Healthy soil and sustainable growing

[Dan Conine <dconine@bertramwireless.com>]

> Personally I don't see a point of feeding anyone who's only capacity is 
> consuming, no matter how rich they are. I have a suspicion that the rich are 
> not necessarily rich because they are more usefull for society. Often the 
> contrary. Many are just better thieves and crooks.
> And maybe Joel Salatin is not too far from this wavelenght but does not want 
> to upset the appletarts (Irish joke).
>
> john
Thanks for addressing the issue, John.
Thanks for being patient with this off-topic, Paul.

Sometimes the usefulness of a person is to teach others how to be care 
providers. Without criminals, there would be no need for cops. Without 
patients, there would be no need for caregivers. There is a whole 
spectrum in between when society creates and devalues unemployed people, 
rather than considering the creation of a baby because one is needed. We 
can evaluate population growth as a corporate wage control tool just as 
the H1B visa is a wage deflation tool.
The point to feeding someone who isn't 'productive' must be carefully 
considered. The parameters we use to determine if someone is useful to 
the future are presently couched in terms of The Economy, and that is 
very dangerous. People are dependent upon being part of society (in 
general...there are a few exceptions). Society is dependent upon how we 
treat other people. Problems arise when the overhead of society in 
general exceeds the usefulness of society toward its own future. We 
currently feed everyone with the labors of less than 2% of the 
population, so feeding people who don't currently contribute isn't a 
factor of need, but of social custom. The main problem is that we don't 
even look at whether people are contributing more than they consume, let 
alone consider how to live so that they would have to or be taught to.
I don't buy the half a billion number, but I don't think we can feed 7 
billion sustainably..though it isn't seriously being considered by the 7 
billion. The population of the Americas was very high before Columbus 
showed up, and modern information from science and social studies could 
mean that humans can become an intentional part of the biomass (though I 
see little hope of it). The current high overhead of energy consumption 
is very misleading because our choices of technology take the easiest 
route, which is rarely the sustainable one (every skidloader we see 
working in construction puts 20 people out of a job, and it only creates 
1/10th of a job to make one).

I'll try to leave this topic alone now, Paul.
Anyone who wants to continue the discussion can send me an email directly.

Dan
Belgium, WI