Posted on 07/15/2018 12:55:06 PM PDT by rktman
Dhaka Bangladesh has 14.4 million people in 118 sq mi... that's 122,000 people per sq mi... almost FIVE times as dense as the densest city in the US (NYC, 27,000/sqmi). At that density, all 7.3 billions of us could fit South Carolina, leaving the rest of the planet empty.
And recent estimates have put Dakha's 2030 expected population at 28 million... doubling in numbers, while remaining the same area... so clearly, 122,000/sqmi isn't close to capacity yet.
Therefore, I'd say we have quite a bit of space left for suburbs.
” . . . high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the U.N. Earth Summit, 1992.
Any bets as to whether Mr. Strong is a vegetarian, works in a non-air-conditioned office, and eschews the use of modern appliances?
That’s the equivalent of the Soviet Politburo and their 5 year plans.
Maurice Strong is an entrepreneur and has a net worth of $44 billion. Maurice Strong has earned his net worth as the former under-secretary general of the United Nations, as an entrepreneur in the Albera Oil Patch and as President of Power Corporation of Canada, as well as Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Program. He was also CEO of Petro-Canada, and was head of the America Water Development Incorporated, and Commissioner of World Commission on Environment and Development. He was also chairman of the Advisory Board for the Institute for Research for security and sustainability for Northeast Asia. He was born in Oak Lake, Manitoba.
All for me, none for thee.
I was referring to Maurice Strong, He’s the one complaining about middle class lifestyles. Should have been clearer. Thanks!
Good point - let’s make that “. . . bets Mr. Strong *was* a . . .”
Thanks.
There’s a lot of weeds to get off into, but one goal of “sustainable development” is getting virtually all land into government hands. From there it can divvied up among the various owners of the government.
They want people off the land and into high-density urban dwellings. A near-term reasoning behind this goal is that people in cities are more vulnerable to interruption of services and therefore are more likely to embrace nanny government.
The long-term reasoning behind getting people into cities is because it’s easier to cull them in that setting.
“They” do NOT “like” individuals and independent thinkers. “They” are more inclined to “like” subservient herds corralled/penned up where it’s easier to “manage” them. Kind of like, dare I say it, shhhhhhh, nazis!?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.