The Triumph of Christianity

[Dr Strangelove]

Bank accounts and credit cards are all it takes. Inflict both upon the third world and you will see a rapid implosion of the world's population.

[Ned]

Originally posted by BlackCat


Often in american movies there are scenes from a courtroom where a witness are asked a question, and are only allowed to answer yes or no despite the fact that both of these answers will be a lie. I don't know if that has anything to do with real world, but your question is in the same class.

Shurely, f.ex. denmark could take a coulple or three more million citizens, but that is not the question. Other countries could do the same, but at what price ? And would it solve the problem ? High, and no.

You and I understand each other. While Denmark is not facing any crisis or difficulty whatsoever due to population, you still are willing to not have kids and advocate stable population for Denmark, and everywhere else for that matter, based upon some theory that since the planet cannot support an infinite number of human beings we have to start controlling population now.

You could also look at things in a slightly different manner. You could rate countries by net productivity. Countries with high productivity actually benefit mankind. Countries with low productivity actually harm mankind. If this is the case, restraining growth in countries having a net benefit to mankind is harmful, not helpful.

If you accept such logic, I would submit that Denmark just might be one of those countries that on balance is beneficial to mankind and should grow until it such time that its inputs and outputs match.

[Heresson]

So, in a way, Christianity helped bring about the collapse of the Roman Empire because its own citizens refused to join the Army.

I certainly doubt it was a massive trend. There were more Christians in army than You may assume - even Julian the Apostate, who officially expelled them from it, had to allow some of them, like the next emperors - Iovian and Valentinus.
Also, remember that since Constantine, the fight was also in the name of cross.
And that the Rome has not fallen.
The eastern part became occupied by barbarians, right, but it is due to that the west did everything it could to fall - I'm talking about Stilichon's case.

If the Christianity was to cause the fall of the Empire, the eastern, more Christianised, part should've done that. Instead, it existed for next 1000 years,
though last 200 were not very glorious.

---
back on topic, it seams these third world Christians are not quite Christian sometimes indeed.
I've heard about cargo cults in Papua.
Amazing.
It's like that they see that the missionary receives cargos from ships by writing something on a piece of paper, so they all want to write thinking that they will get it as well when they'll be writing - and there's no means of telling them that it's not that way. If You try, they think You're cheating on them...
Or they splash the sand in the sea, so that the ship would get stuck while going near their island and they could have all the cargo...

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Technology crushed Malthus, and it will also crush the neo Malthusians.

Since i'm not a neo Malthusian i take this threat easy I agree that there are a wery long road to the point where this planet cannot sustain the population, especially if "terraforming" globally reaches what it is in f.ex. Denmark. Out of 44.000 square km not more than a couple of hundred sqkm can be said to be real wild nature with that diversity this gives - funny enough, those areas are typically military training areas, seems like nature don't mind to be shelled from time to time . This is my main reason to belive that it's a good idea if population drops.

Do you think, given a stable colony another planet, that transport technology will not also improve to increase our lift capacity to make such transports economical?

I agree, with the current model, that space travel is prohibitively costly, but there is no reason why our current model should remain.

I would prefer that we delay any pop boom to such a technology is available - it might be invented but noone knows when - it would be a little foolishly to invent such a thing a decade after the planet broke down due to human pressure.

What do you think it was like during the Age of Discovery? We have lost that sense of travel, and adventure. There will be people signing up just for the chance to do this.

And what happened once Columbus successfully returned? Look at the New World. Why couldn't we do the same again in space?

I would be first in line myself to sign up, but at the moment i fails heavily on the age criteria.

It looks nice when you compare space with the New World, but i think a more correct comparison would be that Columbus had "discovered" antarctica instead of america.

Yes, but they dreamed. What dreams do we have today?

I think there are lots of dreams - i have my own - but you cannot any longer build your own ship and just sail out to see what is out there.

Malthus said the same as you. Yet, who was right, the folks who looked at all this newfangled agricultural tools, or Malthus?

The problem with that is that there are no newfangled tools to go to space.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
BC:

It can also be shown historically that population density drastically increases productivity.

So why are you afraid of putting more people in Denmark?

You are rigth if it is possible to break new farmland or has industry with heavy labor demands, but since it isn't possible to squeeze yet another farm into denmark and since we are dismantling industry with heavy labor demands, no general popgrowth will increase productivity.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Heresson


I certainly doubt it was a massive trend. There were more Christians in army than You may assume - even Julian the Apostate, who officially expelled them from it, had to allow some of them, like the next emperors - Iovian and Valentinus.
Also, remember that since Constantine, the fight was also in the name of cross.
And that the Rome has not fallen.
The eastern part became occupied by barbarians, right, but it is due to that the west did everything it could to fall - I'm talking about Stilichon's case.

