Topic: The Chit-Chat Thread

@ThanosReXXX - While fresh seafood can be a challenge, I personally have an abundance of options for red meat, pork products, and poultry; including local, organic meat farms large enough for the animals to live nearly how they would and eat what they would in the wild. Around here, organic meat and produce is widely available and fairly affordable. It’s all we eat as a family of four. The only times we pay exorbitant prices is for wild caught seafood, and we typically opt for Alaskan salmon. In my opinion, especially with young ones, you really can’t spend too much money on quality body fuel.

IMO the earth isn't really that overpopulated (we can grow plenty of food to feed everyone). It's more of a resource allocation problem.

But I would agree that there are certain areas that are overpopulated, like major city centers. Large families can be an issue, but that's more of a family planning problem.

@bimmy-lee Absolutely. If you've got the means, or are willing to provide for the means, then that's surely the only way to look at it.

@BougieBeetle Well, no offense, but you're wrong. You'd have to look at it from a worldwide view, not from a "where I'm living" view, or just from what you've seen on the news concerning foreign areas. The world still has some empty places left, but most if not all of them, are inhabitable, so people are concentrated in the areas that actually are inhabitable, obviously. Waste problems, smog alerts at least twice a year in certain areas, and even wars, to some extent, are all due to too many people living too close together, doing too many things that they shouldn't be doing.

At some point, a group of really smart people came to the conclusion, after careful considerations and calculations, that ideally, the world's population should be maintained at 6 billion people. Preferably even less. Currently, we've already crossed the 7 billion mark, rapidly going towards the 8 billion mark.

So yeah, I'd say that, as a species, we've definitely overcrowded the world...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_overpopulation

@ThanosReXXX

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2018/07/30/how-big-of-a-pr...
http://theconversation.com/is-the-earth-over-populated-86555
https://earther.gizmodo.com/is-the-world-really-overpopulated...

Even in the wikipedia link you posted, most of the doomsayers (going back to Thomas Malthus) present overpopulation as a potential problem, not a given fact, because they are making predictions. And of course, the misuse of the earth's resources is a problem compounded by the amount of people who live on the planet. But as I said before, the issue is really one of resource allocation.

I dunno, I guess this is a debate that people have strong feelings about. I'm gonna stop posting about it, you're entitled to your point of view, I could be wrong, etc.

@BougieBeetle Yeah, I realized I posted the wrong link, after I read through all of it myself. And to moderate what I said before: you've every right to your own opinion and sentiment, so that's fine by me.
The thing though, is that I'm trying to look at it objectively, and would encourage others to do the same.

So ultimately, the problem remains, probably for quite some time to come. As for that resource allocation part: the fact that we need to destroy more and more natural habitats to accommodate for our own needs, already proves that we're with too many people. The Earth naturally provides for all it's inhabitants. That is the circle of life I mentioned a few pages back. It's how it's SUPPOSED to go, but we've set ourselves aside from that natural cycle, and created our own reality and own cycle, in which we only need more and more, and also luxury produce and foods that we don't really need, but which do exact quite a heavy toll on both the planet and even ourselves, comically enough. The instant karma is already here...

EDIT:

And then I even forgot to mention the constantly returning waves of famine in third world countries. That is perhaps the only instance where resource allocation could be relevant, but we all know how that goes, and why it keeps happening again and again...

Again, F cats.

@HobbitGamer @Ryu_Niiyama

@TheAwesomeBowser I love Pichu. Fite meh.

@ThanosReXXX I always find the "we've scientifically decided the best diet" and most other medical and scientific nonsense to be just that. Every time science decides they're oh so smart and figured out all the answers, they end up being discovered to have found nothing within a century. Simple science. Earth elements, basic chemistry, materials, etc are simple and repeatable. But every time science decides to claim they have answers in complex systems like the human body and the atmosphere it always ends up being "well we almost got it except this and this and this were anomalous and produced unexpected results." Of course there's a non stop stream of "anomalous" intervention in such complex systems. Wake me when they've cured cancer and invented immortality (then kill me because there's no way I want to live in a world THAT overpopulated. )

I don't smoke, I don't like smoking, never have, never will, but I'm always amazed at all the "smoke will kill you" stuff that I always believed, until I realized how prevalent smoking has been in Japan and they've been the longest lived people on earth for a long time (recently supplanted to #2 by Spain of all places.) Then you get the centenarians that ate the same bad food every day for their lives and that was the secret to long live. I mostly don't listen to all the "advice" In all likelihood the date of our deaths and method (unless strangled by a certain mad titan) are probably encoded in our DNA before we were even born. And no I don't eat a 5 pound t-bone daily....mostly just poultry Albeit in the US that's also of questionable nature. But the veggies I already know contain enough toxins to down an elephant, so it's a coin toss. I'd probably be better with a case of Doritos. Nope...pesticides in the cornmeal for that too....

