by Msss. Reef-Rash
We’ve got some serious problems to tackle in our world at the current time.
I’ll start with OVERPOPULATION and the billions of people that are taxing our planet’s resources to its full extent. To the point it is soon likely to be the reason for all wars (if it isn’t already) and whose ENDLESS CONSUMERISM is creating mass amounts of waste. Another factor of the dis-ease in our planet is GLOBAL WARMING, a reality due in part to all the people and corporations that are using mass quantities of oil that are deemed responsible for generating the greenhouse gases changing our planet. A third major problem is the new OIL CRISIS, where this ever-growing population’s demand is about to outstrip the supply available, hence the historic level of oil prices and the search for alternative fuels. And let’s not forget GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION which allows all these problems to continue, grow, fester and get worse in the name of the Almighty Dollar and the American Dream.
The only problem among those mentioned whose solution will fatten somebody’s pockets (there’s that almighty dollar), and therefore the only problem everyone is scrambling to work on, is the oil crisis. Considering that gas now costs twice as much as it did many months ago -certainly an important concern- it’s still only one issue I’d like a solution to. It is however, a great beginning point in changing our world for the better. So what are our options to ensure we have oil to power our lives?
Either we could drill for oil in our our own country, which apparently wouldn’t help the gas prices because to bring the machinery and set up at each of the very small reserves we have would end up costing Americans the same at the pump in the end. Or we could continue down the line with foreign oil until their reserves run dry, but either way the population’s demand will outstrip supply by 2020 according to “Tapped Out” [National Geographic, June 2008].
Hydrogen fuel cells would have been my vote, because it is made simply by converting water to hydrogen with the use of the sun or wind, but our CORRUPT GOVERNMENT screwed that one up with the Bush Administration’s “National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap”, drafted last year in concert with the energy industry, in which “up to 90 percent of all hydrogen will be refined from oil, natural gas, and other fossil fuels – in a process using energy generated by burning oil, coal, and natural gas… which would effectively eliminate most of the benefits offered by hydrogen.” [Mother Jones] Of course, this is because those making the bucks with oil can’t stand the thought of losing out on the money and have to find their way to keep funneling more to themselves.
Many people lean towards alternative fuels because they sound fantastic, but in most cases we are actually just creating more problems. For one, the use of corn in biofuel has driven up prices of food and is now causing food shortages around the globe (to the extent that you now have to ask for a loaf of bread when you go to a restaurant and in many places must pay for it). Another problem with alternatives is that making biofuel isn’t cost effective or better for the environment. In fact, according to Christopher Calder from Huntington News, “The ‘energy independence’ argument for biofuels is a hoax because American biodiesel made out of soybeans costs the equivalent of making regular diesel out of oil at $232 a barrel. Making ethanol from corn costs the equivalent of oil at $81 a barrel and uses 28% more fossil fuels than gasoline. Only massive government subsides makes biofuels affordable at the pump. Most countries had large food surpluses before the onset of the biofuel hoax, and the world will return to food surpluses once we put an end to government biofuel mandates.” 
The future is looking grim, isn’t it?
Maybe not! I have thought and researched and thought some more and come up with THE SOLUTION… which took shape during a political discussion I had with my dad on Father’s Day in regards to alternative fuels, oil and President Bush ‘n’ friend’s fat pockets, which are getting bigger with every increase in foreign speculation that occurs. On every point I made, my dad had a counterpoint except in one area: The real crux of the biscuit that he could not argue was that there are just TOO MANY GOD DAMN PEOPLE IN OUR WORLD. And the answer to that major problem is to get rid of some fuggin’ people… which brings me to THE SOLUTION!
THE SOLUTION which will eliminate all five of our world issues is TDP!
TDP stands for Thermal Depolymerization Plant, which is “a solution to three of the biggest problems facing mankind,” says Brian Appel, chairman and CEO of Changing World Technologies, the company that built a pilot plant and has just completed its first industrial-size installation in Missouri. “This process can deal with the world’s waste. It can supplement our dwindling supplies of oil. And it can slow down global warming.” According to Appel, the TDP will accept any item and turn it into high-quality oil, clean-burning gas, and purified minerals that can be used as fuels, fertilizers, or specialty chemicals for manufacturing.” Oil crisis solved!
