336 Million

[Funkyterrance]

(B) Instead of speaking about 'humans', 'persons', etc., why not just focus on the stages of life and decide which one is acceptable?

Probably because the stages are not really separable things from the being as a whole.
If a baby was, upon conception, sensitive to pain, etc, pro-choicers would just find another reason why killing it is acceptable. It's all about being able to get rid of the problem before it becomes a problem, so to speak. Generally speaking though, the further away from an adult human the fetus is the more comfortable people are with destroying it because it's "not a person" to them yet.

It's not the specifics of the act of performing an abortion that are important, that's just the way western-thinking individuals are comfortable dealing with the subject because it appeals to our "scientific" world view and has the further benefit of leaving all kinds of grey areas ripe for the plucking.

[ooge]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

[Funkyterrance]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

[ooge]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

[BigBallinStalin]

if you say that some stages are acceptable and some aren't, then you need to explain what makes the younger stage fundamentally different from the higher stage... things like "birth" or "pain reception"... what makes them important?

i don't think pro-choice advocates have given good reasons for their cutoff points.

What is a human other than stages of development--both physical and mental?

If we say, "all humans are precious," then where is the angst against women who treat their bodies with mediocrity, thus increasing the chances of miscarriage?

[BigBallinStalin]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

Did you know that there's no correlation between population density and GDP per capita?

Did you know that as a country advances economically, the growth rate of its domestic population decreases?

I'm really not concerned about rampant population growth.

[ooge]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

Did you know that there's no correlation between population density and GDP per capita?

Did you know that as a country advances economically, the growth rate of its domestic population decreases?

I'm really not concerned about rampant population growth.

income,GDP,is not the same as resources witch will dwindle with unfettered human expansion.There are about A billion people alive today only because a scientist in recent history figured out how to grow particular crops in previously unsuitable areas for crop production.

[daddy1gringo]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

Did you know that there's no correlation between population density and GDP per capita?

Did you know that as a country advances economically, the growth rate of its domestic population decreases?

I'm really not concerned about rampant population growth.

income,GDP,is not the same as resources witch will dwindle with unfettered human expansion.There are about A billion people alive today only because a scientist in recent history figured out how to grow particular crops in previously unsuitable areas for crop production.

I'm with BBs here. (and you said you don't believe in miracles) Those of us talking here only have influence on policies concerning population-related issues in the countries we live in, mostly US, UK, Canada, Australia, etc. In those developed countries population growth is for the most part leveling off. Rampant population growth is mostly in the less-developed world.

The suggestion that the earth shows any signs of lacking the resources to feed its population is just misinformed. There is plenty of food. The problem is that a few of us consume too much of it. Just the food thrown out in the US could feed all of the starving in the world. The problem is selfishness, not population.

[ooge]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

Did you know that there's no correlation between population density and GDP per capita?

Did you know that as a country advances economically, the growth rate of its domestic population decreases?

I'm really not concerned about rampant population growth.

income,GDP,is not the same as resources witch will dwindle with unfettered human expansion.There are about A billion people alive today only because a scientist in recent history figured out how to grow particular crops in previously unsuitable areas for crop production.

I'm with BBs here. (and you said you don't believe in miracles) Those of us talking here only have influence on policies concerning population-related issues in the countries we live in, mostly US, UK, Canada, Australia, etc. In those developed countries population growth is for the most part leveling off. Rampant population growth is mostly in the less-developed world.

The suggestion that the earth shows any signs of lacking the resources to feed its population is just misinformed. There is plenty of food. The problem is that a few of us consume too much of it. Just the food thrown out in the US could feed all of the starving in the world. The problem is selfishness, not population.

This is the scientist.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug

[_sabotage_]

GDP does not mean a damn thing. The cancer rate increases, good for GDP. For some an oil spill is a good opportunity. It's called broken window economics.

Actually, the population boom is said to result from the discovery of nitrogen fixation. You may be surprised to learn that plants grow everywhere.

