what i am trying to suggest is that life is a dynamic system, what "solves" the problems of today may ripple in the negative effect 5-10 years from now, may have shortsighted gains b/c of issues of disease, natural disaster, birth defects, inner fighting/crime/killings....and killing people off only sounds good when it's not you or your loved ones....be compassionate leaders!!!
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
what i am trying to suggest is that life is a dynamic system, what "solves" the problems of today may ripple in the negative effect 5-10 years from now, may have shortsighted gains b/c of issues of disease, natural disaster, birth defects, inner fighting/crime/killings....and killing people off only sounds good when it's not you or your loved ones....be compassionate leaders!!!
Holy Hell! You're saying that what "we" do today can have consequences for future generations? No one has EVER thought of that before, you're a fcking genius-philosopher.
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
what i am trying to suggest is that life is a dynamic system, what "solves" the problems of today may ripple in the negative effect 5-10 years from now, may have shortsighted gains b/c of issues of disease, natural disaster, birth defects, inner fighting/crime/killings....and killing people off only sounds good when it's not you or your loved ones....be compassionate leaders!!!
What about all the hoodoo following black people, we can kill them off, right?
Originally posted by Robtard
We sell the excess food at a profit and buy slaves?
ok, but the slaves run away b/c they see other islands near by and didn't like the lack of work options and no luxury...and ok, let's say that slaves work out for now....but
flash forward to 100 years from that date, after the surplus, the slave's children go on an attack against the people who you were managing..
it's not easy being leader...and who is going to be chief? What if the people you manage start to kill each other off due to ego issues? They just go on drive-bys (with horses)...again, who will you pass the leadership onto, your son? one of the slaves sons? what if the slaves son decides to make the "other" people slaves just for revenge...all awhile there is killings/famine/disease...not enough doctors and nurses...
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
ok, but the slaves run away b/c they see other islands near by and didn't like the lack of work options and no luxury...and ok, let's say that slaves work out for now....butflash forward to 100 years from that date, after the surplus, the slave's children go on an attack against the people who you were managing..
it's not easy being leader...and who is going to be chief? What if the people you manage start to kill each other off due to ego issues? They just go on drive-bys (with horses)...again, who will you pass the leadership onto, your son? one of the slaves sons? what if the slaves son decides to make the "other" people slaves just for revenge...all awhile there is killings/famine/disease...not enough doctors and nurses...
No, no... slaves don't run away, not after you hobble them.
You keep the slave population in check with infanticide.
Sure it is... You build a loyal military and run your society through brute force and discipline.
I think overpopulation would be the least of this agrarian hunter gatherer's problems.
Food and water shortages are not necessarily problems of overpopulation. While a lower population may alleviate the problem, since it does not NECESSARILY stem directly from too many people being there, it isn't the issue.
The biggest concern would be lack of expertise or actionable knowledge about an island living condition. The skills any of us have would only be of limited use in the wilderness, and adapting, or the lack thereof, to this new ecosystem would be much more salient a concern than the moderate effects of a "large" population.
Originally posted by Mr. Sandman
Introduce disease as a predator to curb the growth of the population. Administer cure to certain %Problem solved.
don't feel badly if you aren't elected as god or lord for a while...but if it were all comedy like in a cartoon, it would be a funny skit...like in south park or something...
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
don't feel badly if you aren't elected as god or lord for a while...but if it were all comedy like in a cartoon, it would be a funny skit...like in south park or something...
My solution solves all of your problems. A death rate elevated to equal the birth rate curbs the amount of resources it takes to sustain the population.
You see it in every ecosystem on the planet. There always needs to be a predator to curb population. Everyone has a predator except humans, and that's why our population is going beserk.
Originally posted by inimalist
I think overpopulation would be the least of this agrarian hunter gatherer's problems.Food and water shortages are not necessarily problems of overpopulation. While a lower population may alleviate the problem, since it does not NECESSARILY stem directly from too many people being there, it isn't the issue.
The biggest concern would be lack of expertise or actionable knowledge about an island living condition. The skills any of us have would only be of limited use in the wilderness, and adapting, or the lack thereof, to this new ecosystem would be much more salient a concern than the moderate effects of a "large" population.
ok, but let's say there is only 75% of food avaiable do crop failure or because of extra mouths from babies, it really doesn't matter, and some of the 75% is from veggies and protein in milk and fishing...the amount of food is related to the amount of people who can eat, if there are more mouths then food because of either direction (food failure or population explosion), we still are stuck figuring out what to do with the remaining 25% who are going to starve (it doesn't matter how either one became out of balance right now). do we kill off the 25%? do we keep the doctors and nurses and throw out the old people or the sick?
Originally posted by Mr. Sandman
My solution solves all of your problems. A death rate elevated to equal the birth rate curbs the amount of resources it takes to sustain the population.You see it in every ecosystem on the planet. There always needs to be a predator to curb population. Everyone has a predator except humans, and that's why our population is going beserk.
Let's say we did that, see overpopulation is like fat, our body or system keeps it for survival even though, if kept along for the ride for too long,can be systematically unhealthy...but it comes in handy if we are ever starving...
Let's say we do kill of the 25%,and now we have just above the amount of food in surplus (because we lowered the rashings for all and stored the rest via pickeling the food in salt/vinegar)...but we didn't consider that wild rats in the woods got to the food source and now most of the ones healthy enough to work are now dieing from a virus...we already killed off 25% of our healthy people b/c we didn't forsee the viral attack.
Originally posted by inimalist
what food?you are on a jungle swamp island surrounded by salt water?
these are people, I am assuming in Lost style, who just landed there
If you mean more of an Easter Island scenario, its cannibalism.
coconut tree, banana trees, teas/herbs (to treat illnesses), potatoes b/c someone saves a bunch of seeds...fish and some wild live stalk...
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Let's say we did that, see overpopulation is like fat, our body or system keeps it for survival even though, if kept along for the ride for too long,can be systematically unhealthy.Let's say we do kill of the 25%,and now we have just above the amount of food in surplus (because we lowered the rashings for all and stored the rest via pickeling the food in salt/vinegar)...but we didn't consider that wild rats in the woods got to the food source and now most of the ones healthy enough to work are now dieing from a virus...we already killed off 25% of our healthy people b/c we didn't forsee the viral attack.
You don't have to lower rations if the population is under control from the disease. Your logic is flawed there.
However, if some ''rats'' did start to reduce the food supply, elimate the rate problem. The human population takes a hit but so what? Shit happens. Dispense more vaccinations and let the population get under control again.
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Let's say we do kill of the 25%,and now we have just above the amount of food in surplus (because we lowered the rashings for all and stored the rest via pickeling the food in salt/vinegar)...but we didn't consider that wild rats in the woods got to the food source and now most of the ones healthy enough to work are now dieing from a virus...we already killed off 25% of our healthy people b/c we didn't forsee the viral attack.
that then becomes a problem of sanitation due to lack of proper technology or storage facilities. A larger more productive society would be a solution to this problem
If whatever island you are on has a viable food crop and land to grow, overpopulation won't affect your society for hundreds of years
Originally posted by inimalist
that then becomes a problem of sanitation due to lack of proper technology or storage facilities. A larger more productive society would be a solution to this problemIf whatever island you are on has a viable food crop and land to grow, overpopulation won't affect your society for hundreds of hears
but most of the world's population has had problems with plagues and viruses, that has killed off good workers and left the population with nothing but a bunch of young kids who have to raise themselves...think about the history of the world and about how they pick their leaders, and how food supply is effected, and how they deal with overpopulation due to lack of food (not land, that's a different story)...and DISEASE (from food, animals, sex, airbourn...)