Give me you tired, your poor--??????????

Subject: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 07:02 PM

About 25 or 30 years ago it became clearer to me, more or less, that America (the U.S.A.) had, at that time, attained a relatively similar density of population as had Europe and other population-challenged nations when they began filling North America with those distressed and land-poor folk who were, for various reasons, "yearning to breathe free." Groups like the Mormons moved to Utah for their "new start"----and urban people created the suburbs----Jim Jones took his people to Guiana, and then Waco happened.

At the same time, those few decades back, it became common to hear certain squeezed people put forth their ideas why the open door ought to be slammed shut. As the years passed, and as more diverse peoples sought refuge here, their ranks of the squeezed swelled to the point where, in these troubled times, those who came here to be free are truly in fear of being arrested without due process of law and incarcerated. Large groups of Pakistanis have, as a direct result of our nations policies, found their fears so enhanced and so great that it seems preferable to become refugees and FLEE this nation with their families rather than stay here---even though they are legal immigrants to the U.S.A.

Also, this terrible and unacceptable situation plays right into the hands of those wanting to amputate the arms of the Statue Of Liberty that have been open in welcome for so many stirring years.

What are your thoughts ---- and what might be done to change our momentum in so many sad directions? Words are all we can come up with---but words delineating the right good ideas might the pain that looms arounf so many corners these days.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: cockney
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 07:04 PM

Dory Previn

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Abby Sale
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 07:34 PM

Provoking as always, Art. I've long held we ought to somehow close the doors except for asylum seekers. But it's all circular & hopeless. Why not let in somethousands of the starving if they'd agree to be farmers (or farm hands) or help irrigate and develop the dessart?   Because you just can't bound them to the land as some kind of serf and sooner or later they or their children will want education & city life.

Sad to hear about the Pakistanis. Here in redneck Orlando they seem to thrive as a whole. A bit of name calling, true, but not enough to bother I'm told. By my own Pakistani clients, that is. They get along well with the (east) Indians here, too.

It's also odd that the strongest anti-hate crime laws seem to be in Germany. I think our strongest defense against trouble here - and the greatest opportunity to guard against evil - is to staunchly avoid hate crimes. Including any form of ethnic demeaning in public or private - speak out against hatred of any group in public or private - do not permit intolerance in your hearing.

Perhaps I'm naive but I believe that given the bold stance of fairness most decisions made around us will somehow wind up at a higher level for society as a whole. If we chicken out and allow ethnic jokes or hate speeches, etc. then we only (if tacitly) encourage the hate mongers and then the violence.

If the origin of a hate crime is actually political/economic, the continuation and public acceptance of it is based on an acceptance of the hate premise suggested.

Just say no. I'll not tolerate your intolerance.

That'll be 2 cents, please.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Sorcha
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 07:37 PM

I don't know either, but I do know that we can't let in everybody who wants in.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Amos
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 07:41 PM

There is a huge amount of opportunity in this country, Art. So much that there really is little reason aside from security to constrain our policies. At worst we might want to work out some sort of balance between comapassionate admittance policies and quotas.

The underlying situation, IMHO. is the stifling of spirit that has been imposed on the nation's entrepreneurs. Without them, the growth that leads immigrants into stable lives becomes problematical..,and right now we have such a top heavy economy it get really difficult to make growth happen.

The population density is only a problem in the centers. Driven across the West lately? You could put the entire population of New England into Montana and Oregon and they'd rattle around. Besides, the solution to aridity and water supplies is only a generation away. The solution to fuel-driven pollution is as well.

If we give up hope it will be because our politicians have strangled it with taxes, bread and circuses.


A

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Sorcha
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 07:45 PM

And, we westerners would hate it. That is one reason we live here. Anti social? Not really, just don't like being crowded like rats in a maze. And, there is very little "opportunity" in the Western States. Ag is about it, and the "family farms" are going under hand over fist. There are no jobs in this town for 18 yr old students unless they will do the Fast Food thing. That gets old fast.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 07:55 PM

My inland, prairie city of 0ne million is now slightly over 20 % visible minorities. Except for some Chinese and native Americans, most have come in the last 30 years or so. Main difference? A truly cosmopolitan mix of restaurants and food stores- that may sound facetious, but it is a good sign. These people are blending in. The first generation had some problems- the usual name-calling, resentments, etc., but their children are now in every profession and line of work, from carpenter to surgeon. Unfortunately their children's taste in music is as bad as that of their white compatriots.
Of course, a few are making their mark in drug trafficking, but so are some from the visible majority; the overall level of crime relative to population is down somewhat from what it was before they emigrated here.
So far, the Palestinians (a mix of Christian and Muslim), Sikhs and more orthodox Muslims have not had much trouble here. Rare graffiti on a mosque, etc. is about the extent of it (but we have that with synagogues about as frequently).
They are afraid of travel to the U. S. or through the U. S. A few, thankfully a very few, have been refused entry into the States, or removed from their flight. When returning to their homeland to visit, they try to get flights that do not land or change in the U. S. to avoid the hassles from overzealous security people.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Sam L
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 08:10 PM

I think people don't want to just remove the arms, making a Venus de Liberty, but create an entirely new Statue of Limitations.
    I don't have any idea what can be done. People don't imagine what it's like to be in such a position. But I don't know how you make them imagine it, or make them even care to. I've been surprised and disappointed in people who I'd expect more from. In terms of biases, some people must watch too much t.v., and think they can see people based on cartoony images. The people who surprise me must not watch enough t.v. to become immune from it's corrosive effects on the imagination, not enough to become self-conscious of our general tendency to be stupid. It's dangerous to think you are far above the dumb things other people fall for. Sanity is a delicate balance, and we do rely on each other to help us sort things out.

   All I know to do are small things. Try to keep my balance. Say things, do what you can when you can. Don't go along with the drift. Make fun of what's too stupid to let pass, but watch yourself carefully for stupidity and also, the cantilevered counter-stupidity in how you oppose stupidity. That's quite easy to fall into, I think--it plays on your vanity, your desire to see yourself as a good person, compared to others.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 08:29 PM

Agree to be farmers or farmhands in the west? Nonsense. Here in Alberta, the small farm is rapidly disappearing. The future is in the cities, for both immigrants and the children of farmers. Farms have become large, expensive businesses with automated and computer-run equipment. There is no way for the individual with less than a few sections to make a living. Few "hands" in the old sense are needed.

Where are you going to get the water to irrigate the desert? Take over Canada and ditch it down? Not bloody likely. The west coast of the U. S. is barely able to get enough now to service both the cities and the agricultural sector. Canada made a bad deal with the Columbia and will not lie down easily for another theft.

The other point is that there is too much production now in North America. Markets are hard to find. California rice-growers put pressure on the government to make deals to sell rice in Asia, especially Japan, putting growers there out of business because the U. S. can produce it more cheaply and with little labor. German grain producers are having problems because of the US subsidies to grain growers and are now succeeding in getting the EU to level the playing field.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,wdyat24
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 09:57 PM

Within the last year here in Maine, Somali refugees were encouraged to move here by other less tolerant U.S. cities. More than a thousand were directed to Lewiston, Maine because of the easy wellfare system here and Lewiston is north of the Mason Dixon Line. Let me add, American Southern Blacks did not like the Somali competition for jobs, housing and welfare. When the Somalies arrived in Lewiston, greedy landlords saw a way to get guarranteed monthly rent checks from government immigrant relocation programs, so they kicked out the old and working poor and jacked up the rent. This caused a lot of hate and discontent.

   The Mayor of Lewiston wrote a letter to the Somali community and encouraged them not to bring anymore of their relatives or friends to Lewiston because it was overtaxing Lewiston's resources. He was severely chastized for his remarks in the press by the Somalies and The tolerant magority of Maine.

   If race relations weren't bad enough in Lewiston, the head of The World Church of the Creator (The World Church of Hate and Discontent) wanted to speak at a White Supremist rally here in January. Fortunately, he was arrested in Chicago for putting a contract out on a federal judge several days before the big event in Lewiston. There were two rallies on January 11, 2003 in Lewiston, Maine, the White Supremist rally aimed at the new Somali immigrants(460) and the other rally for tolerance and diversity (4,000+). Guess Maine is still anti-slavery. Thanks Harriet Beecher Stowe.

wdyat24

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 10:28 PM

As many questions as answers here. Huge changes taking place and we need to find a new frontier. Where do we find our modern Chris Columbus? Maybe he or she was one of the lost astronauts. J.F.K. said the new frontier was his space program. I'm going to bed.

