More bad times ahead

[Rock Action]

I have no time to write anything, but my reasoning is economic as opposed to the enviornment.

Well, less resources needed = less demand. Less demand = lower prices.

Sure, that sounds like a real job-killer, I agree. But on the other hand, you've got less people needing jobs. It would all even out.

[wanna be drummer]

Well, less resources needed = less demand. Less demand = lower prices.

Sure, that sounds like a real job-killer, I agree. But on the other hand, you've got less people needing jobs. It would all even out.

With the old getting older and living longer, their welfare (which I don't want to hand out..but it'll happen anyways) will need to be supplied by the young. With less young, you cannot keep paying for the old without going bankrupt from lack of available funds. This would especially tank socialistic governments (i.e. Europe, it's already happening)

And with less young, you have less people spending money, which, you are correct, would mean less demand. But, the older people in the workforce would be dropped to make up for the loss of revenue.

Economically, a low amount of young people doesn't really help anyone

Edited October 27, 2008 by wanna be drummer

[Rock Action]

With the old getting older and living longer, their welfare (which I don't want to hand out..but it'll happen anyways) will need to be supplied by the young. With less young, you cannot keep paying for the old without going bankrupt from lack of available funds. This would especially tank socialistic governments (i.e. Europe, it's already happening)

And with less young, you have less people spending money, which, you are correct, would mean less demand. But, the older people in the workforce would be dropped to make up for the loss of revenue.

Economically, a low amount of young people doesn't really help anyone

Quite the dilemma, eh?

[Dzldoc]

Depends on how big your tits are. My 40 D's have been known to stop men, traffic and make an lovely umbrella.

They haven't failed me yet.

Give me a shipping address

[wanna be drummer]

Quite the dilemma, eh?

Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb China

[Lake of Shadows]

I can't stand the idea of more and more growth. When in the hell will people ever learn and respond in kind. Keep putting those babies out, it's such a joy! It's the bottom line of all the world's problems. OVERPOPULATION !!!!!

ZPG is our only hope. Just an example,

Economic miracle, environmental disaster

Decades of extraordinary growth have catapulted China to the top of the world's economic charts, earning the admiration of much of the rest of the world. .....Admiration? Fuck that! Economic, population growth idiots!!! < (My own again, of course.

Indeed, China's continued economic rise has been one of the few certainties of the 21st century. Increasingly, however, the China story is not one of economic miracle but of environmental disaster.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/10/27...ref=mpstoryview

Prepare for reality, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation#References

Joel,

I assume you've already had your vasectomy.

[Hickory Man]

Depends on how big your tits are. My 40 D's have been known to stop men, traffic and make an lovely umbrella.

Oooohh, even Speed Racers car?

[Dzldoc]

Joel,

I assume you've already had your vasectomy.

[zepyep]

Hi all,

With the old getting older and living longer, their welfare (which I don't want to hand out..but it'll happen anyways) will need to be supplied by the young.

Yep,with the older,asking for SS benifits.They were promised,...

You mean us old DB,?It ain't welfare,we paided into to the system.

What young? WTF are you talking about?

F'n excuse me?Where the heck do the 'young' as you call them get their money?Shove off,that does not come from Mickey D's For your education?Your cell phone your internet?,.........are you trying to BS me?

Economically, a low amount of young people doesn't really help anyone

Shut it,Kevin.

[EpicForest]

Joel,

I assume you've already had your vasectomy.

Vasectomy's aren't 100% anyway.

There are other ways to prevent overpopulation, indeed any children as well.

Many ways, legal ones at that. Ain't that somethin'

[Lake of Shadows]

Vasectomy's aren't 100% anyway.

There are other ways to prevent overpopulation, indeed any children as well.

Many ways, legal ones at that. Ain't that somethin'

So, that's a 'no'?

FWIW, vasectomies ARE legal.

I suppose nothing is absolutely 100%, unless you want to just get it cut off or something. However, after vasectomies, a man can have his sperm count done periodically, until it's down to zero.

[EpicForest]

So, that's a 'no'?

FWIW, vasectomies ARE legal.

I suppose nothing is absolutely 100%, unless you want to just get it cut off or something. However, after vasectomies, a man can have his sperm count done periodically, until it's down to zero.

Pregnancies aren't completely avoidable but one thing is 100%.

Yankees aren't just from the North. And it should have been obvious but apparently not, several of the alternatives to vasectomies ARE legal.

