Cyclone Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Where would you get the water from. Have you looked out of the window this morning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 20 years of interest in the subject and lots of reading, but this Horizon special by David Attenborough sums it up reasonably well. http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/how-many-people-can-live-on-planet-earth/ I can hardly watch a film whilst at work can I. Presumably you can source these figures you were chucking about from somewhere in a textual format? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 5, 2012 Author Share Posted January 5, 2012 So you are saying that your opinion should be the only one that counts... That because you don't want to give (through taxation being spent on it) nobody else should be able to give that way either... Correct? Have you turned into the forum idiot, this is a place were different people discuss different topics and express their opinions, we don’t make government policy. When the government gives aid every tax payer is forced to donate, if the government didn’t give aid then the people that want to can still give aid. Only one of these is forcing someone to do something they would rather not do. Stopping government aid doesn’t stop individual from giving aid whereas the government giving aid does force individuals to donate to that cause through their taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Or maybe you're being very obtuse. What is your complaint? The government giving money in aid? You want to stop the government giving money in aid (although they won't reduce my taxation), and you contend that I can then give money directly (I can already do that). You don't see any hypocrisy there with someone who wants the government to give aid (someone who pays taxes just like you do). You think they shouldn't have an opinion on how taxes should be spent, because your opinion on how taxes should be spent is different. To extend your argument, which is that you should be able to veto government spending on an issue because you pay tax, I don't use schools, I don't think my tax should be spent on them and so the entire school system should be immediately privatised allowing people who wish to spend on schools to do so. Oh, and roads, I've decided I don't like money being spent on roads, and so it's wrong of you to suggest that the government should spend money on roads. If you want to spend money on roads do so privately. That's basically your argument. Obviously you can just call me the forum idiot again, or you could actually try to address the points I've made. Completely up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 chuck norris dropkicks a puppy dog every time he hears the word"tax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 You didn't say what you will give up to achieve it.Neither did you. I presume it would have to be reduction in some other place than yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Those figures don't take into account that the developing countries will start to consume more, if everyone consumes the same as the average American then the planet can only support 1.5 billion people. 2.5 billion If everyone consumes the same as the average European. For 9 billion to live on the planet we have to accept that many will be constantly staving and living in absolute poverty. The average American of which I am one, eats food produced within its own border or from Canada. Much of its produce is sold to many countries in the world without starving us. I, like many, eat no more or maybe less than many Brits. Much of our grain is turned into ethanol and used as an alternative to petroleum. Please try to stop being Anti American. We're actively trying to feed as much of the world as possible, are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 5, 2012 Author Share Posted January 5, 2012 Neither did you. I presume it would have to be reduction in some other place than yours. I don't want to achieve anything; I know the consequence of having 7 billion people on the planet is that most will have to be very poor, and many will starve, it doesn't bother me that they are poor. I have done my part to reduce the population and I use the world’s resources sparingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 5, 2012 Author Share Posted January 5, 2012 The average American of which I am one, eats food produced within its own border or from Canada. Much of its produce is sold to many countries in the world without starving us. I, like many, eat no more or maybe less than many Brits. Much of our grain is turned into ethanol and used as an alternative to petroleum. Please try to stop being Anti American. We're actively trying to feed as much of the world as possible, are you? Consumption isn't just about food, its everything you use and the average American consumes significantly more than anyone else. I don't have a problem with that provided the consumer accepts that other people must suffer because of their greed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Have you looked out of the window this morning? Yes, have you looked beyond the end of your nose, http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/20/12/2011/130651/Water-shortage-prompting-irrigation-availability-concerns.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.