If the Christianity was to cause the fall of the Empire, the eastern, more Christianised, part should've done that. Instead, it existed for next 1000 years,
though last 200 were not very glorious.

The cause? Not necessarily. Contributing, yes, for I think, as does Gibbon, that the pacifism of the Church at that time helped contribute to the Western Romans not joining the Army. In former times, being in the Army was THE thing to do for a Roman. At the end, no Western Roman wanted to be in the Army. Christianity was partly the cause for this.

[CharlesBHoff]

When the State set Population Polcy that when thing go wrong. When China started the one child polcy for each familty they expect the sexes to be near equal in number. They are finding there are alot more male boy being born. In China culture the male child have the duty to care for his eldest parents. So familty when they find out the unborn child will be than female they abort the unborn baby.

The Roman Empire went from 100,000,000 to 50,000,000 people near the end. 10,000,000 in the western part and 40,000,000 in the Eastern part.

It very hard to stop population increase as it also very hard to stop population decline.

[Ben Kenobi]

Then you'll have no problem showing me mathematically how it's possible.

Assuming arithematical increase in food production, and geometrical increase in population?

Suppose your rate of increase is at one tenth of one percent.

Suppose also, that the slope of the increase in food is 10, where 1 year is the variable.

How long, will it take for the population to finally outstrip the food supply, assuming both start at 0?

So, you would have 10y=y^1.001

I'll let you do the math. Suffice to say, it takes millions of years, for the geometrical growth to catch up.

[Ben Kenobi]

Then I realized that the population growth can be brought under control if we were to eliminate the Third World (by elevating them to the First World by massive improvements in their infrastructure, and so on), the global population growth will fall. Slower but more 'natural.' There will be no need for state getting involved unless the population has dropped so low that there is a need to reverse the trend.

Okay, this to me seems a more reasonable preposition. However, you do know that with the AIDS epidemic raging through large swaths of Africa and Asia, that the population of the world is predicted to start declining within 50 years.

That's why I think it's shortsighted for countries with declining populations to encourage their further decline.

[Ben Kenobi]

You are rigth if it is possible to break new farmland or has industry with heavy labor demands, but since it isn't possible to squeeze yet another farm into denmark and since we are dismantling industry with heavy labor demands, no general popgrowth will increase productivity.

How tall are your buildings in Copenhagen?

Netherlands 477
Belgium 338
Israel 335
Italy 196
Germany 231
United Kingdom 246

Denmark 125

I think the UK, and Germany do just fine with their industry despite double your density.

[Ben Kenobi]

I would prefer that we delay any pop boom to such a technology is available - it might be invented but noone knows when - it would be a little foolishly to invent such a thing a decade after the planet broke down due to human pressure.

Agreed.

However, you still have not shown me why it is prefereable to cull half of the Danish population over a steady growth.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Okay, this to me seems a more reasonable preposition. However, you do know that with the AIDS epidemic raging through large swaths of Africa and Asia, that the population of the world is predicted to start declining within 50 years.

That's why I think it's shortsighted for countries with declining populations to encourage their further decline.

I am very carefull about using BS, but i think it's nessecary here. What is the connection between european population decilne and Afircan/Asiatic population decline ? Do you think that those superflous in Europe shall emigrate to the less populated areas of Africa/Asia ?

[Ben Kenobi]

Who is superfluous in Europe? You guys need immigrants just to keep your working population up.

What is the connection between european population decilne and Afircan/Asiatic population decline ?

Not much. One is through disease, with 25% of the population in the Southern part of Africa currently HIV positive, and the other, is the slow demographic slide seen in all developed countries around the world.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Barinthus

Then I realized that the population growth can be brought under control if we were to eliminate the Third World (by elevating them to the First World by massive improvements in their infrastructure, and so on), the global population growth will fall. Slower but more 'natural.' There will be no need for state getting involved unless the population has dropped so low that there is a need to reverse the trend.

Is this kind of thinking that plagues Europeans and socialists in general. Note that the word "we" in conjunction with the "massive improvements in their infrastructure." The Europeans actually believe they can bring the Third World to the level of the First World simply by throwing a lot of money at them. One can throw money at the Third World from now until the end of time and nothing would make them be like the First World until they throw off socialism and adopt capitalism and democracy. Even China has understood this. But sadly the Europeans still fail to understand that the source of prosperity is not socialism or access to money from abroad; the road to prosperity lies through freedom, respect for others, capitalism and democracy.

[BlackCat]

Nope, many have claimed that europe can't survive without immigration, but that's not true. We are still above "natural unemployment" .