1. Hello Guest! Welcome to Psion Nation. Currently you do not have an account with us so you are limited on what you can see here at the Nation. Sign Up for free you can have access to read all the amazing material. It takes a couple of seconds and your off to learning the Way of the Psion!

How would you like America to End?

Psions Viewing Thread (Psions: 0, Guests: 0)

?

How would you like America to end?

Poll closed Nov 8, 2016.
  1. WW3

    23.1%
  2. Economic Collapse

    15.4%
  3. Civil War

    23.1%
  4. Nation-Wide Solar Flare

    15.4%
  5. I don't want it to end.

    23.1%
  1.  
    RockShan
    Happy

    RockShan Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2016
    Posts:
    101
    Likes Received:
    56
    There isn't a "overpopulation" issue anywhere in the world, this is a complete myth, we could safely fit 20 BIllion people on Earth without having issues, nor do we have a lack of resources or needs. It is about "over-crowing" specific areas of the world such as coastal China, or horrible city planning. It may look like we have a lack of resources to those that read main stream media yelling about "world hunger" and all of it. but that isn't caused by lack of resources. We could easily end world hunger in a week (We produce way more than enough food), and fresh water could be taken to those that don't have it. If the Governments of the world would get off their "high-horse", and try to fix it, we wouldn't have these issues.
     
  2.  
    Perses Keraunos
    Cool

    Perses Keraunos ♛First Elder of the Nation♛
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2015
    Posts:
    1,852
    Likes Received:
    879
    There is "local overpopulation", which means that in just one country we can find places where there are very few humans, while other places are overcrowded with 'em.So, yeah, we have overpopulation.
    And I never said that we lack resources, but that they're mismanaged or even purposely hoarded by some, which in the end for those that get nothing IS the same as not having resources.
     
    Zerachiel likes this.
  3.  
    RockShan
    Happy

    RockShan Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2016
    Posts:
    101
    Likes Received:
    56
    You said it! That is being "overcrowded" not overpopulated, in cases with that it isn't hard to fix, such as in China just force them to move away from the coast, at least some of it's citizens instead of them being crowded near the coast. China is already trying to get them to relocate. The mismanaging or hording of food could be fixed by local governments as well! Infact there is already many countries that do manage it correctly. or... Sorry to go here, but those countries that do have food problems, can get off their lazy butts and clean up their nation, and stop using their money for pointless things... C'mon people we learned how to take care of ourselves thousands of years ago... use that knowledge.. and don't rely on Western Nations to feed you...
     
  4.  
    Aliter
    Bored

    Aliter Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2015
    Posts:
    174
    Likes Received:
    176
    If you're okay with expanding into our already dwindling wildlife, than sure. But that would affect the population anyway.
     
  5.  
    Perses Keraunos
    Cool

    Perses Keraunos ♛First Elder of the Nation♛
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2015
    Posts:
    1,852
    Likes Received:
    879
    You know, to do most of what you said it would be needed that:
    1.The government started to work with the community, instead of trying to sc**w it.
    2.People in positions of power started to focus more on the general wellfare instead of hoarding more power/money.
    3.The society itself realized that each and every person has a part to play in both the problem and the solution.
    4.Plans, constructions, relocations, management and etc were made and put into action 'till the end, instead of doing it half-assed or just leaving it on the paper.
    5.Most people started to really be concerned by nature and started doing something to help.

    Among other things...

    As for the "countries that have food problems" that need to "get off their lazy butts", you're talking 'bout those ones that were colonized by the europeans and that had many of their resources stolen?The ones that are so ravaged by war, by the dry weather(or the flood, in some places) or by anything else outside their control?The ones that were scr**ed up in the past/beginning and still have to deal with the repercussions of it to this day?
    In most of those countries, the ones in power are usually the ones that already abuse the system or just trample over it.
     
  6.  
    Perses Keraunos
    Cool

    Perses Keraunos ♛First Elder of the Nation♛
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2015
    Posts:
    1,852
    Likes Received:
    879
    The "key" would be to find a way of sharing space, but most humans just can't do that.That's why we keep to the cities, and even those are expanding, taking more space from the wildlife on the border.
     
