APP - Overpopulation Myth

This is the world now. "In a world in which a child under five dies of malnutrition every two seconds, and close to a third of the planet’s population lives in a state of "extreme poverty" that often proves fatal, the global enactment of such a basic income proposal may seem wildly utopian. Readers may suspect it to be impossible even in the wealthiest of OECD nations."

http://bostonreview.net/BR25.5/vanparijs.html
 
midcan5 said:
This is the world now. "In a world in which a child under five dies of malnutrition every two seconds, and close to a third of the planet’s population lives in a state of "extreme poverty" that often proves fatal, the global enactment of such a basic income proposal may seem wildly utopian. Readers may suspect it to be impossible even in the wealthiest of OECD nations."

http://bostonreview.net/BR25.5/vanparijs.html
Click to expand...

This has to do with the policies with which the elites rule the world, not with the true human carrying capacity of earth.
 
apple0154 said:
Ahhh, recreational drugs, huh?
Click to expand...
I can see that you're attempting to deflect, and its been a few days, so let's re-cap:

You said:
It's truly incredible how you miss the main point. It is not the relationship with the mother, per se. It's rightfully questioning to what use his contribution is being used, vis-à-vis the child.

When it comes to shirking ones responsibility there are many situations where people have said, "I was ordered to do that", thereby relieving themselves of any responsibility.
Click to expand...

So I asked a question:
So your position is that men are ordered to have sex with women?
Click to expand...

Ar you going to answer my question?
 
Southern Man said:
I can see that you're attempting to deflect, and its been a few days, so let's re-cap:

So I asked a question: (insert: So your position is that men are ordered to have sex with women? )

Are you going to answer my question?
Click to expand...

Why would you ask if that's my position? I never alluded to any such thing.
 
Southern Man said:
A man should support his family. A real man does voluntarily, gladly.
Click to expand...

There are more than a few instances where the man's support payments go to supporting the EX's "accustomed standard of living" rather than being used for the children. When it's time for the children to go to college or are seeking help with the down payment on a house the man doesn't have the necessary funds as they were squandered by the EX.
 
apple0154 said:
There are more than a few instances where the man's support payments go to supporting the EX's "accustomed standard of living" rather than being used for the children. When it's time for the children to go to college or are seeking help with the down payment on a house the man doesn't have the necessary funds as they were squandered by the EX.
Click to expand...


John Cleese is a good example of how crazy Californian divorce laws are, there wasn't even any children involved.

John Cleese has to pay £12.5 million in his divorce settlement. (Source)
The 'Monty Python' comedian will have to give over half of his estimated fortune to third wife Alyce Faye Eichelberger, after a ruling made by a Californian court - leaving her richer than him.
Cleese, 69, has been forced into agreeing to a settlement worth £8 million in cash and assets, alongside £612,000 annually for the next seven years.
It is estimated he will be left with a fortune of around £10 million.
Joking about the decision, Cleese said: "I got off lightly. Think what I'd have had to pay if she'd contributed anything!"
In support of the comic star, his film director friend Michael Winner said: "The result is extraordinary. Alyce lived in a council flat when they met.
"As he put it, 'What I find so unfair is that if we both died today, her children would get much more than mine.'
"There are no dependent children. If ever there was a case for prenuptial agreements, this is it."
It's going to be very, very expensive, but it will be worth every penny.​
Cleese has two adult children, Cynthia and Camilla, from his marriages to actresses Connie Booth and Barbara Trentham respectively, while Eichelberger has two sons from her previous marriage.
The settlement marks the end of a 19-month battle for the 'Life of Brian' actor and his psychotherapist ex-wife, whom he married in 1992.
Originally Eichelberger had been claiming £900,000-a-year maintenance, two houses and half of all earnings Cleese had amassed during their marriage.


Cleese split from Booth and Trentham amicably and without the need for lawyers.
He previously said of his divorce from Eichelberger: "It's going to be very, very expensive, but it will be worth every penny."
Your Comments:

Add your comments
by Christina Weston - 17:22:03 19th Aug 2009
John, Will you marry me? I promise to only ask for half of what she did!


John Cleese
enlarge

Share this article:
 
Last edited:
Over-population becomes a problem because human beings take one societal format and try to apply it globally. Urbanization should never have been the blueprint for "civilization" around the globe, but a history of conquering armies has done that deal. Cultures that originally were agrarian and/or nomadic kept there practices of large families, as it was internalized as religious and cultural identity. Couple this with the city/suburbs blueprints...and you screw up natural resources.
 
apple0154 said:
There are more than a few instances where the man's support payments go to supporting the EX's "accustomed standard of living" rather than being used for the children. When it's time for the children to go to college or are seeking help with the down payment on a house the man doesn't have the necessary funds as they were squandered by the EX.
Click to expand...
Then the man should monitor this situation and report it to the judge, who would likely reward custody of the children to the man.

You argument is based on three theories on top of one another:
1. The man makes a poor decision in his choice of a wife;
2. The man can't manage the woman and she divorces him;
3. The man can't manage the divorce and so his kids get screwed.

And this is all in response to my post 48 where I pointed out the weakness of the liberal man. How ironic.
 
Southern Man said:
Then the man should monitor this situation and report it to the judge, who would likely reward custody of the children to the man.

You argument is based on three theories on top of one another:
1. The man makes a poor decision in his choice of a wife;
2. The man can't manage the woman and she divorces him;
3. The man can't manage the divorce and so his kids get screwed.

And this is all in response to my post 48 where I pointed out the weakness of the liberal man. How ironic.
Click to expand...

Well, all I can say is "Congratulations" on the ability to manage women.

I think I'll just leave it at that. :whome:
 
Taichiliberal said:
Over-population becomes a problem because human beings take one societal format and try to apply it globally. Urbanization should never have been the blueprint for "civilization" around the globe, but a history of conquering armies has done that deal. Cultures that originally were agrarian and/or nomadic kept there practices of large families, as it was internalized as religious and cultural identity. Couple this with the city/suburbs blueprints...and you screw up natural resources.
Click to expand...

Our Agrarian Paradises in the US led to the longevity of slavery, the rise of populist politics, and a culture of failure. I do not recommend it, except to those who really love the agrarian life, and do not weaken their character as a result (i.e. Jefferson and many of the agrarian Founding Fathers).
 
Over population is when there are too many people around me, not when there are too many people around you.
 
Threedee said:
Our Agrarian Paradises in the US led to the longevity of slavery, the rise of populist politics, and a culture of failure.

I do not recommend it, except to those who really love the agrarian life, and do not weaken their character as a result (i.e. Jefferson and many of the agrarian Founding Fathers).
Click to expand...

Actually, it was the European ideals and culture of indentured servitude and property ownership, and socio-political ideals that led to slavery and a culture of failure. The native tribes that were here for thousands of years had learned quite well to live WITH the land, and had thriving civilizations. It can work, just don't repeat the mistakes of the past
 
Taichiliberal said:
Actually, it was the European ideals and culture of indentured servitude and property ownership, and socio-political ideals that led to slavery and a culture of failure. The native tribes that were here for thousands of years had learned quite well to live WITH the land, and had thriving civilizations. It can work, just don't repeat the mistakes of the past
Click to expand...

They also had slaves.

Why was that??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top