Art

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 10:29 PM

Art, That's a good thing.

wdyat24

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 11:21 PM

Wdyat24, by my Almanac, Lewiston has only about 36000 citizens (2000 census). 1000 Somalis (or other visible) would cause quite a turmoil, especially if the economy is not good whereas in my city the ripple wouldn't be noticeable. Relocation to small communities must be handled very carefully.   
There are a few smaller cities in that size range here, and it would be impossible for 1000 visible immigrants to move in without displacing others from their jobs- most of the little businesses are family, with neighbors' sons and daughters providing any needed help. The few chains operate with a manager plus mostly young people or farm wife minimum wage help.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 01:26 AM

"Driven across the West lately? You could put the entire population of New England into Montana.....etc...."

reminds me of when Wally Hickel, former Gov.of Alaska and Sec. of the Interior was aked about the 'Population Explosion'....he said (paraphrased) "there's plenty of room, I just flew over it the other day and looked down, and SAW all the empty space"

trouble is, he had no concept of "the carrying capacity" of the land. Water and usable land are at their limits, and I will wager a LOT that "solution to aridity and water supplies" is WAY more than a generation away.

There are other, less obvious problems also. People need room!...yes, I know, 'survival' is possible in highly congested places, but it does strange things to the head. Have you ever seen the studies about allowing rats to breed until the cage is too crowded? Even with water & food, they become aggressive and manic.

With humans, you add in language differences and appearance, and crowding takes on new levels of problems. In my urban area, you seldom see an Anglo-Saxon looking individual as a janitor or 7-11 clerk...but most of the lawyers are VERY white. Don't you think this affects the behavior of BOTH classes? Yes, it is changing, but not nearly as fast as the conflicts and complaints are growing.

The plain fact is, we (the USA)are over-populated NOW, and the ethnic diversity that was healthy and enervating at one time is now a complex set of problems. Either the various 'minorities' will become a group majority and take over the government, or they won't...either way, someone will be unhappy. (You don't believe me? Look at Wash DC, or Miami (and probably Los Angeles or Detroit)and REALLY study the seething discontent on BOTH sides of the class/race line.)

This problem is like many others...it is so deeply embedded and so lacking in easy solutions that most people won't even look at it directly...they cope and dodge and hope and juggle and Gerrymander and obfuscate and rationalize until the problem sneaks up behind them and bites them on the butt!.....it is not a one issue problem, it is multi-level and tied to the economy and to people's very notion of what 'civilization' is ....It requires long-term planning, and most politicans can't see beyond next election.

What, me pessimistic?...nawwwwwwww.........

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mudlark
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 03:07 AM

Here, here, Bill D...well put. One has only to drive thru areas like Pecos, Texas to see what happens when too much ag is foist upon a finite deep aquifer...not a pretty sight, and full of hostile, angry people with no way out. Now it is happening here, on the Central Coast of California, with multi-national winery coalitions putting in huge acreages of heavily irrigated vineyards, on land that was once dry-farmed barley. And even that looks good next to the kind of rampant growth and proliferating housing tracts spreading out over the hills, with $150K houses selling for two times that. These are being bought by people who have just sold their homes in LA/Silicon Valley/etc for 4 times that and think they are getting a bargain, while the people who work in the vineyards, and flesh out the construction crews, are living 2 families to a small house because they can't afford rent, let alone purchase. Not a great combination.

I'm joining you on the pessimistic couch...

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 03:56 AM

"The plain fact is, we (the USA)are over-populated NOW"

And what do you think Britain is? You have areas of land given over to huge farms producing more food than you can eat, OK, you need exports, but why keep adding to the western food mountain? There are still huge stores of food that are now inedible because they were a surplus you can't get rid of (can't possibly give it away to those who have nothing, can we.....?) and won't release for less than cost.

America has so much space, the whole of Great Britain could fit in several times over. You could lose the population of London without even realising it.

Yes, it would have to be handled sensitively, ALL refugee/asylum seekers must be, but first of all the attitude must change.

Send me your poor, your oppressed 'but I'll only take the ones I want or can make use of, the rest of you can bugger off back to somewhere else!'

LTS

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Sam L
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 09:45 AM

Bill D, I remember driving through the west and thinking how one could easily have an illusion of infinite resources. I think those rat studies were the behavioral sink studies, also involving observations of deer on an island, excess adrenaline, hardened arteries--I was thinking of that the other day because of all the deer now. I think I read nearly everything written in the 70's.

As I said I don't know what to do. But I agree with your summation. It's tied to the economy and to culture in general. The U.S. has far more resources than will ever accidentally get to people who could use them, because things aren't produced for use, but for sale. All the planning goes into selling (including the selling of candidates in the next election) not the fitting or saving or using of stuff. I think if people could vote as consumers, in a principled way, they'd have much more political power than election votes give them, but attempts to do this are below the level, and it's very hard to follow the money.

   A telemarketing call to sell you a pre-approved platinum credit card is like a play, a short drama, that says a lot of things briefly.
   It's hard to see and feel how all the little choices and minutia of our daily lives add up to general cultural problems that we wouldn't have choosen to contribute to. But they do, and then it's easier to see the other rats crowding the feeder as the problem.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 02:00 PM

No one wants to discuss the real problem. Rampant human breeding and world overpopulation. China is making a stab at the problem and being reviled by many for doing so.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 02:21 PM

There are still places where farmers are paid NOT to produce, to keep the prices high enough. The U.S. could easily feed several millions of immigrants, possibly tens of millions. The only problem would be getting enough resource redistribution. That, unfortunately, seems like an insurmountable obstacle, given our current government's regressive economic policy.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 02:34 PM

Social Darwinism influenced immigration laws and the quota system when major revisions were made in 1921 and 1924, and they still reverberate today. A lot of people would rather stay at home, except corrupt governments and out-of-control economics make it a deadly choice. Consider how major American exports--film and television--portray life here, and to those who have nothing even poverty here looks pretty good. Helping make life easier in other nations is supposedly a goal of the various funds made available to NGO's and to other nations. Yet (as Q noted) things like birth rates are something that can barely be addressed. This is because well-fed American religious-right bureaucrats don't want the "A" word ever mentioned, let alone practiced, or all birth control funding is forbidden. Several studies have proven that if you can make the lives of women better, through reproductive freedom and access to small loans for setting up businesses, life is much easier and families are more likely to stay in their homelands.

SRS

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 02:35 PM

Yes, we could take more immigrants, but that does not solve the world problem-
Nor does it help with our overuse of our limited water supplies.
Nor does it help with restoring land that never should have been farmed in the first place.
Nor does it help to correct conditions in the areas supplying the immigrants.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 02:47 PM

It does, however, make the lives of those needing general asylum better. As to the world problems, birth control will solve a lot, if it is made available and acceptable. We may not be able to convince many people that it's a good thing, but we can easily provide the materials and services needed.

Unfortunately, voluntary birth control can only do so much. If you start persuading people that they shouldn't have too many kids, while multiple children is still a viable reproductive option, you start selecting for people who cannot be convinced that they shouldn't have as many children as possible. That just makes the problem worse down the road. Even worse, the only other solution is forced birth control, which is morally abhorrent in the extreme.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 03:04 PM

Forum Lurker, that "selecting for people who cannot be convinced" is the old "Catholic problem" argument--and has a lot of flaws. And more than just a little Social Darwinism as it's major component.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 03:18 PM

Why is legislated birth control morally abhorrent? It is both logical and necessary. In spite of current cultural and religious opposition, it is the future.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Sam L
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 03:32 PM

I'll start worrying more about overpopulation when the excess we have starts getting to those who could use it, to a greater extent. Til then, seems like we're skipping a step somewhere.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 03:43 PM

Do you actually think that it is acceptable for the government to dictate that you not have children? If you were a legislator, would you vote for a bill which restricts all people to only one child? If you were a newlywed, and the government told you that you couldn't have a kid now, because the death rate had slowed to much, would you accept that? On what grounds can a society make that decision? And what about a society that refuses to do so? Do other nations have a right to force them to adopt mandatory birth control?

