Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] Population (again)

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "John D'hondt" <dhondt@eircom.net>
  • To: "Healthy soil and sustainable growing" <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Population (again)
  • Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:19:28 +0100


Sorry Paul but if we take this off list now I'm afraid of having given a wrong impression of what I believe.


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.

Now this is one that could get me started.
I have been studying alternative health methods for many years and have come to the conclusion that most health problems rife now in our society could be wiped out very cheaply and easily for at least 80 %.
That this does not happen is I think because main stream health care is an industry that makes trillions of $$ every year and that can only keep going if the general population is kept sick.
So would it not make more sense to try and change this system and make people healthy instead of "taking care" of the sick, in many cases by hand feeding them the chemicals/medicines that keep them sick in the first place?

Without criminals there would be no need for cops? I have heard police men here say that half their coleages would be in jail if it were not for the fact they were police and I have seen plenty of examples with my own eyes. For instance a police night patrol that stole gas bottles, bags of coal and garden sheds almost every night until they were caught red handed. But all was kept quiet because they were police.
I just signed a petition against tazering pregnant women in the US. And from everything I read I think that more inocent civilians are killed by police in the US than by criminals?

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.

I never said I was against feeding the unemployed. I have been unemployed myself but at the time we were living in a suburb with many poor old age pensioners and we had a neighborhood group that would do all kinds of small repair jobs for free. We wall papered and fixed leaking roofs and pipes (many, many after severe frost), cut lawns, did shopping, moved furniture and repaired wheel chairs to name a few things. In a very short time you get a reputation for being quite good with the hands and then the bell never stops.
What I am absolutely alergic too is "consumers", people who have been told and believe they deserve an easy life with food and plasma TV EVEN if they pay for it with money they legally made. Just because you have a lot of money or no money at all does not mean you should not try to build a better wind turbine or a way to purify water or think hard about a unified theory of physics or invent a better cheese press or .... Although you would be hard pressed to invent a better one than the one I came up with when we first started making hard cheese here :)
Know what I mean? Everybody but everybody should have some goal in life to improve even the tiniest aspect of life in general. If there is nothing at all then you are a "consumer" in my book and it would be a better world if you were not on it.
john

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

_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page