Ok, so I see that Brian Appel’s crew thought of the TDP first and foremost to help with our ENDLESS CONSUMERISM, OIL CRISIS and GLOBAL WARMING, but I promised a solution to two more problems that Brian didn’t have the guts to talk about. Why not use the TDP to deal with our OVERPOPULATION issue, because that truly is the root of all problems since the TDP can accept any carbon-based items. “If a 175-pound man fell into one end, he would come out the other end as 38 pounds of oil, 7 pounds of gas, and 7 pounds of minerals, as well as 123 pounds of sterilized water,” according to Appel. (The article this information came from Discover, Vol. 24 No. 5, May 2003, called “Anything into Oil“, which goes on to state that there are no plans to put people in the machine.)
But why not? Why not start throwing people in that TDP thing and churn them into biodiesel? The only question that remains is which people? …and the answer is obvious! Well, I have to admit I personally thought we could get rid of the Christians first since they feel they must over-breed us into oblivion, though that would include my mom, Jesus bless her. But then my dad commented that we should save our country by using the very people that are wrecking it and turn in the Democrats… but I say why stop there? The Republicans are just as guilty of causing the mess in this country. Why not make it government workers across the board. That made my dad happy because he thinks most government workers are Democrats anyway… but I think it is high time to get rid of our entire CORRUPT GOVERNMENT, POLITICIANS and LOBBYISTS and start over again, fresh and new, with nice people that aren’t power-seeking, power-wielding ogres. I mean, have you ever gone to a government office, such as the building department, tax office, county council meeting, etc., and enjoyed your visit? Most every American leaves these places in disgust, wishing that murder was legal.
Well, maybe we can make it so, in the name of altruism: Government Employees (not including teachers, park workers or…any other people I deem as the good guys) it is time to volunteer to help your country. Put yourself out of our misery. Don’t hesitate, please send yourself in for oil! The rest of us need to be able to afford the drive to work again!
The much hyped problem of “overpopulation” isn’t the cause of Global Warming, thus killing people to turn them into fuel doesn’t stop the problem.
Consumerism, and the industries that pollute while supporting it is. Thus I would focus attention there, not on the number of humans.
And if you think getting rid of the number of humans is the solution you should consider that in China as the birthrate falls the amount of pollution generated has been rising because they have been trading in children for cars and electronics and guess which does more ecological damage.
Oh, and the polluting consumer class of humans doesn’t make up the majority of the human population. Thus starting to get rid of people will likely both miss those people who consume the most and not deal with consumption.
You may have put this idea out there as a joke but here are some of the real world problems with it in addition to the fact that it would involve killing alot of innocent people.
First of all, I never said we should kill any innocent people. I only was talking about getting rid of the corrupt powers that be that keep all of it going, without placing restrictions on those polluting, in order to pad their pockets and to hell with the health of the world! Second… it’s pretty easy to see that having MORE children causes MORE ecological damage, cuz then all THOSE kids want more cars and gadgets too. Finally, if we weren’t so OVERPOPULATED, there wouldn’t be all those companies polluting the environment and creating more crap for the masses cuz there wouldn’t be the masses, so OVERPOPULATION is really the crux of the biscuit… ya no! But yes, it’s a joke… sort of… not really.
But not all corporations create crap for the masses. Most corporations try to sell products to people above a certain income level (where the money is) and thus ignore the true worldwide masses (many of which are too poor to spend their time on right now).
Moreover, some (maybe not all, but some) support having less children. This is because if people have children then they will likely want taxes for schools and so on. Guess who gets looked at for a share of those taxes? Thus these corporations like the idea of having less kids, why pay taxes for schools when you can invest in building a new factory and get that money back sooner?
Going to back to China (which I mentioned earlier), the growing capitalism there has created a divide between rich and poor that didn’t exist to such a level before (at least under the current so called “communist”) government. This divide means that there is now a growing consumer class in China that drives cars and so on. Do you think that GM is trying to sell SUVs to Chinese peasant farmers (who have an income level and lifestyle that are considered “medieval”) or the rising class of business people who are much smaller in number but have a rising income (there are now a number of millionaires-in US Dollar terms-in China)?
Kids may want gadgets but they don’t have to get them. First, you could raise your children to want less things and understand how what they do relates to environmental damage. Second, not everyone (as I just pointed out) can afford to buy new gadgets. Third, a few wealthy people can just keep buying multiple new gadgets (as generally happens in the wealthy “western world”) and these people generally don’t have many children but do have a lot of stuff-so population control frequently misses them and the environmental damage they cause.