What exactly are the flaws in the "selecting for people who can't be convinced" argument? As far as I can see, the only way it wouldn't work is if failing to use birth control reduces the total number of reproducing offspring. If that is the case, then nothing needs to be done about it, and people who refuse to use birth control will dwindle away. As to Social Darwinism, that's the idea that superior societies win out. The idea of selection in human populations is just natural selection.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 03:48 PM

That is the same Wally Hickel who would say the same thing about Alaska. LOTS of Alaska is almost totally unpopulated; we have the equivalent of just a fraction more than one person per square mile. Sustainability of life and livability is a different subject.

Wally also proposed that we hook up to a large iceberg and tow it to southern California to ameliorate their water problems. We laugh. But as water shortage becomes inescapably severe, wouldn't it be funny ha ha if eventually the world scoured the north for stray bergs to tow home? Of course, if global warming continues the icebergs will disappear even as the glaciers themselves thin themselves to extinguishment.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 04:54 PM

Forum Lurker, are you determining which societies are "superior?"

As to Social Darwinism, that's the idea that superior societies win out. The idea of selection in human populations is just natural selection.

Dominant societies win out, certainly, and in most circumstances think they're superior to those they dominate. Xenophobia, based on a lot of (mis)readings of "Other," is a strong force in dominant cultures.

SRS

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 05:06 PM

I was talking about the theory. I personally think that the best theory out there is Jared Diamond's (read "Guns, Germs, and Steel), that the success of a society is based largely on the geography and biology of its origin. I do not agree with Social Darwinism.

The idea of natural selection within human populations is another thing entirely. The laws of natural selection, that those most capable of reproducing flourish, remain true in any situation. It's only what is necessary to reproduce that changes. That's why I said that if it is a successful strategy not to use birth control, then we cannot institute universal population control without draconian measures, and that if it is an unsuccesful strategy, that population control will occur.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 05:15 PM

as Liz the Squeak said, Britain has even denser average population than the US...and many places have it FAR worse. This does should not mean that the USA should absorb unlimited immigration and growth until it is as bad off as everyone else.

The sane solution is to limit growth until ALL countries can support their population and provide a decent life for all! The birth rate in some areas and ethnic groups is nearly down to sustainable levels, but not in China...or Mexico...or Brazil...etc.. Brazil's rain forest helps to control climate all over the world, and excess population there is chopping down that forest at a staggering rate!

We have 5+ billion people now....we had 2 1/2 billion when I was in school....what are we going to do when the population of the earth reaches 800 billion?

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 06:00 PM

Like lemmings, council suicide.
China is doing its best through restrictions and education to limit couples to one child. Men want their string to continue, so if the first child is a girl, they still try to get a male. China does not belong on the list with Mexico, Brazil, India, Indonesia; there has been a measure of success there.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Sam L
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 06:09 PM

Well, okay. It's probably practical to skip a few things that aren't likely to change soon.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mark Clark
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 06:47 PM

I still remember those lines from “Beyond the Fringe” where they're talking about America and the statue of Liberty…

…It's a lovely statue.
Yes, a lovely statue.
But someone wrote on it “Give me your tired your poor your huddled masses…” Well, naturaly everyone did.

But seriously folks… This ol' world ain't all that crowded unless you buy into the political and economic dogma of the ruling elite. R. Buckminister Fuller showed that the entire population of the earth could sleep overnight in Manhattan using the floor space that is vacated at the end of each business day. Granted, it's been some time since Fuller made that calculation but then there's more floor space now too.

I remember once calculating that the entire population of the earth could live in Texas with each family on their own half-acre lot. There is enough space, you don't even need high-rise buildings. Fuller also showed that we can feed and clothe the entire world's population. Not only can we feed and clothe everyone, we must. Read Fuller's book “Utopia or Oblivion.”

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 07:07 PM

Bill D, I have to take you to task about your allegations of "seething discontent " in Miami.

Who exactly is seething ? I never saw any Cubans seething, and didn't see too much seething among the WASP population either.

They may both, unbeknownst to me , have been seething about the Haitians, of course ....

Muray

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 07:46 PM

Murray...hmm..well, I don't have bookmarked references at hand, but I have read a number of articles and seen TV shows talking about the growing Latino population of Miami, and the arguments over the makeup of the police force, about what languages are taught in schools..etc.. but that is not the main issue

and Mark...I don't exactly take Bucky Fuller as the final authority on population problems.(and there is a billion or two MORE than when he wrote!) In a sense, he is correct...if the population stopped NOW and held steady, and we kept improving distribution and grain production and de-salinization of water, we 'might' just keep everyone alive and fed...sort of....that does not mean we can offer all 6 billion a good life...and certainly not if we have 11 billion...or 27 billion or 42 billion. What DO you think is the upper limit? (This is not a trick question; we have trusted science & technology to bail us out so often the last 200 tears, that we are getting complacent. This planet is limited, and it behooves us NOT to find out the hard way what that limit is.

(I heard Bucky Fuller speak for 2 hours once...about 25 years ago..and I must say, I never heard such a rambling, disjointed discourse in my life..he had many interesting concepts and did many worthwhile things early on, but he sure went off some wild toots at times!)

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Amos
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 08:43 PM

Any one ever hear of molecular techology, nano-technology, or the like? In ten years desalinating H20 from sea water will be about as challenging as separating cows from SUVs on a football field.

Patents exist right now, and have for years, which could raise the efficient conversion of sunlight to applied ebnergy from the present rate of about 12% to over 65%. The limiting factor ontheir use has been implementation on a micro-scale, a problem which is retreating fairly quickly at present.

Much as I like deserts, I don't think considering they were once lake and sea beds that they would be much harmed by a little judicious terraforming, even though I know that sounds heretical.

You'd have to go a far piece to tell me there are too many people. I submit they are just terribly poorly organized, and are essentially the equivalent of potential Pulitzer winners flipping burgers and serving fries. FIne, if that's all they can get, but why the hell should it be?

I believe all such failures, called "economic", are nothing but massive shortfalls in imagination. Sorry -- I know it sounds arrogant, ya....but I am pretty sure it's true anyway! :>)



A

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 08:59 PM

It IS a problem of organization, but that doesn't make it easy to solve. We'd need to either get all countries to agree to global economic management, in order to assure adequate distribution, or bring every country's economy up to the point where even the poorest can afford all their basic needs, and make those countries redistribute sufficiently to keep the masses above poverty. I wish it could happen easily, but it's been a long, hard road to make it this far, and we've barely begun.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 09:19 PM

Destruction of the earth to serve even more humans seems to me a mindless path.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 10:04 PM

well, Amos, I sure hope you are right....I guess. I had NOT heard of nano-tech being applied to those particular problems, so I will have to do some looking.

as to "You'd have to go a far piece to tell me there are too many people"....well, I submit, that if you DO that sunlight conversion and terraform ALL the deserts,(and can do it before we getoptimistic , you still only stave off the ultimate problem awhile. The oceans ARE overfished and polluted...now!. And if the problems of food and water are met, where are you going to put 500 billion people? oh...that's a silly, inflated number?...I asked generally above, how many people CAN we support, given the most optimistic analysis? ..and do you really want to live in a world where personal space is almost impossible? 25 years ago, I waited in line for several hours to get into Yellowstone Park, and I gather they are into reservations now at several parks. And they can't build highways and parking lots fast enough here now...(you, Amos, see as much traffic as I do...is nano-tech going to get the kids to the beach?)

We simply cannot just do an equation and say that we can theoretically tolerate "X" levels of population increase...and then pray we are right. "Testing to destructive limits" is fine for seeing how much stress a car frame can take...when it comes to my planet, I'd like to see a bit more careful pushing of the limits. Financial interests, unchecked, will NOT look at the long term analysis, and you can go outside any day and see the results.

(gee, I've been preaching all this for 30 years, but seldom had more than 2-3 people 'hearing' it.....at least technology is good for something!)

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mudlark
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 10:57 PM

Well, I hear you, Bill D. and altho my romantic soul wishes that science could once again pull our collective cojones from the fire, my life experience tells me that there are too many people, demanding too much of a finite planet. It is not a matter of just "feeding" the hungry...it is sustainability I'm worried about...the destruction of rain forests, the polution of the seas. And the ability to find wild, unadulterated places to feed the soul.

