excellent website on population

[jonny2mad]

Intolerance is absolutely fine if it simply means standing up for what is right

and you get to define whats right right

[SleeperService]

Sleeper- I know that people of all colours and creeds are capable of murder, I'm just making the point that a tiny minority of racists use their views as an excuse to perpetrate violence against others up to and including murder.

I get that nexus but targeting a specific group for a general activity, good or bad, tends to lead to very unpleasant places.

What does that ridiculously vague statement actually mean?

Some here seem to be suggesting that liberals should be tolerant of literally everything, including racism and other forms of extremism. Meanwhile, the racists don't need to be tolerant of anything.

Bollocks to that. Intolerance is absolutely fine if it simply means standing up for what is right. And I don't classify murdering racists as right, before anyone accuses me of that.

Sorry but I was being a bit brief. Saying racists use their views as an excuse to perpetrate violence against others is pedantic BS. It's no more meaningful than saying traffic wardens use their views for the same ends etc etc substitute any group you wish. Racial minorities are quite capable of appalling violence, without racist views, even against their own family members. In my view NO VIOLENCE IS ACCEPTABLE NOT EVEN TO YOU LUDWIG

Do you understand now? As for what is right? Beating demons out of children is right as far as some are concerned.

Intolerance is not accepting another's position and can be good or bad depending on your and society's view. For example: A person may campaign for euthanasia because, in certain circumstances, they feel it's the right thing to do to allow people to take their own life. I do not wish to commit suicide. I am intolerant if I force my choice on others and deny them their choice. I am tolerant if I allow them their choice if that's what society finds acceptable but do not accept the option for myself.

OK?

[kenneal - lagger]

What's the AFL?

Racists in the UK have murdered people, have people who are 'culturally inclusive' done this?

People of all backgrounds kill others all the time. Racial minorities get killed by other groups and their own. Racial majorities ditto. It's rather silly to suggest that all members of any given group are good or bad. I was brought up to be tolerant of others' beliefs and abilities. That has always stood me in good stead and I won't change that even if I could.

Supposed "racists" peaceably celebrating St George's Day with a family day out and carrying the flag of England and St George in Brighton were violently attacked by anarchists and lefties. The riot police had to fight a way through for the celebrants and arrests will be made. Tolerance? Brighton is hardly a mixed race community like Bradford or Southall.

[woodburner]

Historically a flag was usually a battle flag. Whatever reason you give for carrying one you may give the impression you are up for a fight. There's no point in claiming this is intolerant and uncivilised, civilisation is paper thin.

First rule of self defence is don't go down dark alleys.

[jonny2mad]

If you cant carry the national flag of a country inside that country, is that Territory still part of that country .

Your getting the same thing in the south west of the state's where people are flying the Mexican flag .

If a people stop caring about their borders, they are too weak to control the territory they think they have.

If flying the flag of england in england that you've let a bunch of people with no allegiance to that flag take over upsets them well fine, fly it and have a fight

And I'd say the first rule of self-defense is being willing to fight people for whats yours

[jonny2mad]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12kiMoyp88s

A American who understands the importance of flags

[UndercoverElephant]

What's the AFL?

Racists in the UK have murdered people, have people who are 'culturally inclusive' done this?

People of all backgrounds kill others all the time. Racial minorities get killed by other groups and their own. Racial majorities ditto. It's rather silly to suggest that all members of any given group are good or bad. I was brought up to be tolerant of others' beliefs and abilities. That has always stood me in good stead and I won't change that even if I could.

Supposed "racists" peaceably celebrating St George's Day with a family day out and carrying the flag of England and St George in Brighton were violently attacked by anarchists and lefties. The riot police had to fight a way through for the celebrants and arrests will be made. Tolerance? Brighton is hardly a mixed race community like Bradford or Southall.

When you live in Brighton, you get so used to the noise made by the gulls that you don't notice it anymore, but the first day you wake up somewhere there are no gulls you notice that something is missing. When I moved to Brighton 15 years ago from South London, the same thing happened with respect to black people. It wasn't so much that Brighton was all white, and certainly not all English, but there were hardly any black people at all. This has changed a bit since then - there are more black faces than there were - but there still aren't very many. But on the other hand Brighton is culturally mixed much more so than most other places, and there is a vast selection of people from every corner of the world and of every race. There aren't enough of most of them to form their own communities (that only applies to French people and Swedes), but taken together I guess foreigners account for at least 30% of the population of Brighton in Winter and 40% in the summer.