This is why China, where there is strong population control measures is becoming the most polluting nation in the world when it wasn’t before (despite having the largest population in the world). Perhaps my point could be summed up in these two questions. Why is it that China is only threatening to become the most polluting nation in the world years after it started doing population control? Why is it that China has not been the most polluting nation in the world for so long when it has had the largest population in the world for so long?
um, china is not polluted because they are simply supplying goods for their peasants or their rich – it’s because they are supplying goods to the U.S. and allowing foreign co’s to outsource their pollution to China. We have laws to protect the environment – they have few, mostly in place as a facade it seems, as there is no $/resources or agencies truly set up to enforce especially in rural areas, and most are not complied to by companies. Not needing to worry about dumping toxins into rivers/plumed into the air saves China’s factories (many utilized by US manufactures) big bucks.
And our masses -yes, our rich AND poor- buy these goods – from WalMart on up (you think the crap in Walmart isn’t where the money is?!?). China is selling their country to us – letting us essentially destroy it – while they turn around and use the money they make to buy up the U.S. (billions of dollars of federal gov/American debt a month, property and control of American Pie corporations. Note: 44% of US debt is held by foreign nations. Japan and China own most of US Federal Debt – meaning they have serious control over US economy, over 300billion a year in interest alone. check out more regarding our debt crisis at http://mwhodges.home.att.net/ We’ll have to see how that all goes.
In the meantime, consumerism by more consumers – not just the rich (who are, by-and-large, insidious wasters) – but the larger population of poor to average Joe’s who are a little over-extended while trying to keep up, are all perpetuating the nastiness. Living within our means is… beyond us. Yes, we could simply not buy our kids the new XBox I suppose – or, we can focus on the parents of a some of these rich kids – politicians, business men who own these polluting corporations, etc. and kill two birds so to speak: getting rid of the parent who produces/buys too many gadgets while generating energy from their fruitful demise (yes Nathaniel, it was a joke… though cremation could evolve into Thermal Depolymerization Cremation – a last dying gift to future generations).
Again, China’s pollution has more to do with the world’s out-of-control consuming population and less to do with its own (“controlled” and decreasing or not). It started in the 1970s, as the country transitioned to a market economy -supplying to a growing world and their needs- and opened its doors to rapid industrialization (with an officially endorsed “development first, environment later” policy). Ergo your ‘summed up’ points… kinda weak.
Note that China’s rapid industrialization program was started alongside its population control policy. Also you are half right and half wrong when you talk about China’s rich. The US is the current place (today) where many of Chinese goods are sent. The change will occur when the class of Chinese consumers gets large enough that it replaces the USA. You have over-focused on the US in terms of the future.
Look at 2 things and see if you notice the trend. China (due to their rich) is one of the few places were GM can still make money selling SUVs (a symbol of waste that has recently become less popular in the USA) while sales are falling here. In 10 years China is predicted to have the same number of cars as the USA. These show impact of the growing Chinese consumer class is starting to be felt now and will be even stronger later. Thus while China has stated a desire to become the “world’s factory floor” in the future, many of their future customers are themselves.
If you base your argument on assumptions and missing things does that not make your argument “weak”?
Though if I say that I am obligated to mention one last thing. Look up Solow in relation to economics. His model is one where having less people means freeing up wealth for investment (thus growing the economy faster). Thus the argument that there is a link between population control and rapid economic growth could be made.
Also, about company heads and so on. As the world globalizes these entities have become transnational and less attached to any one nation or place. Because of this getting rid of one group of execs doesn’t solve the problem as they (and their habits) are simply replaced-perhaps in someplace else but replaced all the same. Thus getting rid of the habits appears to be the only solution.
look people, it all comes down to how we live. if people weren’t so materialistic and lived naturally (as we should!) then there wouldn’t be any problems!but no, everybody wants there cars and fancy homes and electricity. society is so up itself that it thinks its higher then nature! if we went back to basics and lived naturally, the world would be restored to normal.
of course most will object to this and find reasons why we sholdnt be natural. such as how are we going to store food without fridges and electricity? well HELLO!!!!!! were not ment to store food! animals eat wat they can find and wen they can find it so why shouldn’t we?
i know that no one will take this seriously but i had to voice my opinion. i suppose it doesn’t really matter if global warming occurs and we screw up the earth because we all die in the end anyway. we might as well spend 50 years living high and being happy, rather then spending 100 years living without stuff just so we can save the earth for a couple more years.
but seeing as no one will go back to living naturally, RECYCLE, Let the government know we want to cut back on the crap were putting into the atmosphere, and buy recycled stuff, not only is it better for the environment it is also usually cheaper.
if you totally disagree with me im sorry, im only 16 and i probably have no idea wat im talking about:)