There were a LOT more of those kinds of places, between LA and San Diego, for instance, 50 years ago. I'm sure they still exist, in small pockets, here and there, known to the cognnizant. But in 1955 they were right there, along the manic highway now known as I5. Empty beaches, laid back beach towns, quiet, contemplative places where one could just pull off onto the verge and chill.

I don't want to end up as a rat in an overpopulation experiment. Further, I think it is important that there remain large tracts of natural ground that has not been tampered with, whether by agri=biz or big box stores or any other kind of development. There is something deeply instructive about a piece of ground, or a landscape, that hasn't been forever changed by our intervention. They are getting rarer by the minute, and harder to find.

OK...back to my Biogem website and writing letters to congressmen to, yet again, try and save the Tongass...but doesn't it sometimes feel like an exercise in futility....

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Amos
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 11:22 PM

Weel, dear Nancy and Bill, I am sure not oblivious to the issues you are describing. The ruthless march of protoplasm through time exponential for humans because of the very techical skills I was talking about.    I don't think we need to make any MORE people, for sure -- IIRC, it takes a birthrate of about 2.1/couple to sustain a level population. The poeple of Hong Kong, who live in a highly dense AND strictly regimented mini-nation, are actually declining in population and their government is resorting to unusual solutions like Love Boats to encourage population growth! But most humanpopulations are expanding which is a serious issue.

But I think we can sustain our present number, and I think with a little hard work this nation could sustain more than it does now, although I really hate the crowded parts of it as much as anyone.

But I am not arguing for unfettered growth. Just better use of the people we already have, and some imaginative strides toward better solutions.

A

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mark Clark
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 12:26 AM

Bill, I used to go hear Bucky every chance I got and always found him totally energized and focused. I'll admit I was sceptical the first time I heard him speak. He started very slowly while seated in a chair on the stage. He probably spent ten or fifteen minutes throwing out seemingly random and disconnected thoughts. I thought to myself "Well he's way over the hill but at least I can say I heard the great man speak." Then he stood up, walked a few steps from his chair and in a single sentance or two tied together everything he had said so far into a single complete and exciting thought. If I hadn't been paying attention I might have missed it but it was like lighting struck. From that point, his pace accelerated and he began walking quickly all over the stage pulling ideas together and weaving them into a well considered fabric. By the time he finished (a couple of hours later) his audience was intellectually exhausted but he showed no signs of tiring. I saw him do that more than once to highly educated audiences.

Fuller was definitely a dreamer but he backed up his dreams with the science and research needed to make his dreams a reality. Is there some rule that says the thoughts of dreamers can't be part of the solution? It's like saying we want things to be better but we don't want to change any of our ideas or behavior. We don't want to have to consider things in a different light and we certainly don't want to let go of any of our predjudices.

Fuller's hope for the earth wasn't a fairy tale and it wasn't bare subsistance for the earth's populations. Neither was it built on a collective society or centrally planned economy. His ideas were based on doing more with less—not getting by with less—prevention of waste and understanding the nature of the earth's resources and how they can be distributed to the point of need for the economic benefit of everyone

Malthusian economics suggests that increased use of technology will result in increased population growth and result in exhaustion of resources with respect to that technology. Modern experience has shown, however, that industrialized nations tend to have a lower birth rate than do less advantaged ones.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 09:18 AM

" Is there some rule that says the thoughts of dreamers can't be part of the solution?"

of course not!...any idea which might help save us from ourselves should be looked at carefully. "Doing more with less" is a fine idea...but simply not always and automatically possible! Bucky Fuller was quite a thinker, but I have heard other 'thinkers' who were perhaps not quite so charismatic, but whose math stood up better. I would LOVE to be proved wrong, and have someone show me precisely why I need not be pessimistic. The flow of information I see each day says we are gowing problems faster that solutions.


" Modern experience has shown, however, that industrialized nations tend to have a lower birth rate than do less advantaged ones."

and all that tells me is that seriously excessive population growth is occuring in places where we have little control over it...which leads me back to Art's original question. How ARE we going to deal with "less advantaged" people who see "industrialized" nations as the place to go to ease their pain? The flow (legal and illegal) of people across the southern borders of the US is never-ending. Those people are poor & hungry and frustrated...and they see ANY improvement in their lives as worth the effort. Ask Amos how much of California's budget is devoted to dealing with this situation....(I have no idea how much of a problem it is in Hawaii, but since no one can exactly walk in in the darkness, I'd guess it's not 'quite' as severe.)

(if I were a faster typist, I'd whip off 40-50 pages of details of how I GOT so pessimistic...*grin*...but perhaps this is not the place anyway..)

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mark Clark
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 11:19 AM

Bill, I see I haven't properly expressed myself. I didn't mean to imply there is some reason for optimism, only that the misery of humankind is self imposed. We have the means to develop world-wide utopia but lack the will to do it. We as a species seem to prefer nationalism and short-term self interest. It may be in the genetic nature of homo sapiens to self destruct. It often seems that way.

There may be no easy answers but there are answers. To dismiss them out of hand because they can't be immediately put in place seems tragically short-sighted to me.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 11:19 AM

I suppose we could insist that our industrial community behave better toward those nations, and stop wasting so many of the world's resources. It would make a lot more available for other places that need them. It's appalling the waste we generate. If you watch the news, you'd see that even just sending plastic jugs for water would be a huge gift in many parts of the world, but we throw them out without a second thought here. Helping make things easier for people in their own homes helps them stay where they want to be in the first place. At home.

SRS

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Ritchie
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 11:42 AM

Can you remember your Great-Great Grand parents ? Of Course you can't and will you see your Great Great Grandkids ? Probably not and yet here we are worrying about what kind of world it's gonna be. Are we any further than good old Adolf's ideas for a better world. Yup it's ok to go into 'one of their restaurants' or go on holiday as long as we come back to things we hold dear and true to our hearts. Perhaps Good ole Bush and Blair have it wrong ... forget about the oil. lets have a real war and kill people .. you know it makes sense less people more for 'us'.

It's odd hearing people complaining about our immigration policy in the uk . forgive my naivety but it exists in the US of A goodness me whatever next send them all back to the countries of their origins ha that'll teach them.

love peace and happiness and Woodsie thanks for reminding me that was Dory Previn it would have bugged me (now thats the sort of thing that gets to me) regards Ritchie

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Bill D (Opera keeps losing my cookie)
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 12:03 PM

"There may be no easy answers but there are answers." indeed there are!...sorry for mis-understanding what YOU were getting at

unfortunately, the answers that will work are not easily accepted by many, as it would mean quite a change in culture & lifestyle,,,as well as the BIG issue of economics.

SRS...I am at least pleased that serious re-cycling is beginning to happen...we put 'almost' all of our aluminum, cans, bottles, paper (Including cardboard & slick catalogs), and plastic, into bins each week. The state and county have realized that building recycling facilities is cheaper in the long run than landfills. Much new research is going into this, and they have made it 'almost' painless to recycle.

I guess it will be awhile before all parts of the country catch up.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 12:22 PM

Bill D.,

The problem is that the market still isn't fully developed for those recycled goods. We don't buy enough things made out of that plastic we recycle. Unfortunately, much of the plastic collected locally by Waste Managment ends up in the landfill anyway. They've just expanded the program in Fort Worth to collect other plastics in addition to the standard 1 and 2 (I hope that means they do have a market now), and they collect aluminum, steel, glass, newspaper, but so far have neglected cardboard. Corrugated cardboard is one of the best inventions ever, it is profitable to sell for recycling, yet few bother to do it except at the industrial level. Last time I checked corrugated was going for $400 a ton, and that is a 10-year-old figure.

I recyle a lot more than the stuff that goes in the bin. I compost, I have a stack of lumber left over from remodeling around the house and from wooden objects that gets reused when possible. I just built the workbench in my new garage out of a big scrap of furniture-grade plywood and the planks from the decrepit picnic table that was here at the house when we moved in. Rather than try to renail the entire thing into a stable table, I used it in the bench. They are in great shape for that. A friend of mine has gone so far as to take discarded carpeting from her house and instead of hauling it to the dump she cut it into wide strips and placed it on the ground around some fruit trees (she has homes in Wyoming and South Dakota, and both places the trees can use all the mulch they can get). She says it takes a while for grass to grow up over it and make it look something other than strange, but it certainly is a better use than as landfill. It will eventually break down while doing something useful.