[tzor]

Question for everyone:


1. Humans have stages of life: egg+sperm, fetus1, fetus2, fetus3, newborn, child, teenager, adult, old (to speak crudely).
2. Some pro-choicers say, "egg+sperm and fetus1" are acceptable stages for annihilation.
3. Then, some pro-lifers say, "ah, if those are acceptable, then the rest are acceptable."

(A) Why do they say #3? Why do they carry that analogy beyond the details of stages and into all stages of a human?

(B) Instead of speaking about 'humans', 'persons', etc., why not just focus on the stages of life and decide which one is acceptable?

That's not exactly true. So let's look at number 2 closely.

Some pro-choicers say, "It is acceptable to abort a fetus as long as it is in the womb, even moments before what would have been a natural birth."

Some politicians and abortionists say, "If the woman had an intent of an abortion and the fetus (now baby) is delivered alive outside of the womb, it's perfectly fine to kill it."

This is the two wherein the three follows. No one argues that Plan B results in infanticide.

Pro-lifers see the whole picture. This is more than just abortion at state at this point. The arguments used to favor post birth abortion can be easily turned to use by the state for the termination of elderly people. There is a trial going on right now about a butcher who literally induced live births and then cut the spinal cords of the just born infants. He called it an "abortion." The media wants to cover this up; that's why you probably haven't heard of it.

[_sabotage_]

Can I kill my son or not? He's just about 18 months and is looking pretty succulent. If I can get the go ahead, I'm going to feed him beer til June and then its BBQ time. Now that tzor has opened up the possibility that pro-choice stands for infanticide, I'm going to get me some choice up in here.

[BigBallinStalin]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

Did you know that there's no correlation between population density and GDP per capita?

Did you know that as a country advances economically, the growth rate of its domestic population decreases?

I'm really not concerned about rampant population growth.

income,GDP,is not the same as resources witch will dwindle with unfettered human expansion.There are about A billion people alive today only because a scientist in recent history figured out how to grow particular crops in previously unsuitable areas for crop production.

GDP per capita has its problems, but it's good enough for our purposes here.

Not dealing with declining growth rates, which I mentioned, doesn't help your argument.

If increased production of food comes with lower prices, then more people can afford to live at lower prices, incomes, etc.---assuming the governments don't inflate the money supply (they do), or impose tariffs to 'help' local agri. producers (they do), etc.

If Norman_Borlaug is making Malthusian arguments, then he should study economics before making bold claims about stuff he doesn't understand.

[BigBallinStalin]

Question for everyone:


1. Humans have stages of life: egg+sperm, fetus1, fetus2, fetus3, newborn, child, teenager, adult, old (to speak crudely).
2. Some pro-choicers say, "egg+sperm and fetus1" are acceptable stages for annihilation.
3. Then, some pro-lifers say, "ah, if those are acceptable, then the rest are acceptable."

(A) Why do they say #3? Why do they carry that analogy beyond the details of stages and into all stages of a human?

(B) Instead of speaking about 'humans', 'persons', etc., why not just focus on the stages of life and decide which one is acceptable?

That's not exactly true. So let's look at number 2 closely.

Some pro-choicers say, "It is acceptable to abort a fetus as long as it is in the womb, even moments before what would have been a natural birth."

Some politicians and abortionists say, "If the woman had an intent of an abortion and the fetus (now baby) is delivered alive outside of the womb, it's perfectly fine to kill it."

This is the two wherein the three follows. No one argues that Plan B results in infanticide.

Pro-lifers see the whole picture. This is more than just abortion at state at this point. The arguments used to favor post birth abortion can be easily turned to use by the state for the termination of elderly people. There is a trial going on right now about a butcher who literally induced live births and then cut the spinal cords of the just born infants. He called it an "abortion." The media wants to cover this up; that's why you probably haven't heard of it.

