View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 20th-May-2008, 10:47 AM
spadlet's Avatar
spadlet spadlet is offline
Forum Hermit
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yorkshire lass, born & bred
Posts: 1,688
spadlet is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wmiddlemas View Post
The problem is that the earth has too many humans all wanting to live the highly extravagant and wastful lifestyle of the developed western world.
BUT, the smaller the population, the higher the cost of labour, due to lower availablilty, so the use of machinery rather than manual labour becomes more ecconomic, if you want the same goods. Which has the lower environmental impact, a team of humans doing a job or the design, manufacture and running of relacement machinery?

Either was I think peple would have to change their lifestyles, so why not change in a way that allows natural population reduction (such as natural disatasters) rather dictating such things to people?

Wobs and co have provided infromation that suggests peple tend to choose to have less children when their circumstances improve. One factor is that people do not need to produce so many babies to achieve the same number of health adults because infant mortality is reduced. Also more afluent societies tend to have other things to spend their time on, such as going to the theatre/cinema so thay do not tend to spend so much time rearing children.
__________________
'There are only two ways to live your life, accept things as they are or take responsibility for changing them' Bhagat Singh (even if you don't agree with how he chose to apply this philosophy)

"Just ignore it all" {CT}
Reply With Quote