Meanwhile, since it isn't practical to send our discarded empties to third world nations, the next best thing is to avoid using the ones that don't recycle, and when we can, reuse boxes and bags and create less of a market for the plastic stuff. I won't let my kids buy candy encased in hard plastic one-use containers. They can get what they want in paper or cardboard and because they understand why, it isn't a problem. The answer begins at home.

SRS

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 02:39 PM

Amazing where this discussion has gone. I'm fascinated.

An old riddle I heard PAUL ERLICH tell once:

----------There is a pond with a lily pad growing on it. Every day that lilly pad doubles in size. It will take thirty days for the lily pad to cover the entire pond and kill off all life in that pond.
When do we cut back on the lily pad's growth in order to save the pond?

The fairly easy answer is ------on the twenty-ninth day ! If each "day" is an indeterminate number of years long (as in the Bible's creation tale) how might we know when that "right moment" actually is ??

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Q
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 03:59 PM

Old waste pits are creating a problem here. They are too contaminated to be built over, even though the city has grown up to and around them. They have started to give off methane. They will end up being far more expensive to remove or correct than recycling ever could be.
Cardboard is picked up here by residential recyclers, and stores flatten and pack cardboard for recycling. Vehicle tire recycling is mandated by the provincial government, but the quantity exceeds demand so big piles are building up.
Since we subscribed to recycling we have gone from two black bags a week to half a bag a week (includes dog doo here but not in some cities).

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 05:32 PM

obviously, serious recycling will help as lot...both economically and environmentally. I, too, tend to re-use and plan and not toss stuff in trash that is truly salvagable....

One idea that works in some areas..(ask Rick Fielding) is a place where people bring useful stuff and take what they need...sort of an exchange spot with no money involved....but that doesn't work well for most large metropolitan areas.

......and, sadly, recycling and pollution controls only slows down the problem. No system is 100% efficient, and I will simply state once more...the KEYSTONE to it all is total population. No matter WHAT problems are lessened or solved, they will all fail eventually if the population gets too large. All the solutions to social issues and environmental issues can only be considered band-aids if that pond is allowed to covered with lily pad past the 29th day.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:05 PM

Where population density is concerned, how do you begin to indentify that you are at day 28 or 29---let alone convince the status quo-loving people of the need for unpleasant action that could discommode them?

Where the hole in the ozone layer is concerned, is it possible to see where we are and take proper actions even at our own expense?

Where population is concerned, where do we even take note of the problems if we are idealistically opposed to limiting births? And the population, like the lily, has already been doubling incrementally for so very many years.

Where global warming is concerned??

Where a headlong rush to war is concerned?

I another thread, I've said that I feel that this life is a grand parade and panorama whatever comes. But as Edgar Lee Masters said in his book SPOON ROVER ANTHOLOGY (through the words of Lucinda Matlock), "Degenerate sons and daughters, life is too strong for you. -----It takes life to love life." -------- Sometimes it does get pretty hard to remain philosophically positive and optimistic though.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Amos
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:14 PM

Art:

Hang in there buddy. Bear in mind that two hundred years ago, you would have worked 75% of your waking hours just to have food on the table. Let alone any need beyond that.   While every solution has its unforeseen consequences, the net picture is not as grim as some people would like to paint it. Obviosuly we have some serious adjusting to do. But compared to the hurdles we have met so far, I think its doable. Largely its a matter of posing the right problems. Molecular mechanics, for example, would make recycling and reconsittuting landfills fairly easy to do.

A

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:22 PM

" discommode".. is that anything like 'getting them off the pot'? *grin*

ah, Art...I'm afraid that many will not see the danger until a crowd breaks down THEIR walled compound in search of food, water, and/or justice!

You know the story about putting a frog in a pot and raising the water temperature very slowly???...Global warming takes on whole new layers of meaning...*wry smile*

It took a few Donora,Pennsylvanias and Bhopal,Indias and Cuyahoga Rivers to get some ideas through the heads of the recalcitrant...and some simply DO NOT CARE to see, as they think themselves safe from being 'discommoded' during their lifetime.

"It all depends on whose Ox is being gored"

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 11:38 PM

On the other hand, Amos, 12,000 years ago, you would only have worked 10 hours a week to feed yourself, and you wouldn't have had to worry about war, disease, or tyrannical governments. Progress is relative.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Amos
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 12:23 AM

Lurker, I promise you anyone around 12000 years ago who worked only ten hours a week is probably out of the gene pool. Youthink they bought those shaped flints at KMart? It doesn't seem meaningful to say "get real" about events neither of us have first hand knowledge of, but get realistic! You know what the life span was back then? And as for not worrying about war and disease, excuse me pp but the human race was in a fight for its survival against a whole array of other species, and it was a struggle. Perhaps you were dreaming? No war? It was all a battle, daily.

A

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 12:36 AM

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the majority of anthropologists and ethnographers agree that the average hunter-gatherer only needed to spend ten to fifteen hours a week gatherinh food. Further, the average lifespan of Paleolithic peoples appears to be into the fifties for men and sixties for women. This is actually better than many developing countries today. A knapped flint tool can be made by a modern artisan in less than half an hour. Most predatory species leave human bands alone, and archaeological evidence is that this has been the case since the mastery of fire.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 01:04 AM

You might have worked only 10-15 hours a week if you were a man. (And that is an average, but not I bet necessarily typical.) Women are credited with inventing agriculture, and women are also credited with doing a lot of hunting. (Contrary to the popular belief that men did the hunting and women did the gathering.) As to whether it was charismatic megafauna (mammoth, bison, deer, horses, aurochs, etc) or the utilitarian small stuff (rabbits, squirrels, pica, dog) that she dropped into the afternoon stew pot, I won't try to say.

SRS (I'm going, I'm going, just had one last little thread to attend to. . .)

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 10:49 AM

Alas, working 3 or 4 hours a week (albeit driving for 20 or 30 more hours per week) was enough to make ends meet as an on-the-road folksinger through the 1970s and the 1980s.

Somebody once said, "Nine-tenths of life is just showing up." I like as how I agree with that perceptive person.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 10:56 AM

"But compared to the hurdles we have met so far, I think its doable"

Amos, I have never wanted to LOSE an argument so badly in my life...but in my view, the hurdles we are about to face are different in kind from those the human race has dealt with for most of its existence.
It is like saying that "we have walked from the east coast of the USA to the west coast, so a little stroll across Death Valley shouldn't be much trouble". *one of my weaker grins*
I do understand that technology is improving by leaps & bounds and all sorts of innovation are on the horizion, but a lot of it feels like trying to invent a better spear or bow WHILE the lion is charging, when what was needed was to 'stay away from lions' until we had plans in place.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 11:55 AM

In most hunter-gatherer societies now, men hunt the megafauna, and women hunt small game and gather vegetable foods. The women do contribute more calories to the family diet. While 10-15 hours a week was spent gathering food, some foods require a lot of preparation, like nuts or plant pith ( which actually is a staple in some societies). So yes, women may have worked more than that. Compare it to the work of an 18th century housewife, working at a textile factory and raising a family, and it's still a lot simpler. As far as women inventing agriculture, most recent theories I've seen call it an accidental discovery. Women may have contributed more due to their portion of the gathering work (grains are domesticated much earlier than cattle), but I haven't seen any arguments on the subject.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Amos
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 01:00 PM

Well, FL, mebbe you're spot-on-right... I don't have the hard data to argue, nor the inclination, but the fact is that the world is not about to support the pastoral vision of the hunter-gatherer clan today. And I don't believe it is part of any real human destiny to return to that condition. You do make it cound attractive -- work 15 hours a week and spend the rest of your time painting on caves and inventing new dance steps, or religions, I guess...but somehow it is outside the range of the possible IMHO.

