default.
The second solution is the physically gather everybody on the planet into an area of land of 330 sq miles and then fire the starting gun. Everyone can choose where to live and to acquire the resources concomitant with the piece of land area selected, including houses, bank accounts, businesses, cars etc. OK, for the bleeding heart liberals will make it so when we’re all pushed into that little area together, those with the most go into the middle of the mass of humanity and those with the least on the outside. I tell you, even with a head start, I know how it’s going to end up within a very short space of time. There’s a reason why things are as they are.
Next solution is to go to all this difficult areas where people choose to be born and, sort of live, and instead of sliding in bits of aid, what remains of the aid that hasn’t been siphoned off by the various corrupt governments and military, and instead of giving them money and p!ss-poor excuses for civilised hygiene and self-support, simply gas or napalm them all. It’s a solution. No more comic relief. No more red nose day. And we can then turn our guns on the more local problems. I never thought ASBOs went far enough anyway.
The next solution is to forget maintaining infrastructure that in any way supports those that don’t have jobs, their own house (at least one) and at least two cars. If they have kids then private education would further confirm eligibility for the ‘Support Club’. Anyone not meeting the entrance criteria would simply be removed from the support grid and any road, rail whatever infrastructure currently in place would be left to rot, or better still, re-utilised in improving that of those in the Support Club. This would further reduce the reproduction capability of the lower orders and effectively, in time, remove their genetic influence form the global gene pool. I’m not suggesting we actually kill anyone closer to home and not in any of those nasty foreign places, just make it more difficult for them to live or breed. Of course, the old and the sick, even if previously of the Support Club should be considered for compulsory euthanasia in order to free up more resource for the greater good of the greater good.
Yet another solution is to simply take all the resource that is being hoarded by those that hoard all the resource. They might require significant inducement to part with their wealth, but a small price to pay for global equality-ish, wouldn’t you say.
And the final solution offered for your approval is the overthrow of all governments and return to a more locally organised support system. Again, those in power in governments are unlikely to want to go quietly and even though they came about through public disobedience and revolution, will not take too kindly to being ousted in similar manner. They also have big police forces and armies to help support them against such an eventuality, but if you can’t take up the baton that I’m passing you and develop the detail there’s really nothing more I can help you with anyway.
Anyone have any more problems they want me to have a shot at?
