"katy" wrote
So...discounting immigration, the us, GB, and Europe have all
achieved zero population, and in some places have a negative birth
rate in the middle class up. ....

I didn't know that was the case in the USA. Could you cite a source?

So who decides who does and doesn't get to have babies?

I suggest letting economics decide. Give each person two "chits" allowing them
to father or give birth to two babies. If one didn't want children before
having them, one could sell his/her chit(s) (on eBay grin) at whatever the
market would bear. Similarly one wanting more than two kids could buy chits.
This would allow young people to sell to, say, finance their education or a
house, then buy when they could better afford kids. It's all very democratic and
fair to everybody.

And who do you commit genocide on? Africa? They're doing a really
good job already on themselves.

I'm not going to kill anybody. I'd let God do it! As you say, it would be
unnecessary to commit genocide. All we have to do is quit helping the poor
breed like roaches and mother nature will limit their population.

... China? They've been committed to
that for years and yet they could still physically engulf the US
with population alone.

They have their own solutions and don't need any intervention.

Who's going to enforce world legislation?

God. As you said, most developed countries are limiting their indigineous
populations already and there is a huge backlash building against immigration
from the "third world". If these countries, including the USA and China, simply
close our borders and simultaniously quit paying other countries to over
populate, the problem in those countries will solve itself just as it is in
regions of Africa. When Rhodesia was governed by Europeans it more than fed
itself but now as Zimbabwe, it does not.

And when a pandemic hits, and wipes out millions, who will be the
replacement stock?

Why the people of the developed countries who have vaccines and medicines of
course - vaccines and medicines they do not share. And there is no need to
hurry - the world could do without a few millions.

Well, Jon. I don't fly, so I think all airplanes should be
grounded, world wide.. I don't ride on busses, therefore all
busses should be parked, permanently. Neither do I use the
train, ditto. I loathe powerboats, we should sink every
one. People who ride motorcycles should get free gas. Those
using wood stoves should get major tax breaks. Trucks , and
motorcycles, should be the only vehicles allowed on
Interstate roads.
All elevators should be welded closed and people forced to
use the stairs.

I have more, but that's a start.

SBV




"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Nothing to do with trucks, freight, etc. They need to
travel. The main
problem is that regular consumers need to be weaned off of
large, gas
guzzling cars and Stupid Utility Vehicles. If gas prices
rose to north of
$5/gal, the car companies would be forced to make cars
more efficient
because no one would buy the gas pigs.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...

Date: Wed, Apr 26, 2006, 10:15am From:
lid
(Capt. JG)

The point is not to "collapse" the economy. The point is
to force people
to change their driving and car purchase habits.

Jon,

How about 18 Wheelers, Air Freight & air mail, Military
air patrols,
Harbor patrols, border patrols? How about tripling Bridge
fares?
Parking fares? School busing? Let's get the Cops back on
there feet?
Trolley? How about going to Oars for Auxiliary Power,
Outlaw Power
Boating.
Home Heating with wood or coal or even electric.

We have a lot of ways to change our society to do without
oil. I'm
almost 80 years old and don't give a damn:^) It up to you
youn'uns.
CHANGE!!!!

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

"katy" wrote
If more people rode mopeds, vespas, those scooter things, etc we'd
be better off. Europeans do, why shouldn't we?

Good question - IF you live in or near a major city. But many are fortunate
enough to not have to do that. The down side (or plus side depending on how you
look at it) of this is that jobs, markets, medical care and entertainment are
often far away. It is 15 miles (one way) to my job, 8 to the nearest grocery,
and 20+ to major shopping or a MD. That'd be hard to do in winter snow.

Moreover, why should we be forced to live cheek to jowl like Europeans just so
people of limited intellegence can breed like roaches, having 3, 4 and more kids
per couple??

"Capt. JG" wrote
Nothing to do with trucks, freight, etc. They need to travel. The main
problem is that regular consumers need to be weaned off of large, gas
guzzling cars and Stupid Utility Vehicles.

Why?? So those too stupid to avoid having kids they cannot afford can continue
to breed like cockroaches?

Scotty wrote:
Ever see rush hour in a big city?


"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
?? I drive a Jeep, and I have three other cars. I'm
willing to pay more or
pick smaller cars if that's what it takes. I don't often
agree with Bushco,
and even though he's just pandering, I agree that America
is addicted to oil
produced by countries who are hostile to us. We should let
them eat their
oil by reducing our dependency.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Scotty" wrote in message
...
"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
The point is not to "collapse" the economy. The point
is
to force people to
change their driving and car purchase habits. That
would
do it, according to
economists.

Do you ride a bicycle everywhere? Do you own a car?