A

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 03:06 PM

some interesting points.
While I agree with FL on the relative number of hours worked (pre-agriculture) I disagree about the lifespan, everything Ive read
indicates that while some people may have lived in to their 60s
average life expectancy was in the early 40's. (if youre megafauna
hunter that megafauna fights back from time to time)
there is also a distinct possibility that starvation is around the corner. (certainly, agriculture while it was more work added to food
security)
but its not likely or even possible that we can return to the huntergatherer mode - so the question is how much population the planet can support at a comfortable level. (and what are the problems
that need to be addressed)

I read a book some years ago that covered past predictions of the
Earths max. population, and its interesting that weve long passed some of the early predictions (ie. a max of 1 billion, and 3 billion)
one interesting fact was that while the population is steadily increasing the rate of population increase started to decrease in 1968) while the book never really came up with a possible figure - one notable statistic was that if you take all the people in the world
grind them up into a soup - and layer the surface of the Earth, the layer would be only be a micron in thickness.)


seriously: facts to consider, our economy is based on the idea of constant growth - ie. we are only doing well if our businesses are growing and expanding - how do we do that with a planet of finite resources? the oceans are being overfished (after years of factory fishing) the underground aquifers are being depleted.
(Im sorry but Idont really think southern California will move to nano tech desalination - the easier thing to do is to take it from us
(Canada) while our govt claims Water was never part of the FTA
there are lawsuits pending from US companies wanting to export our water)

on a positive note; the pop. growth in the developed world is actually declining, which means that if people have a better standard of living they choose to have less children (this also applies to women in the developing world who when educated and have reproductive freedom will limit the size of their families)

I dont know about the US, but in Canada we are told that without immigration our economy would be in trouble (the aging population,
looming labour shortage etc)

what is the future? I spent a year in Japan, and coming from Canada with the same population as Tokyo city (30million), I have to say I dont want to live in a crowded future were people live tiny one room
apartments, the rush hours and the station people whose job is to shove everyone on the train.

the industrial revolution and improvement in science, health care etc led to a better standard of living but its time some of the basic assumptions about economic growth were addressed, and the true costs of things were factored in to the equation.

I heard a farmer in the prairies say he get paid $30 an acre not to farm his land, and if he did farm it - he would make about the same.
in fact he makes part of his living from that and the rest running a motel in a nearby town. on the plus side wildlife has started to return.

still Im reminded of a farmer I know on one of the Gulf Islands in BC
hes raised a family and made a comfortable life doing organic farming for the last 25 years no fancy machinery, or pesticides.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 04:41 PM

" facts to consider, our economy is based on the idea of constant growth"

indeed...and it would be quite a switch to a steady-state economy. Some businesses would falter and change a LOT until they adapted...and some would cease altogether. Those whose concept MUST include constant growth simply deny the obvious truth...infinite growth is impossible, and debating over whether we have 10 years, 10 generations, or 10 centuries to solve the problem is merely an exercise (though an inportant one).

The point is, there ARE controls that will be put in place, and our goal is to decide ourselves, and not let nature do it for us, as the results would not be pleasant. (riots, starvation, disease, loss of technology, re-institution of anarchy or despotitsm in unknown ratios...etc.) (some of this happens EVERYDAY somewhere in the world now...we just don't see most of it)

Read the history of Easter Island to what can happen to a closed ecosystem when things go wrong....and the earth is just as much a closed system as Easter Island...only larger and harder to model.

IF we are cautious and sane,the technology Amos mentions can add a great deal to our society....if not, the barbarians will be trampling that nano-technology into the dust without knowing it's there.         








It is not enough

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 06:04 PM

I never intended to imply that we should go back to the Paleolithic. It has been made impossible by the population boom, which was spurred by agriculture. The thing is, agriculture actually decreases food security. If you depend solely on a handful of crops, which can only be harvested once a year, blight, drought, or any of a dozen natural disasters can destroy your entire food supply. Further, agricultural societies suffer from dietary deficiencies in many proteins and vitamins, and get many diseases from their domestic animals (smallpox, influenze, plague from rats eating stored grain, etc.). If it were at all possible, a return to hunter-gatherer societies would still improve the average living conditions.

Since it is not a viable option, there are only a few ways in which we can deal with Malthusian economics. First, we can attempt to limit population growth. Unfortunately, unless everyone can agree to produce only 2.1 children per couple, some people will need to be coerced, which is ethically very shaky. Second, we can increase our ability to utilize existing renewable resources. The improved solar converters mentioned above would help, as would intensified use of the oceans and lakes as centers for food production. Fish farms date back to the heyday of the Hawaiian empire, and work surprisingly well for the manpower requirements. Such measures will only work for a limited period of time, unless world birth rates fall in line with those of the industrialized world. Finally, there's looking for somewhere else to live. We've emigrated whenever population pressures got too much, and it's not as if the subject hasn't been given any thought. The only problem is finding another habitable planet we can reach.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Sandy Creek
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 08:56 AM

Those of you who are not happy with the United States as it is today
can always move to Mexico, Latin America, and South America. There is plenty of room now that large percentages of these populations are now residing north of the Mexican border. Or wait a few years and many parts of Africa and Asia will be able to accomodate you because AIDS and the complications of AIDS will kill off as high as 30-40% of some populations (unless the WHO finds solutions and effective preventions). Don't count on government assistance or welfare or good 'ol free government cheese and handouts if you decide to relocate to these parts of the world. So, quit yer bitchin' and count your blessings, make room for the legals and illegals and share...you have no other choice.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 11:47 AM

Woodsie, I think Art's allusion might be to Irving Brlin ("Give me your tired and poor"). The Dory Previn lines were "Give me your poor, your maladjusted / Your sick and your weak, your tired and your busted..." or something like that.

Good stuff, Sandy Creek. And Bill D's pessimism is well founded. Sorcha, whose family were no doubt US immigrants at some stage, thinks there must be a limit, but whatever that limit is, it's not in sight right now.

The impoverished, overcrowded and overworked people of the world have increasing opportunities to realise that there can be a better life, and many of them will go to desperate lengths to get to where the grass is greener, if only for the sake of their children. Like it or not, the grass is greener in the US, and it's going to be a hard task keeping them out.(Alaska alone has about 30,000 miles of coastline.)

Population density in the UK is around 340 per square kilometre, and it's close to that in Japan. In neither country is it seen as a mega issue. In the US, density must be far below 50 per square kilometre (don't have the figure to hand). And the proportion of uninhabitable land is probably no higher in the US than in Japan. Like it or not, the US is part of an extremely distressed world, and is going to get a taste of that distress.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mark Clark
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 12:33 PM

“…count your blessings, make room for the legals and illegals and share...you have no other choice.”

Great thought, Sandy. At first I thought you were espousing that love-it-or-leave-it crap but your conclusion is the only one that makes any sense.

Good on ya… and you too Fionn. There never was a good time for isolationism but it's really an impossible stance in today's world.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 01:30 PM

there's whole lot of grey area between isolationism and "y'all come"

to be clear...I am NOT suggesting that the US switch to some heavy handed policy of almost no immigration...but porous borders, where almost anyone, whether they want to live here or commit terrorism, will not do either.

Any country should be able to make it's own rules about who immigrates and at what rate, and in my view we have been a bit too open in some categories, leading to a slow rate of assimilation.

and we simply have to get used to the fact that since Sept.11, all bets are off as to who will next try to damage us and how. If they can't hijack airplanes, they may try to poison the water or use bio-terrorism, and we need to limit their opportunities as much as possible.........yes, that means, dare I say it...profiling. I do not like this!...but 'most' of those seeking to harm us right now come from certain cultural groups......and many of those fall right into the category that titles this thread "...your tired, your poor..."....so....whether some folks think we 'deserve' our punishment of not, we don't LIKE it when someone does billions of $$$ damage and kills our citizens....and are threatening to do more.

Sorry about that you tired & poor--...some of you are ruining a good deal for everyone else.

(oh...please don't accuse me of prejudice, I will live next door to, eat with, buy from, hug, let my children marry...etc...anyone! so long as they behave and act responsibly and don't try to alter the basic structure of this country gratuitously.)

(I am sitting here, trying to imagine how this sounds and how to post it without 27 pages of disclaimers & explanations--perhaps it can't be done easily....but here goes nothing..) *click* "submit message"

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 08:24 PM

Bill D, you remind me of a point my brother used to make - if a country gets TOO many immigrants because of its prospects coupled with an open door policy, eventually it won't be the same country. (Just ask the Indians!)

Forum Lurker and others, if human being hunters/gatherers worked fewer than 20 hours a week, why is it that monkey troops spend most of each day feeding?

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 10:41 PM

one other related point is, that if it gets too many people, (no matter how) it runs the risk of becoming like all the other countries with problems. Is it reasonable that the only 'fair' solution is for all countries to sink to the same level of frustration?

