Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I fail to see the relevance of this to the argument advanced - either in favor or opposed.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt t gmail dotcom) on Wed Aug 19th, 2009 at 07:35:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Which argument would that be?

Rutherfordian ------------------------------ RDRutherford
by Ronald Rutherford (rdrradio1 -at- msn -dot- com) on Wed Aug 19th, 2009 at 12:09:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The one you were replying to?

En un viejo pas ineficiente, algo as como Espaa entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Aug 19th, 2009 at 12:13:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
  1. The costs of indefinite population growth outweigh the benefits.
  2. Said costs and benefits are distributed inequitably.

If you wish to discuss these points seriously, wonderful.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt t gmail dotcom) on Wed Aug 19th, 2009 at 12:35:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Let's stop feeding the trolls, people.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Aug 19th, 2009 at 12:50:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I figured it was worth offering a last opportunity to show good faith.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt t gmail dotcom) on Wed Aug 19th, 2009 at 01:10:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
  1. The costs of indefinite population growth outweigh the benefits.
   2. Said costs and benefits are distributed inequitably.

If you wish to discuss these points seriously, wonderful.

dvx, why thanks for you level of tolerance and faith in other people.

  1. I do not believe I have ever here nor anywhere else said "indefinite population growth outweighs the benefits". We seem to have definite numbers to work with and 416 million for the US is OK with me and 9.2 billion other humans on this planet is fine also.

  2. No one again said distributed equitably. I think that was already assumed since people got in rickety old boats and set out for a better life-as I mentioned. But it is beyond just material possessions but also freedom and chance to develop themselves to the full potential. And yes human capital is not distributed equitably. Which is at least one reason for allowing labor to migrate.

Thanks...

Rutherfordian ------------------------------ RDRutherford
by Ronald Rutherford (rdrradio1 -at- msn -dot- com) on Wed Aug 19th, 2009 at 02:18:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
dvx:

1. The costs of indefinite population growth outweigh the benefits.

I agree. Isn't it obvious that an "indefinite population growth" will collide with a "finite planet earth" (Or even a finite universe for our believers in technology :-)? Somebody posted a nice video on the exponential function in my "Ponzi" diary.
The problem is that the mainstream economic religion says that our economy needs growth. And population growth is "Growth for Dummies" to paraphrase popular book titles. This reminds me of my old diary Beyond Ponzi Economy

Schau in mich, Harno

Make it as simple as possible but not simpler (Albert Einstein)

by harnoes on Wed Sep 16th, 2009 at 04:16:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series