It is true that "SOME pro-choicers say, "egg+sperm and fetus1" are acceptable stages for annihilation," so it's just silly to refute that.

That's what I'm talking about. You're changing topics, which I don't care about at the moment. Then you wax romantic about pro-lifers. Please. Just deal with my post as is, or leave it alone.

(BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA, "THE MEDIA COVERS IT UP"!!! lulz)

[AndyDufresne]

I've switched over to an "In Kind," economic model. I pay my bills like the serfs of the middle ages.

"Hm, I owe $89.34 this month on my credit card. Time package my tomatoes and goats to send off to the CC company."


--Andy

[BigBallinStalin]

GDP does not mean a damn thing. The cancer rate increases, good for GDP. For some an oil spill is a good opportunity. It's called broken window economics.

GDP means plenty of things, but its usefulness is limited. If I asked you to explain that GDP-cancer correlation, could you?

"Broken window economics"? You're just making stuff up.

[patches70]

"Broken window economics"? You're just making stuff up.

I think he means "Keynesian economics" and broken window fallacy. Just a guess.

[AndyDufresne]

GDP does not mean a damn thing. The cancer rate increases, good for GDP. For some an oil spill is a good opportunity. It's called broken window economics.

GDP means plenty of things, but its usefulness is limited. If I asked you to explain that GDP-cancer correlation, could you?

"Broken window economics"? You're just making stuff up.

I subscribe to Door Ajar Economics myself.




--Andy

[Ray Rider]

"Broken window economics"? You're just making stuff up.

I think he means "Keynesian economics" and broken window fallacy. Just a guess.

I guess he missed the fallacy part.

[tzor]

It is true that "SOME pro-choicers say, "egg+sperm and fetus1" are acceptable stages for annihilation," so it's just silly to refute that.

I'm refuting point 3 that begins with "Then." Point 2 may be true, but it doesn't prove point 3. I've never seen anyone argue from early stage non implantation or early stage abortions to that of infanticide.

There are some pro-lifers who might say that in an imperfect world "egg+sperm and fetus1" are acceptable stages.

[ooge]

Over 100 million sharks killed a year,consumed by The Chinese in shark fin soup.Sharks predate the dinosaurs and will go extinct if this continues.more people only make problems like this worse.One day humans consuming other humans may be the only source of meat.

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

Did you know that there's no correlation between population density and GDP per capita?

Did you know that as a country advances economically, the growth rate of its domestic population decreases?

I'm really not concerned about rampant population growth.

income,GDP,is not the same as resources witch will dwindle with unfettered human expansion.There are about A billion people alive today only because a scientist in recent history figured out how to grow particular crops in previously unsuitable areas for crop production.

GDP per capita has its problems, but it's good enough for our purposes here.

Not dealing with declining growth rates, which I mentioned, doesn't help your argument.

If increased production of food comes with lower prices, then more people can afford to live at lower prices, incomes, etc.---assuming the governments don't inflate the money supply (they do), or impose tariffs to 'help' local agri. producers (they do), etc.

If Norman_Borlaug is making Malthusian arguments, then he should study economics before making bold claims about stuff he doesn't understand.

WOW...you clearly have no idea what this guy accomplished in life,you must not have bothered to read it

[BigBallinStalin]

Are you suggesting we start killing Chinese people who eat shark fin soup? You lost me.

population control while it is heartless now,is the only way to save the human race in the long term.With scientific advances, Abortions should become unnecessary.China was stuck in a numbers game.This is why they instituted these drastic measures.India will be doing something similar before long.

Did you know that there's no correlation between population density and GDP per capita?

Did you know that as a country advances economically, the growth rate of its domestic population decreases?

I'm really not concerned about rampant population growth.

income,GDP,is not the same as resources witch will dwindle with unfettered human expansion.There are about A billion people alive today only because a scientist in recent history figured out how to grow particular crops in previously unsuitable areas for crop production.

GDP per capita has its problems, but it's good enough for our purposes here.

