Do bicycles and cars mix?

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Enough Already" wrote in message
om...
Robert Coté wrote in message
...

It was only a matter of time before that old suicide reference popped
up here. The irony of that cliche is that it shows a subconscious
recognition that overpopulation is indeed a problem.

No. The inevitable reference to suicide is because the respondent
recognizes the cognitive dissonance of the overpopulation crowd. It is
old and common precisely because it succintly reveals the hypocrisy of
the overpopulation crowd.

That term "overpopulation CROWD" is a good one. The hypocrisy angle
implies that anyone who seeks change is a hypocrite. Let's stick to
the issue of why you don't perceive an overpopulation problem with so
much scientific and instinctive evidence of one. Even if the
environmental angle doesn't matter to you, people have a natural need
for space that gets violated more each year. It explains a lot of rage
on our roads. People get much calmer when given ample room.

Even more hypocritical, Robert apparently was active the SOAR campaign which
put strict growth limits on the county where he lives. I guess he thinks
that those extra people just go away.

In article ,
"Baxter" wrote:

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Enough Already" wrote in message
om...
Robert Coté wrote in message
...

It was only a matter of time before that old suicide reference popped
up here. The irony of that cliche is that it shows a subconscious
recognition that overpopulation is indeed a problem.

No. The inevitable reference to suicide is because the respondent
recognizes the cognitive dissonance of the overpopulation crowd. It is
old and common precisely because it succintly reveals the hypocrisy of
the overpopulation crowd.

That term "overpopulation CROWD" is a good one. The hypocrisy angle
implies that anyone who seeks change is a hypocrite. Let's stick to
the issue of why you don't perceive an overpopulation problem with so
much scientific and instinctive evidence of one. Even if the
environmental angle doesn't matter to you, people have a natural need
for space that gets violated more each year. It explains a lot of rage
on our roads. People get much calmer when given ample room.

Even more hypocritical, Robert apparently was active the SOAR campaign which
put strict growth limits on the county where he lives. I guess he thinks
that those extra people just go away.


Yes, I continue to support SOAR. The law did only one thing. SOAR
requires a 50% plus one public vote for rezoning open space or
agricultural land uses. 50%+1 is a LOWER threshold than the previous
3/5ths Board of Supervisors process. No land uses were changed, no
property rezoned, no new limits or restrictions enacted. Ventura County
continues to be a high growth area so any claims of "strict growth
limits" are unfounded.

In article ,
Enough Already wrote:

People who don't currently perceive an overpopulation problem are
unlikely to ever perceive one until their own food or water runs out.
The rest of life on Earth can just go to Hell while they enjoy the
ride of the moment. That's what it comes down to.

You worry too much. Even if there were severe food and water
shortages worldwide to the human population, most life on earth would
do just fine.
--
Matthew T. Russotto
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue." But extreme restriction of liberty in pursuit of
a modicum of security is a very expensive vice.

In article ,
Enough Already wrote:

"The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive
effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite.
Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite.

All uncontroversial"

And we are fast approaching many of the earth's limits.

So we've been hearing for years. Still false as ever.
--
Matthew T. Russotto
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue." But extreme restriction of liberty in pursuit of
a modicum of security is a very expensive vice.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Robert Coté" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Baxter" wrote:


Even more hypocritical, Robert apparently was active the SOAR campaign
which
put strict growth limits on the county where he lives. I guess he
thinks
that those extra people just go away.


Yes, I continue to support SOAR. The law did only one thing. SOAR
requires a 50% plus one public vote for rezoning open space or
agricultural land uses. 50%+1 is a LOWER threshold than the previous
3/5ths Board of Supervisors process. No land uses were changed, no
property rezoned, no new limits or restrictions enacted. Ventura County
continues to be a high growth area so any claims of "strict growth
limits" are unfounded.

IOW - the Developers found a way around your NO-growth attempts. Better
luck next time.

"Enough Already" wrote in message
om...

People who don't currently perceive an overpopulation problem are
unlikely to ever perceive one until their own food or water runs out.
The rest of life on Earth can just go to Hell while they enjoy the
ride of the moment. That's what it comes down to.

Birth rates in the US are below replacement levels which would lead to a
population decline if it were not for immigration. Our population increase
is mainly due to legal and illegal immigration levels.

To prevent future over crowding, society has to decide how it wants to
handle immigration, which is a politically volatile subject.

"Enough Already" wrote in message
om...
"George Conklin" wrote in message
k.net...

It was only a matter of time before that old suicide reference popped
up here. The irony of that cliche is that it shows a subconscious
recognition that overpopulation is indeed a problem

No, it merely asks you to stop being a hypocrite.

In that case, everyone alive today is a hypocrite for being born into
an overcrowded world. Anyone who exists and questions troubling
aspects of their existence is a hypocrite.

E.A.


People have been saying that for all of recorded history. If you think
there are to many people, then help solve the problem by offing yourself.

"Enough Already" wrote in message
om...
Robert Coté wrote in message
...

It was only a matter of time before that old suicide reference popped
up here. The irony of that cliche is that it shows a subconscious
recognition that overpopulation is indeed a problem.

No. The inevitable reference to suicide is because the respondent
recognizes the cognitive dissonance of the overpopulation crowd. It is
old and common precisely because it succintly reveals the hypocrisy of
the overpopulation crowd.

That term "overpopulation CROWD" is a good one. The hypocrisy angle
implies that anyone who seeks change is a hypocrite. Let's stick to
the issue of why you don't perceive an overpopulation problem with so
much scientific and instinctive evidence of one. Even if the
environmental angle doesn't matter to you, people have a natural need
for space that gets violated more each year.

We are crowding ourselves together near the two coasts. This is not due
to overpopulation, but due to social factors such as the elimination of
farming for nearly everyone as a means of earning a living. Urban planners
want MORE density, not less. This is a mistake, but then they say that
crowding is good.

"Enough Already" wrote in message
m...
Robert Coté wrote in message
...

So, there can be no such thing as sprawl and overpopulation because my
posting style doesn't fit your parameters. I like your evidence-based
approach to this.

There is no evidence of either sprawl or overpopulation based on the
evidence you've produced in these posts or on your website. It is
precisely because I insist on evidence-based approaches that your post
fails to advance your claims.

You're sounding like those nuts who think the world could (and should)
support a trillion people. Your pattern of responses tells me that no
evidence will prove to you that the world could be overcrowded. Except
maybe by animals, which get culled "for their own good" whenever they
outgrow (by a few hundreds) the pockets of wilderness we've pushed
them into.

You must also be a big lover of crowds, noise and traffic jams,
because those things will certainly get worse with more people in a
finite space.

E.A.



Planners would just take the fewer people you want and crowd them into
smaller and smaller areas. In the end, nothing would change.

"Enough Already" wrote in message
om...
"George Conklin" wrote in message
k.net...

So, there can be no such thing as sprawl and overpopulation because my
posting style doesn't fit your parameters. I like your evidence-based
approach to this.


Overpopulation is a literary term, not a scientific one.

Then why do so many actual scientists warn us about it, as seen in
this well publicized open letter to humanity?


The Club of Rome has been disproven so many times now no one pays
attention.