[Lake of Shadows]

Pregnancies aren't completely avoidable but one thing is 100%.

Yankees aren't just from the North. And it should have been obvious but apparently not, several of the alternatives to vasectomies ARE legal.

Yes, it was obvious.

However, if you want to talk about zero population growth, I think you have to assume that couples will have, and will want to have, sex with each other,

Yes, abstinence works, but people don't always stay abstinent, even though they may have intended to do so. Yes, there are many other forms of birth control, but they all have their drawbacks, and if you want a permanent solution, sterilization is the most effective, for couples who have sex with each other.

Your emphasis on alternatives to vasectomies being legal is kinda odd, but whatever...

...and if you wanna be the board advocate for self-gratification, by all means, go ahead.

[EpicForest]

Yes, it was obvious.

However, if you want to talk about zero population growth, I think you have to assume that couples will have, and will want to have, sex with each other,

Yes, abstinence works, but people don't always stay abstinent, even though they may have intended to do so. Yes, there are many other forms of birth control, but they all have their drawbacks, and if you want a permanent solution, sterilization is the most effective, for couples who have sex with each other.

Your emphasis on alternatives to vasectomies being legal is kinda odd, but whatever...

...and if you wanna be the board advocate for self-gratification, by all means, go ahead.

I don't know where you're coming up with these weird twists. My alternative, used as a last resort, is abortion. You never even seemed to consider that, at least with your posts. That is what I meant by a legal recourse. YANKees!!

Sex doesn't necessarily = children. Why does that seem so difficult for you, or are you just trying to say offspring are a fact that is SO difficult to prevent?

We as a mammalian creature can DO something about overpopulation, unlike other calamities that can occur in nature. I find it SO ironic and ignorant when talking about preventive measures, people will resort to the "Well that's nothing WE can do anything about", when it comes to reproduction.

WEAK !!!

Edited October 28, 2008 by EpicForest

[wanna be drummer]

Yep,with the older,asking for SS benifits.They were promised,...

You mean us old DB,?It ain't welfare,we paided into to the system.

What young? WTF are you talking about?

They never should have been promised anything. The original use of Social Security was never intended to be the retirement plan it's become.

And the young (me included) are also paying into the system. Am I gonna get anything out of it? Nope.

F'n excuse me?Where the heck do the 'young' as you call them get their money?Shove off,that does not come from Mickey D's For your education?Your cell phone your internet?,.........are you trying to BS me?

What does this have to do with anything? I don't mean young as in teenagers, I mean younger people such as 20-30 year olds. Below middle age. They hold regular jobs, they pay regular taxes, they may have families. With a severe drop of these people, the economy would be in big trouble

Economically, a low amount of young people doesn't really help anyone

This is incorrect

Shut it,Kevin.

And this is unnecessary Edited October 28, 2008 by wanna be drummer

[Lake of Shadows]

I don't know where you're coming up with these weird twists. My alternative, used as a last resort, is abortion. You never even seemed to consider that, at least with your posts. That is what I meant by a legal recourse.

My weird twists?

I made a short one sentence post and you ran with it. You're the one with the italicized "Yankee" comment... what other inference was I supposed to get from that. (edited to add... saw your edit after I posted... most abortions are done by a 'suction' procedure... 'yank' didn't occur to me in that context).

As for abortion and legal recourses... of course it's a legal recourse if pregnancy occurs. However, some folks don't consider it an option. There are all sorts of birth control methods, including various forms of prevention, abortion, and abstinence.

Sex doesn't necessarily = children. Why does that seem so difficult for you, or are you just trying to say offspring are a fact that is SO difficult to prevent?

I know sex doesn't necessarily= children. That's not a difficult concept for me, nor am I trying to say it's difficult to prevent pregnancy. Talk about 'weird twists'. My point, such as it was, that if someone is adamantly opposed to having children for population growth reasons, sterilization is the most reliable way to prevent pregnancy.

We as a mammalian creature can DO something about overpopulation, unlike other calamities that can occur in nature. I find it SO ironic and ignorant when talking about preventive measures, people will resort to the "Well that's nothing WE can do anything about", when it comes to reproduction.

WEAK !!!

Well, I did not say or imply that belief (again, talk about 'weird twists'), so I guess you just felt like being argumentative. Whatever...

For someone who is a zealously in favor of ZPG as you are, to dance around answering a question about vasectomy, (which implies that you haven't had one)... that is what I find ironic.