  7.  
    Mammon

    Mammon Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Posts:
    537
    Likes Received:
    433
    Yea better ship people to the ocean or Antarctica.

    Don't kid yourself the world cannot sustain 20 billion. It can reasonably fit that many. Support them? Youre high.

    That's probably a snippet from an essay of super number crunching if every single one of that 20bil conformed to super strick regulations.
     
    #47 Mammon, Oct 31, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2016
  8.  
    RockShan
    Happy

    RockShan Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2016
    Posts:
    101
    Likes Received:
    56
    We are currently producing enough food & water for over 10 billion people, well water for a lot more than that.. and even if we reach 20 Billion guess what? that won't be for hundreds if not a thousand years, not taking into the account of possible wars, outbreaks etc. We will be a lot further ahead of space exploration & colonization by that point. Especially sense population growth rates are decreasing currently.
     
  9.  
    Mammon

    Mammon Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Posts:
    537
    Likes Received:
    433
    No were not lol.

    There are entire nations without adequate food and water. There are people dying of starvation daily in wealthy countries like america and even Switzerland. There is not enough food for people. There is definitely not enough clean water. There is technically enough water yes. But you cant just drink from any random source of fresh water. Its toxic or has parasites. There is virtually 0 sources of safe fresh water that can be drink without some method of purification and of those that can be they are all super isolated mountain streams that are the spawn of glacier ice wayyyy the fuck out of range of most airbourne toxins.

    You need to go read some articles and books instead of listening to some crack head rebulicans or a youtube channel.

    Not a single scientist in the world will agree with what you just said.

    You need to read up on environmental sciences and ecology and economy dude.
     
  10.  
    RockShan
    Happy

    RockShan Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2016
    Posts:
    101
    Likes Received:
    56

    I don't think you quite understand the current world situation and technological advancement do you? First of all they are starving, due too food being overpriced in those regions, or not enough supplies being sent or grown there at that time. But we still make more then enough food on the global scale that could be provided to those regions. Now concerning the Fresh Water, have you ever heard of Seawater/Saltwater Desalination Plants? They are all over the world, processing or filtering millions of gallons of Seawater/Saltwater daily... When recognizing this you cannot say we have a lack of drinkable water.. You Sir need to do you're research not me. I am not a Republican, nor do I listen to cracks on Youtube, I actually educate myself on topics before engaging someone in a topic. The chance of us running out of drinkable water in the next 10,000 years is very slim, not only taking into account the mass amount of water on the surface, but also the "underground oceans" that are theorized.

    If we do run out of water on Earth, again.... by that time we will have inter-planetary travel... we won't have to worry about it, especially not now.
     
  11.  
    ShadowNox
    Darkness

    ShadowNox Senior Citizen
    Official Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2015
    Posts:
    91
    Likes Received:
    173
    It's more or less agreed upon that the quantity of resources available is not the problem, the distribution is. Despite the long running arguments for either sides, it's pretty much proven that if not before, distribution is the problem today. Distribution, however, can not be changed due to the nature of its existence in the first place. The very way our society exists means that distribution will always be an issue and the only solution then would be to increase the quantity of resources because expecting the entire global society to change is absolutely ridiculous. So yes, both sides are right. The quantity and the distribution of the resources are both problems, just that the distribution is the primary problem.

    Don't be confused though - while overpopulation is not the main problem when it comes to global resources, on a smaller scale (such as a country-level scale) overpopulation is still a very real problem. Globally there are enough resources to sustain us currently but those resources are spread out (once again - the issue of distribution) and in many places, there are far more people than available resources. Simply speaking, in many places the demand is higher than supply. This is one of the cases where quantity then becomes the issue because expecting people to relocate is unreasonable at best and you might not even have the capability to properly and fully use the resources present.

    Then you have to consider the fact that a lot of the resources are in either unavailable places or in places where it could be available but it would either be illegal or immoral to remove and use them. So yes, technically speaking distribution is the issue here but you can't look at the world so simply. When being realistic with your approach and accounting for humanity on a whole, the amount of resources is the problem.
     
    RockShan and Ulysses88 like this.

Share This Page