The US has mostly used its good fortune to try to help those with problems, but it MUST remain stable and strong to do much...but it seems as though we are now often seen as arrogant and pushy and that just BEING strong and rich in a world that is 50%+ poor is patently offensive *sigh*...

I watched a documentary the other night about China, and how Genghis Khan and his barbarians seemed to hate seeing comfortable, secure areas, and often just burned and ravaged them. China's response was The Great Wall....It made me wonder.....we can't build 25,000 miles of wall today, but I'd bet there are modern equivilents being discussed...kinda scary....

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 11:26 PM

Ebbie, it's a fairly complex answer, but here are some of the factors. A) Monkey troops, in fact, do not spend that much time feeding, at least compared to herbivores. The more the animal grazes or browses, as opposed to eating concentrated food sources like fruits or animals, the longer they spend getting food. Humans and apes usually gather from more concentrated sources. B) Humans have tools, which greatly speed the gathering of many types of food. C) The 10-15 hour figure is time spent gathering food. Preparing and eating the food may take longer.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 14 Feb 03 - 01:07 PM

I've had the luxury, as a folksinger on the road who was willing to accept "less" than the typical American consumer, to anchor my family down in a place where we had the small town lfe we wanted along with urban sprawl and an enlightened night life cultural scene close by. I could USE the city for all it's benefits and then head to a more peaceful and less populated and problematic place where our son's school was academically superior. The life in a more rural area also cost about 50% less than a city and 75% less than the suburbs. Being self-employed and at least 85% my own boss was important to me.

What I'm getting at by first stating the above is that humans should not be forced to live the way they do in so many overpopulated areas of our world. Indeed, for me at least, I had to get out. I made a choice to have less in order to have more. From where I sit, there was ACTUALLY a point where being with fewer people was a necessity.

If I am at all typical, we will need to limit our population at some point. By the time we decide to do that, the pond will need emergency pruning that will be painful for many I fear.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 14 Feb 03 - 07:34 PM

Bill D, you're right to be thinking fences. You've got one protecting you from the native poor - it's the one that goes round all the penitentiaries, and the sooner you get ALL the poor on the right side of it, the sooner you can relax. (You've already got way the highest proportion in the world of population in prison, including one in every three blacks aged 18-23.) The other one's the problem - the one between the rest of the world and you. And all the time, knowledge of your standard of living, which is largely on the back of unfair trade terms, is spreading wider and wider. And travel is getting easier and easier.

Of course if the USA as a nation spent just a little more time thinking about the world about it, you wouldn't need to be thinking fences, and people would not be intent on blowing you to hell. As for your belief that the USA has "used its good fortune" to help countries with problems... that would make an economist smile. The USA doesn't even help its own poor, as that would mean the monstrously rich being just a little less monstrously rich.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 12:52 PM

Fionn, That's Emma Lazurus, not Irving Berlin:

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Forum Lurker, I don't have the citation handy for a specific reference to women inventing agriculture, but it is a widely-held idea in anthropology and womens studies today. You might start with Donna Haraway's Primate Visions: Gender, Race and Nature in the World of Modern Science. The theory isn't without argument for several reasons, but the gist of the idea was that as women figured out how to concentrate (cultivate) the grains they had once gathered from random stands, and to store the extra, men figured out how to turn that surplus into political power. It could as easily have been women figuring out that it meant power--and to support this, we should note that there were at one time many matrilineal cultures and societies in the world. Back at a time when there wer more goddesses than gods? Diana of Nemi, Cybele, etc. Something caused that to change--possibly the ability to make weapons and wage war? Fast forward to today where power is more often measure by the "lack of" power (ability to feed family, raise children to adulthood, educate them, shelter them). Allow people to at least achieve these basic levels of comfort and control over their lives and the rest of the stuff will follow, if they wish, in their own homes. I'll stop here before this becomes a thesis-length essay. :-)

SRS

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 01:37 PM

That argument is based on the idea that these cultural practices were, to some extent or another, deliberately created. It seems to me, based on what I have read, that such ideas as agriculture and unequal distribution of power were accidental developments slowly evolving towards recognizable forms. By those ideas, it is probable that women, usually being more involved with the harvesting of plants, had greater responsibility for the rise of domesticated crops. I doubt that there was any intentional creation of agriculture by either gender.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 01:57 PM

Yes, the title I gave this thread did come from Emma Lazarus and the poem that made the inscription on the base of the Statue Of Liberty. How Irving Berlin and Dory Previn made their way into this, I cannot fathom. But I was a folksinger----and knew little of moon-June-croon and-spoon music.

As far as I know, that inscription is still there on Ms Liberty and still our ideal...

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 07:35 PM

Fionn-- having read this forum from almost the beginning, I do notice trends and, for want of a better term, 'leanings' by certain individuals. You have pretty consistently had mostly critical and negative things to say about the US. I don't remember whether you have ever been here, or spent any time here, but you have some pretty strong views.

I, having been born here, am no doubt biased a bit, but it still seems as though you paint with a pretty broad brush. Do you see nothing good or decent about the US? I am quite aware of various problems, and recently 49.5% of us, helped by 5/9 of the Supreme Court, elected an administration that is making our image worse. We may well UN-elect them in a couple of years...I hope so!

I do KNOW though, that we have spent many billions of $$$ abroad that were genuine help, not just greedy manipulation of the world for our own self interests. (I 'seem' to remember asking you once before what nation you would put forth as a paradigm of virtue and a model of altrusim....would you care to suggest one?)

ANY nation tends toward decisions and actions that benefit itself, but it is perfectly possible to do good at the same time, and I maintain that we have done a lot of that, in different measure at different times.

As to the rich & the poor and blacks in prisons...etc...*shrug*...statistics only tell you a few things. Suggesting that "putting the rest of the poor in prisons" is either our aim or our secret wish is utter nonsense! If it were, I'd be pretty damn close to being locked up myself! You 'state' that 1/3 of young blacks is in prison as if you had some idea of how to deal with the situation that is better. Care to enlighten us as to how to deal with crime and social problems to solve the problem? More jobs? Better education? We are trying! There are levels to the situation that you barely comprehend!

your last paragraph has things that simply are not true:

"Of course if the USA as a nation spent just a little more time thinking about the world about it, you wouldn't need to be thinking fences, and people would not be intent on blowing you to hell."

pooh!...just BEING richer and having the position as the last 'super power' makes us an automatic target. Mistakes that we DO make are taken out of context and used to make it sound as if all 280 million of us were little Hitlers, bent on some form of subjugation of the rest of you!

"The USA doesn't even help its own poor, as that would mean the monstrously rich being just a little less monstrously rich."

doesn't even help? Nonsense!...enough? How DO you do 'enough'? The "poor" are not a simple stereotype...there are MANY types of poor who are poor for different reasons, and needing many different kinds of help. Want to come design programs and work on THAT can of worms?

About the only thing I can TRULY agree with you on is that the "monstrously rich" are getting richer, and widening the gap every day, and I doubt that they will willingly become ".. a little less monstrously rich." ...but we have ways...we still have the basic elements of a democracy, and CAN vote out the worst ones, if we can get the message out. (Yes...BEING "monstrously rich" allows them to control all to much of the election procedure, but short of anarchy, we have to work 'mostly' within the system.)

Fionn...take a look at YOUR country..(I don't remember you mentioning which of the fair, sane, happy, well-run model countries of the world that you live in...)...and ask yourself how YOU appear to those on the outside.

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 10:26 PM

Bill D, True enough. Good thoughts all.
I will tell you all that I am now in the ranks of the "folkie poor" having spent all the reserves I had put away on medical bills for myself and Carol. That said, I'm now on Social Security disability and other government programs that make getting medical care, if not perfect, at least possible. Sure, it could be better. But my needs are sparer than many. Me having been a road-weary folksinger, living cheaply between gigs and towns is a necessity. ;-) I feel no guilt these days either. I put all that cash into the system that I get back now. I thank Jack Kerouac and Pete Seeger and Woody and Utah and our public library and more recently, Barbara Kingsolver for showing me over the many years what really matters --- and that smaller is better.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 11:01 PM

exactly, Art!...I, too, am on social security, and doing some craft shows to supplement income...we 'have' medical insurance, but it is soon going up $200 a month....we just hope to scrape by till I can get Medicare in 2 years. Still, we are doing ok, with careful planning.