Not dealing with declining growth rates, which I mentioned, doesn't help your argument.

If increased production of food comes with lower prices, then more people can afford to live at lower prices, incomes, etc.---assuming the governments don't inflate the money supply (they do), or impose tariffs to 'help' local agri. producers (they do), etc.

If Norman_Borlaug is making Malthusian arguments, then he should study economics before making bold claims about stuff he doesn't understand.

WOW...you clearly have no idea what this guy accomplished in life,you must not have bothered to read it

If it's similar to arguments that you've been making, then no I won't waste my time. I've heard plenty of that before. (I looked at his wiki page, so I gave a quick "if-then" argument. You cited him as some kind of defense of your position, without providing any details. His green revolution thing seems to pull against your arguments anyway).

Since you're not really defending your earlier position, then we can safely assume that it's incorrect.

[BigBallinStalin]

It is true that "SOME pro-choicers say, "egg+sperm and fetus1" are acceptable stages for annihilation," so it's just silly to refute that.

I'm refuting point 3 that begins with "Then." Point 2 may be true, but it doesn't prove point 3. I've never seen anyone argue from early stage non implantation or early stage abortions to that of infanticide.

There are some pro-lifers who might say that in an imperfect world "egg+sperm and fetus1" are acceptable stages.

lol, okay. Point 2 and Point 3 aren't proving anything. It's a list. They lay out a scenario, then I ask a couple of questions.

[ooge]

Since you're not really defending your earlier position, then we can safely assume that it's incorrect.[/quote]

so you are unable to make the connection between the green revolution and the starvation that did not occur because of it.That unfettered population growth will result at some point in a food shortage that some scientist like him will not be able to fix.China's premier told President Bush what keeps him up at night was the thought that of all Chinese coming from the county side going to the city's to demand food and jobs.but somehow more Chinese would make this problem better?

[BigBallinStalin]

Since you're not really defending your earlier position, then we can safely assume that it's incorrect.

so you are unable to make the connection between the green revolution and the starvation that did not occur because of it.That unfettered population growth will result at some point in a food shortage that some scientist like him will not be able to fix.China's premier told President Bush what keeps him up at night was the thought that of all Chinese coming from the county side going to the city's to demand food and jobs.but somehow more Chinese would make this problem better?

Oh, you're switching your argument. Okay.

(1) "Technology might not keep up." Again, what happened in the US? Stagnant/significantly decreased growth rates in population. Didn't need drastic measures for a problem which resolved itself. (Hell, the government may worsen the problem by subsidizing the production of children--by offering tax credits per child).

(2) "Rural emigration to the cities in China because Bush worried about it." And what do the immigrants offer in exchange? If it's voluntary trade, then they offer something useful in exchange for something useful. If there's involuntary exchange, then they'll crowd the cities demanding 'free' food and 'free' jobs. Obviously, we can point out the culprit in the latter scenario (governments). So, if your scenario of people running to cities demanding 'free' food and 'free' jobs holds true, then we should blame any government responsible for creating that incentive. If there are people running to cities who offer useful services in exchange for goods, then it's not a problem in general.


You could say the same of industrialization (i.e. the migration of rural individuals to the cities) of any nation at any point in time, but we get different outcomes, and each country faces different technological advances and institutions (e.g. property rights regime).

What have we seen with "First World Countries"? Stagnant/declining population growth rates (especially if we exclude foreign immigrants).

What have we seen with 2nd world countries? High rates of population growth rates (but they die quicker).
How about the 3rd world countries? Highest rates of population growth (but they die quickest).
(in general).

So, how do these differences matter? Do higher growth rates in poorer countries offset themselves due to the lower life expectancies and higher mortality rates?


(3) Green revolution isn't responsible for as much as you claim. That's why I don't "make the connection between the green revolution and the starvation that did not occur because of it." Sure, rising productivity of particular staples was great and all, but it's not what got people out of the Malthusian trap--if it ever existed.