Having said all that, the hub of my own immediately-local community is a small "open all hours" shop run by a pakistani family. I've never witnessed anything unpleasant directed at them, and would be very surprised if it happened.

[clv101]

Timely report from the Royal Society:
http://royalsociety.org/news/Royal-Soci ... -humanity/

Covered in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/b ... population

The intertwined issues of consumption and population have, of course, long been cornerstones of the wider environmental debate. But, in recent years, the consensus among environmental commentators seems to have moved towards the view that over-consumption is, indeed, the more pressing concern. In 2011, when the human population reached 7bn for the first time, a major report by French national agencies concluded rather bluntly that "the rich must stop consuming so much".

[UndercoverElephant]

Timely report from the Royal Society:
http://royalsociety.org/news/Royal-Soci ... -humanity/

Covered in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/b ... population

The intertwined issues of consumption and population have, of course, long been cornerstones of the wider environmental debate. But, in recent years, the consensus among environmental commentators seems to have moved towards the view that over-consumption is, indeed, the more pressing concern. In 2011, when the human population reached 7bn for the first time, a major report by French national agencies concluded rather bluntly that "the rich must stop consuming so much".

This is a red herring, CLV.

I've already demonstrated that changes in behaviour without addressing the population problem will not work. India is the perfect example: nearly everybody is vegetarian, but this has just allowed the population to get that much bigger before starvation started to become a serious a problem.

There's also another reason why it is a red herring, and that is that the "rich countries" are broke and are destined to consume much less in the future anyway, for the simple reason that they are going to run out of currency to pay the rest of the world for their resources. The only people to whom this does not apply are the 1% - the super-rich who can go on consuming whatever they damned well like until there is some sort of revolution which gets rid of them - a revolution which is already gaining momentum in the form of the Occupy movement, which I'm expecting to take off again in a major way this summer.

[woodburner]

This is a red herring, CLV.

This is a red herring

[vtsnowedin]

Timely report from the Royal Society:
http://royalsociety.org/news/Royal-Soci ... -humanity/

Covered in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/b ... population

The intertwined issues of consumption and population have, of course, long been cornerstones of the wider environmental debate. But, in recent years, the consensus among environmental commentators seems to have moved towards the view that over-consumption is, indeed, the more pressing concern. In 2011, when the human population reached 7bn for the first time, a major report by French national agencies concluded rather bluntly that "the rich must stop consuming so much".

I suppose it would be too much to ask for the poor to stop "Boinking" so much?

[clv101]

I suppose it would be too much to ask for the poor to stop "Boinking" so much?

They are doing. But because of population momentum where high fertility rates produced large numbers of young women yet to reach child-bearing age. The population continues to grow:



These data are how we can be confident population's not going to get much higher than 9bn.

[vtsnowedin]

I suppose it would be too much to ask for the poor to stop "Boinking" so much?

They are doing. But because of population momentum where high fertility rates produced large numbers of young women yet to reach child-bearing age. The population continues to grow:



These data are how we can be confident population's not going to get much higher than 9bn.

They are doing? really? To pull their fat out of the fire no woman or girl in Egypt should deliver a child for at least five years. This would not be a hardship on the twenty somethings with babes in arms or the fifteen yearolds about to start bearing young but don't hold your breath for them to grasp the depth of their problem or the possibilities that might serve as solutions.Note that even if the women figure it out the men in Egypt will insist on traditional fertility patterns and drive the country into mass starvation.

[RenewableCandy]

There are findings that suggest the women have had it figured out all along and are only waiting for the law to catch up with them. In "Freakonomics" the authors point out the interesting correlation between "Roe vs Wade" and a spectacular drop, fifteen or so years later, in urban crime rates. They jalouse that it's the babies nobody wanted (many of whom are now not being born) who were falling into lives of crime.

[tpals]

Does quality of life have any place in a discussion on population? Even my village of 200 feels too crowded at times.