Posted on 06/18/2012 4:20:46 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
I worry too much. You do, too. And no wonder: you can’t watch the news or read a newspaper or click on a website without seeing or reading a report about something horrifying. Often, the risk as reported in the media is grossly out of proportion with the actual risk you face.
Given that we have limited time and energy, there are some things people worry about that get far too much attention relative to the risks they pose. It seems like there are terrifying possibilities around every corner, and unfortunately there is an entire “industry”—government—that feeds on and fuels fear. Over the next several weeks and months, I want to consider a few things about which people spend too much time worrying. In this first installment of an occasional series, I want to consider (briefly) overpopulation and resource exhaustion. When private property rights are secure and markets are free, these shouldn’t concern us.
People have wasted enormous amounts of time and energy worrying that there are too many people and that we will eventually run out of this or that scarce resource (petroleum, for example). Indeed, every time gas prices rise you are likely to hear members of the same crew of alarmists claiming that we’re running out of fossil fuels, that we like sheep have gone astray, and that if we don’t repent, turn from our wicked ways, and (strangely) give the alarmists and their political friends power over our decisions, there will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Rumors of the imminent exhaustion of this or that natural resource are greatly exaggerated. As the late, great economist Julian Simon demonstrated (both with clear economic logic and an unassailable mountain of data), there is a long-run tendency for standards of living to improve
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
There is no such thing as “resource exhaustion” in a free market. There is only a price that precludes the planned used of the resource. A price that is too high prompts adaption, innovation and substitution.
We see this by the fact that nobody today lights their homes with whale oil. As the price rose due to decreased supply, an oil made from coal was substituted and became the successful replacement. Then an oil refined from crude oil replaced coal oil. Then electric lamps were found, on balance, to be superior, and so on.
Overpopulation stories always fascinate me. I always wonder what the motivation is?
I also like to be the antagonist in someones life.
The author is correct, but avoids recognizing the reason the myth of overpopulation was generated was EUGENICS.
Not only Sanger’s well documented racist roots for Planned Parenthood, but later efforts to discontinue DDT for malaria control.
When it was recognized that DDT was saving millions of lives per year, in the 3rd world, a new population control initiative was born.
Their demand for food resources wasn’t the primary concern.
Rather, it was the West’s inability to politically control those populations, AND perhaps limit OUR access to THEIR precious mineral resources.
Unfortunately, this policy initiative was introduced under Gerald Ford.
Overpopulation and resource depletion are all gateways to more government control. People fall for those fears every time. The sad part is that no one does the commonsense math to find out that the doomsayers are full of hogwash. Paul Ehrlich is a good example. He calculated to the nth degree our doom but failed to use commonsense and his doom predictions fell apart when reality met theory.
BTW - If all of our resources ended up, as the experts warned us, in a landfills, wouldn’t it be prudent to mine the landfills? After all, mining 30 feet deep for nearly finished metals is much easier than mining 1000’s of feet deep for raw ore that needs massive processing to be useable.
NJ is our most densely populated state and they say it is about 30% developed, i.e. 70% of it is still trees and forest. The planet could probably support upwards of a hundred times its present human population, although there would be a question of whether or not the planet would be a fun place to be at that point.
Some people, like Obama, believe that if a farmer grows more crops and consequently makes more money or an oil producer drills more wells and makes more money they are taking that money from other people - probably the poor.
In other words, idiots like Obama think that the pie is only so big. Most of us have actually built or created something of value and recognize that we can and do make the pie bigger so more may eat.
Get married. :D
I’d like to see a demographic breakdown of those concerned, or not, with overpopulation. Methinks most harping theeon are sardine-packed city dwellers who have little idea of how much space & resources there really is.
I read some 20 or 25 years ago the entire global population could live in an area the size of Texas with the population density of New Jersey.
Don’t recall the number; there is a replacement rate below which a culture CANNOT recover from. It’s surprisingly high, and IIRC Japan and Italy are below it.
Depends on how much space you give each person, from shoulder-to-shoulder to averaging agricultural usage.
Main factoid is everyone’s fair share is 5.38 acres. Grt yours now while the gettin’s good.
The thing that cracks me up is that the left simultaneously tells me that (1) “The future of the (your) white race is doomed because the dark man is replacing (out-breeding) you”. In other words you had your day in the sun and now it’s time to go off and find some place to die. And, (2) If you don’t stop (living, growing, developing, etc) there won’t be anything left for future generations”.
So if point #1 is true, why should I GAS about point #2?!
Overpopulation stories always fascinate me. I always wonder what the motivation is?
Conservatism is a K-selected psychology, designed for a world of limited resources, where individuals must compete to acquire them. We recognize that resources are always limited, in some way, and must be fought for.
Liberalism is an r-selected psychology, designed for a world of limitless resources, and no competition. This is why Libs panic at the thought of a world where resources are limited, and one must compete to acquire them.
It’s basically the same force motivating Libs to want resources apportioned equally to all, so there is no competitive selection effects favoring the fit.
See the site in my tag for a more detailed explanation.
Brilliant insight.
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.