Edited October 28, 2008 by Lake of Shadows

[Electrophile]

I always love it when new members decide to jump right in and start quasi-arguments with people they barely know.

BTW Lakey, I understood the point(s) you were making, so don't think you screwed up somewhere.

[Lake of Shadows]

I always love it when new members decide to jump right in and start quasi-arguments with people they barely know.

BTW Lakey, I understood the point(s) you were making, so don't think you screwed up somewhere.

Thanks, glad you got it.

I daresay EF knows me better than his post count would signify.

[Ned_Devine]

I always love it when new members decide to jump right in and start quasi-arguments with people they barely know.

BTW Lakey, I understood the point(s) you were making, so don't think you screwed up somewhere.

What, their opinion on a subject doesn't matter? It's a generic subject, and posted for all to see. Should they have to stay in the Newbie section until queen electrophile declares they are worthy to leave? Just because you are a post whore, it doesn't give you anymore relevance over any other member.

[Electrophile]

Wow, that's a whole lot of WHARRGARBL in such a small post. First of all, I said nothing about opinions not being valid, or people having to stay in certain sections of the board or any of that other nonsense. YOU said that, not me. Also, post whore? Are you serious? I am on this board collectively, less than 2 hours a day.

That was probably the dumbest thing I've ever been called on this board, and I've been called a lot of things.

[wanna be drummer]

What, their opinion on a subject doesn't matter? It's a generic subject, and posted for all to see. Should they have to stay in the Newbie section until queen electrophile declares they are worthy to leave? Just because you are a post whore, it doesn't give you anymore relevance over any other member.

Post numbers only show how long that name someone has been here, not how long the person has been here. You obviously didn't understand what she was talking about, and probably still won't.

I'd advise you simply drop the subject.

[Ned_Devine]

Wow, that's a whole lot of WHARRGARBL in such a small post. First of all, I said nothing about opinions not being valid, or people having to stay in certain sections of the board or any of that other nonsense. YOU said that, not me. Also, post whore? Are you serious? I am on this board collectively, less than 2 hours a day.

That was probably the dumbest thing I've ever been called on this board, and I've been called a lot of things.

Is it a requirement for persons to know each other on this board without stating a difference of opinion to someone else? Why can't a new person jump into the fray?

And yes, I was serious about you being a post whore:

3. A person, who feels their higher post count gives them added credibility in the forum, even over people who have contributed for much longer and as such they go to great lengths to increase their post count.

Post numbers only show how long that name someone has been here, not how long the person has been here. You obviously didn't understand what she was talking about, and probably still won't.

I'd advise you simply drop the subject.

I am well aware of what a post count indicates. Thank you for your unnecessary definition Webster.

[wanna be drummer]

I am well aware of what a post count indicates. Thank you for your unnecessary definition Webster.

Then you clearly don't get what we're saying.

[Ned_Devine]

Then you clearly don't get what we're saying.

I clearly understand, it was written in English, not something else.. I am sorry I am new, and felt it necessary to start a quasi argument with you, whom I barely know and did not address for that matter.

[EpicForest]

Whoa whoa whoa,

I do a post only quoting I've got a horsey, LoS chimes in and then my alternatives are either misread or misunderstood, so she comes in with an abstinence twist, which I had NO allusion to in my post. That was one of her points. That's fine. She didn't 'see' the YANK part in the way I meant it, at first.

Then I'm accused of STARTING an arguement? My post was a stand alone, not challenging anyone personally.

And yeah, there is an element of 'being liked' and someone's 'credentials' as far as imput and longevity on the board that is referenced elsewhere, as much as many here try to deny or refudiate their view on that.

People often shoot the messenger, not so much the message in many circumstances.

And I've seen true newbies to this board who've got WAY more knowledge of Led Zeppelin, and at times other topics, than many of the old timers here. You'll always find those who think a newbie has either invalid views or just not 'accepted yet' to be able to argue or point out things of the oldbies.

It's a funny thing really.

There are MANY people here with relatively low post counts who've been here a LONG TIME...and/or have read much to be able to respond informatively to those they've observed and read in their time here, and the old board. It's just that some like to make certain points about certain people and let others go and either defend or persecute some. Lots here hold onto OLD grudges, sometime obscured in their posts, hinted or blatantly exposed.

Back to my original 'overpopulation' post. It's not a matter of IF, but a matter of time. This is a finite world and in the future, our problems of availability and consumption will wreak havoc on the human population unless that is slowed down. Actually halted at some point. Even Kansas will be overun eventually.