The best way to reduce the odds of having food shortages in the future is to reduce the overall population. Overpopulated nations need to educate their citizens that it's better to focus resources on one or two kids, rather than a dozen. If the global population were around 1.5 billion, we could all live relatively comfortably, and there would probably be a lot less conflict and strife.
Conflict of course is a subjective thing and can scale accordingly, but not being packed together objectively reduces disease. It also objectively increases the relative level of food production, because the same amount of land would still exist, and farming processes would be just as efficient.
Well, I don't know anything about the Kissinger/King George thing, but the simple fact remains that if you have X amount of resources and Y amount of people, and X < Y, then you have a lot of conflict.I do not believe the population of the world is as major a problem as some would have us think. I do think however that the New World Order pushers and shakers wants us to believe it and wants to use fear to convince us that it is the problem They want to control the population and killing of millions of people has never been a problem for them
Well, I don't know anything about the Kissinger/King George thing, but the simple fact remains that if you have X amount of resources and Y amount of people, and X < Y, then you have a lot of conflict.
As an example that I know of all too well, Florida has seen a lot of growth recently, and most projections show that we're going to tap out the Floridan aquifer by 2020 at the latest. We've done our share of growing and wasting water in N. Florida, it's true - but, massive growth has occurred in C. Florida between Orlando and Tampa. Now, Orlando wants to start pulling water out of the St. Johns River. That flows north through Jacksonville, and has raised quite a ruckus here - it would result in drawing the total water level down by a foot! We're also at the end where all the pollution finally ends up, and when the algae blooms and the fish die, it all happens here the worst. So, less water = more algae/red tide, which means less fish and the river becomes pretty disgusting overall.
We're now discussing desal plants, water conservation strategies, etc, etc. I don't have anything against Orlandoeats - but the fact of the matter is, we have 18.5 million people in this state, and IMO that's too many. It's not like we would have all died of cholera if we hadn't grown our population to an unreasonable size. If we had a lot fewer people (say, about half of our current population) we would really be just fine.
Not having the people around in the first place is a surefire method of not having a demand that strains resources, especially when hard times inevitably come. Consider Atlanta - they've become overgrown and now, uh-oh...here comes a drought. Last I heard, they were pumping water out of the bottom of a large mud puddle they used to call a lake. With a smaller population, even if there's a drought, it's a lot less likely to have a huge impact if you don't have as much demand to begin with.
Or, look at Burma. See what happens when you're dirt poor and have 55 million people in a tiny country...one hard disaster and total inaction by the government, and it's suddenly a big dramatic affair to keep everyone fed.
I believe in helping when and where we can. The Bible says To whom much has been given much will be required. I don't believe however any good thing can come out of the U.N. We should get out of the U.N and get the U.N out of the United States.
I'm with you,HK4U.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?