Why are liberals so selfish?

SV





My youngest son lives south of Atlanta...I ahve never seen traffic
like that, even in Los Angeles....took us 45 minutes to get across a
street to go to Wally World for groceries..

Maxprop wrote:
"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
?? I drive a Jeep, and I have three other cars. I'm willing to pay more or
pick smaller cars if that's what it takes. I don't often agree with
Bushco, and even though he's just pandering, I agree that America is
addicted to oil produced by countries who are hostile to us. We should let
them eat their oil by reducing our dependency.

What we don't buy, China will. The Arabs couldn't care less if we all buy
solar-powered electric cars.

Max


Yes...they will buy and use up all the Arab oil...not bothering to
exploit their own oil fields...then they will ahve a monopoly on
oil, as well, as everything else. If you can't get there one way,
another road will do.

Joe's news clip predicting the end (almost) of humankind

Don't need a biologist to rehash that scenario. Historically,
humans have been almost decimated from earth several times.
Histtory repeats itself...for awhile, we all thought it would be
AIDS...now we're saying Bird Flu...doesn't matter what the name, one
day some pandemic will do it's best and the strong will survive and
the whole thing will start all over again...that's kife, not death.
Che sera, sera.

Vito wrote:
"katy" wrote
So...discounting immigration, the us, GB, and Europe have all
achieved zero population, and in some places have a negative birth
rate in the middle class up. ....

I didn't know that was the case in the USA. Could you cite a source?

Not off the top of my head. Can't find what I'd read but did find
this which supports that it is the recent immigration population of
the US that is having babies, not the historically WASP/European
background citizen.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pub...m_births04.htm



So who decides who does and doesn't get to have babies?

I suggest letting economics decide. Give each person two "chits" allowing them
to father or give birth to two babies. If one didn't want children before
having them, one could sell his/her chit(s) (on eBay grin) at whatever the
market would bear. Similarly one wanting more than two kids could buy chits.
This would allow young people to sell to, say, finance their education or a
house, then buy when they could better afford kids. It's all very democratic and
fair to everybody.

The Chinese have been doing that. So we're going to have the
government legislate birth. Don't think so...

And who do you commit genocide on? Africa? They're doing a really
good job already on themselves.

I'm not going to kill anybody. I'd let God do it! As you say, it would be
unnecessary to commit genocide. All we have to do is quit helping the poor
breed like roaches and mother nature will limit their population.

I am partly in agreement with you there. When I was working HR,
many of the young women that came through the system were working
(at $10/hr to start) and collecting welfare of some kind. I am all
for welfare that trains people so they can become self-sufficient
but 70% of our employees were playing the system. They knew exactly
how long they had to work before they could get themselves fired,
how to get enough unemployment to tide them through, and how to get
back into the system when the welfare ran out. It would make an
excellent sociology study for someone writing their doctoral
dissertation. The mahority of these women were under 30 and most
had at least 2-3 children, oftentimes with another imminent.

... China? They've been committed to
that for years and yet they could still physically engulf the US
with population alone.

They have their own solutions and don't need any intervention.

Who's going to enforce world legislation?

God. As you said, most developed countries are limiting their indigineous
populations already and there is a huge backlash building against immigration
from the "third world". If these countries, including the USA and China, simply
close our borders and simultaniously quit paying other countries to over
populate, the problem in those countries will solve itself just as it is in
regions of Africa. When Rhodesia was governed by Europeans it more than fed
itself but now as Zimbabwe, it does not.

And when a pandemic hits, and wipes out millions, who will be the
replacement stock?

Why the people of the developed countries who have vaccines and medicines of
course - vaccines and medicines they do not share. And there is no need to
hurry - the world could do without a few millions.


BTW, Vito, God is not some giant director in the sky. He made us
with free will. All this comes about by our own actions, not His.
He set the stage and let us write the story.

Hmmm... not a problem here. Perhaps he's attempting to circumvent filtering
again.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Scotty" wrote in message
...
For some reason he came out of my KF tonight.


"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Scotty, don't get too upset. This guy (or is it a woman?)
is not worth
responding to, although you are correct of course.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Scotty" wrote in message
...

"Mys Terry" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:12:45 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

What does this have to do with gas prices?

You posted something incredibly stupid and I simply
reciprocated.


Your posts are always incredibly stupid.

S

Fortunately, I only get the ones that interest you and Scotty. :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
link.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Scotty, don't get too upset. This guy (or is it a woman?) is not worth
responding to, although you are correct of course.


Every now and then he actually posts something other than his typical
acerbic BS. I'll respond to those posts, if the subject is of interest.
Otherwise you're absolutely right--he's hardly worth the effort.

Max