http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2011/09/11/is_it_time_for_population_control/
Don't worry it's a really short article. I promise you can read it in ten seconds.
P: Population keeps growing but space for farming does not
C: Population must be controlled
China did it right? Would a law like that stand a chance here in the US?
Looks like they keep changing their mind. Make more people or start reducing them. Here is an article that sort of explains that there is a problem in china with a population decline.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/04/28/china-population-census.html
Sorry if the link does not turn into a hyperlink, blogspot stinks and keeps altering my html when I try to make it a link, so just copy and paste it.
This is definately an argument, but you put two premises into one
ReplyDeleteP1: Population is growing
P2: Farmland is not increasing
On another note, picture this.
What happends when a city runs out of space for buildings - they build upward.
Why not an indoor skyscraper farmhouse, fueled by growlights?
A 50+ acre farm could be built on only one acre of land this way.
I agree that this is an argument as well, though I don't believe the US would ever instate such a law; the furthest the Government seems to be willing to go is to set in the 2.5 children suggestion for families.
ReplyDeleteWhat the simple, Malthusian argument neglects is the complexity of human (as opposed to, say, bacterial) population and food production. Josh's suggestion of a hanging garden (though impractical, since substituting artificial lighting for sunlight has all sorts of other consequences) is an example of the many ways humans find to alter their situations and make growth possible. A better one: rooftops in Manhattan could produce almost all the food its residents require, if gardened intensively.
ReplyDeleteSo how far away do you guys think we are from these alternative methods? If it seems so practical then why isn't it happening?
ReplyDelete