I am NOT satisfied that the govt. is doing the best it can, and I'm sure a lot of people could have better prescription drugs for what they are spending everyday to harass Saddam, but I can do little about that except vote & talk...and I do.

I have plenty to say about the U.S. of A., both positive & negative, and I wish EVERYONE understood that nothing is simple black & white. I have complaints about France, but I admire the stand they are taking against the war, and I appreciate a LOT about their culture...I sure don't use every opportunity to bad-mouth them about every little thing I dislike...(nor England, nor Russia, nor Ireland, nor Argentina..etc...)

Art, it does my heart good to see you here, sharing and counseling and educating after the years of dues you paid collecting the wisdom and humor you exhibit every day. You show more restraint than I in navigating the rapids of many of these debates and discussions...(all those years of working an audience, hmmm...*grin*...

anyway, I hope life stays comfortably 'steady' for you, and that I can keep sneaking into your interesting thread for a long time!

take care.....

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 12:30 AM

Bill,

It's a hell of an adventure, ain't it? We had insurance all the way through until it was up over 7,000.00 a year and one day, we had to let it go to pay the rent. Carol ran out of her coverage for specialized problems first. Then the parts it did't cover for me did us in as well. I'll bet American Family Insurance was glad to see me fumble the old pigskin. They had paid out $750,000.00 for what our old-fashioned policy did cover. If Bush screws up Social Sec. even worse than it is---well, that'd be par for the course. As my old uncle was fond of saying, "If ya don't have a sense o' humor, it isn't funny !" He meant life in general I think. I used to carry those old Groucho glasses with the big nose in my glove compartment to put on in a traffic jam in Chicago. Ya can't be pissed off when you're wearing those.-----HEY, everybody, send those or a rubber chicken to Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell---even Sadam and Bin Laden. We really do need some levity to change the mood of everybody.------------Onward...And the best of luck to you all !!!!!

Art

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Art Thieme
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 12:39 AM

Folks, that's a bit high. $500,000.00 would be closer to reality.

Art

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 22 Feb 03 - 02:06 PM

BillD, sorry not to respond earlier.

Yes, I've been to the states and loved it. Few places have made as big an impression on me as Alaska, and I'm dismayed to see its wonders going down the tube. As I usually try to do, I travelled in Alaska mostly by mountain bike, bus and rail (1400, 1000 and 300 miles respectively) to minimise my own impact on the environment.

It's surely beyond argument that America is not only the richest nation, but also has the widest gap between rich and poor of any OECD country. Under Thatcher and Blair the UK (where I am) has been trying to catch up, by allowing the gap to widen at a faster rate than any developed country except New Zealand. But we're still way behind the USA, and consequently our prison population, though nearly unique against any other comparator, is still far behind the USA's in relative terms. Build a fairer society and you will need less prisons.

Countries like Norway contribute far in excess of the UN-agreed 0.7 per cent of GDP to overseas development. The UK is far below that level (less than 0.3 per cent last time I saw a figure), and the US is far behind the UK (maybe around 0.1 per cent?!!). Both the UK and US notoriously attach all kinds of strings to the aid they contribute, like the requirement to by un-needed weaponry.

Even that aid, pathetically feeble as it is, has nothing to do with generosity - at best it is inadequate compensation for punitive trade barriers. Any state in Africa would forego all aid in exchange for fair access to markets. Many have said so, many times.

And yes, part of the reason for the USA's exceptional unpopularity worldwide is that it is so disproportionately rich. People who work their socks off for pittances (say 18 hours a day, when aged 10 or 12) are entitled to wonder how many hours Americans must work to earn all their vast riches. Admittedly it is widely overlooked that - inexcusably - there is worse poverty in the USA than even in, say, Cuba - whose economy successive US administrations have sought to cripple.

In short there are MANY countries that treat the developing countries more fairly than the USA does, and that also distribute wealth more fairly within their own populations. It's not rocket science, so what's the excuse?

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mark Clark
Date: 22 Feb 03 - 02:23 PM

Fionn, Your observations are quite right. The policies and practices of the U.S. Administration(s) have long been an outrage and an embarrassment to many of us here. We can only pray that the world understands that our government does not necessarily represent most Americans and is willing to distinguish between individual citizens and national policy.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Feb 03 - 06:58 PM

I'm thinking...not easy questions to answer. (But I will say, it is far easier to TRY to answer those kind of questions..put forward with figures and comparisons, than to deal with sweeping accusations and condemnations..)...I will contemplate hard!

I do know that, over the last 20-30 years, it has 'felt' to me as though the very fabric of out society has been changing to allow "The Golden Rule" to be followed more often and in complex ways...(that is, "He that has the gold, makes the rules!")... Those whose idea of success involves money and power work the hardest to control the entire structure OF lawmaking, business, environmental controls, social entities, etc. One historically strong influence on society has been religion, so those who would control money see that if they can give the 'right' (no pun intended...yet) religions more input into the elective/judicial process, the easier it will be to move minds in ways that reflect their (those who seek control) ends.

In the same way, laws and procedures about 'how' the financial systems are operated are changed, massaged and made complex to allow the flow of *money* to be manipulated more easily. It's almost like diverting rivers for irrigation--if you control the direction and volume of the flow, you can make sure YOUR crops get watered, no matter the fairness of the distribution.

I am sure that some of these people working hardest at this do not even realize exactly what formulas they are following, they just have a routine, and like the results.....but others know exactly what forces are at work, and strive to control without public understanding of their methods. (Sometimes they get so greedy they fail miserably, and we get scandals like Enron, where they wanted it ALL, and barely hid the machinations).

Well...what has this to do with the USA's position and image in the world? A lot...we have had administrations for a number of years now that were controlled by these interests, and even when they sincerely THOUGHT they were 'doing the right thing', they often did good with ulterior motives and clouded vision. Some had NO illusions, and I can name some who I cannot imagine being genuinely altrustic!

Not since Kennedy/Johnson (it seems to ME)have we had a strong push for truly fair distribution of wealth and power...and of course, Kennedy was wealthy enough that even HIS decisons were colored by lifestyle.

Still, the image of "what America was founded for" and the words of our Constitution and Declaration of Independance are known to most of us, even if interpreted a bit differently by some...*wry smile*. We still DO try to help other countries, and we do NOT seek to simply overthrow those weaker than ourselves, though we probably could. (Can you imagine the world if the power of the US were suddenly transferred to certain other world figures?).....

I wish I could encapsulate the unimaginably complex set of issues and problems...and their solutions... in one big socio-political "Unified Field Theory", but I suspect that is impossible by definition!....I do have opinions about certain 'keystones' and focal points that need to be addressed if any specific solutions are to have any chance of working. (What good are pain pills and band-aids, if the diagnosis is cancer?).....................The trouble is, that I believe that for almost ALL problems, from the equitable distribution of world resources, to local immigration policies, the only real, long term solutions are so radical that most people, no matter what their politics or social status, will have trouble even considering them, as they will involve either too much lifestyle change, or too long a timeline in these days when tomorrows stock market (or supper) are the main considerations!

....well, I said I would think, and then I rambled. I will STILL think. I do not pretend that the US has no faults, and I know that some countries have, outwardly at least, a calmer, saner, quieter image. One would like to KNOW exactly why Norway or New Zealand can seem more stable and reasonable than Ireland and Israel.

Ah, my head is so full of threads of thought right now that I can't even decide what to talk about, much less argue the details...

off we go.....mumbling and digesting........

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Mark Clark
Date: 22 Feb 03 - 07:18 PM

Well, Bill, that is so typical of you… applying actual creative thought to a problem. I think you've got a really good start, I hope you'll add a chapter once in while.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Give me you tired, your poor--??????????
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 02:02 AM

Well, I can answer your question on why Norway and New Zealand are more stable than Ireland and Israel (by the way, were you trying for consonance, or did it just happen?). Norway is more stable because it has almost no history of divisive internal conflicts, and not much more for external. New Zealand had some conflicts, but for the most part, the invaders, both Maori and European, were so succesful that those of the original populations left didn't do much. In Ireland and Israel, there has been and still is great sectarian strife, resulting from their many invasions and colonizations, ranging from partial success to abject failure.