And yes, we agree on world population reduction but not in the West. Though US population continuously grows, but not through native births which is a compound problem, and Europe is starting that process too. Importing overpopulation from elsewhere "because we can fit them" is a special kind of stupidity. "If we can't produce overpopulation on our own, we'll import it!" Which is all to service the entitlement Ponzi schemes that didn't make any more sense in 1949 than they do today, but somehow every Western country got stuck with them, ironically thanks to the low post-war population that had excess.

Contacts: Yeah, like I said to Ryu, I've always been squeamish about eyes in particular. No specific reason, just a natural sensitivity to the idea of anything involving eyes. Contacts are a complete no-go, as in "zero chance ever".

@bimmy-lee Wow, around here if you want "organic" you're prepared to shell out 4-6x the normal going rate. And the rich people around here gladly do so in abundance, guaranteeing no need for price competition. For everyone else there's Perdue chicken if you're lucky and "no name store brand, probably from China" meats otherwise. That sort of thing is premium luxury. Of course all the farms were bulldozed a decade or more ago. It's just residential trackts, corporate centers, and strip malls (with the same 10 services/stores in all of them) as far as you can go in any direction. It was rural not so long ago....the transformation happened over maybe 15 years

"Young ones" I dunno, in our day we were all raised on a diet of McDonalds and potato chips and we turned out just fine, right?

@BougieBeetle We can't provide enough food for all. The largest single population on earth is on the African continent, a large portion of which is arid desert incapable of much agriculture Traditionally it was inhabited by nomadic tribes, for that very reason. In "modern" society it needs to import most of its food. Meanwhile the solutions for producing enough food involve synthetic production of test tube meats, and solutions like I mentioned of the IMMENSE pesticides to ensure absolute minimum crop loss, and continued synthetic engineering of growing more food than is naturally possible.

Ultimately population has to consider quality of life. Humans are generally solitary creatures with small social circles. Dense crowding is unnatural. Violence, rapid spread of disease, etc are results of such. (It was, in fact, the extreme low population and vast distances between inhabited areas during the Great Pestilence that is the only reason the human race even exists today. That disease was so virulent, so efficient, it would jump from crowded town to nearby crowded town within a day or two and wipe out the population almost completely within another day or two. We don't have that kind of protection today. If a disease like that were to appear, we'd be at the mercy of the "miracle of science!" to stop it. And the miracle of science doesn't always get the answers, and doesn't always get them in time. If the Great Pestilance were to arrive again today in a different form (obviously the existing strain is known and thus more easily solvable), in all odds, there would be only a few thousand people left after a few weeks.

Densely packing as many people in, because you can, and forcing resource allocations by spreadsheet and dispensary, free will be darned, is without question going to lead to violence. And eventually war. The Wars of Muslim Expansion into Europe in the 11th century, while a religious expansion on the surface, were primarily a war necessitated by population pressure in the Middle East. Much of the current conflict in the same region can be attributed to the same, history always repeats. No matter the religious or ideological window dressing put on it, the ultimate conflict is too many people in too small an area to accommodate them needs to expand into new territory, and the group generally wants to preserve it's traditions and culture, including religion, thus it must push and replace another population.

A solution of "managing resources" better wears the problem right in the name: Managing. It requires a central control to "allocate" said resources. I thought the Soviets already taught us why central planning sounds a lot better on paper than in practice? The problem is "if only we could be totally efficient" removes the idea of free will, removes the ability to say "no", which means one is controlled by another. And of course once you get to a situation of one controlling another......you're back to violence.

Which goes back to the inevitability of depopulation. Like I said to thanos the other day. Every solution to try to prevent depopulation only accelerates it further. It's entirely inevitable. Similarly all the attempts at "world peace" since WWII will only serve to make the next big war even bigger than it would have been. You can't force people to like each other or tolerate each other if they don't like or tolerate each other, you can only force them to pretend which only works until there's an unavoidable conflict of interest between the two individuals/groups.

And yes, for clarification, both Thanos and I are talking more or less objectively and philosophically on the matter, not ideologically or politically, so there's no offense involved for your differing view.

Though I will take this moment after several disagreements with Thanos to whole heartedly agree with him. You're wrong.

@NEStalgia Well, it has been my experience that true objectivity is impossible, and it would be prudent for one to accept that at any given time, all of one's basic assumptions might be wrong, and one simply hasn't realized it yet.

Beyond that, I don't really want to get into this with you. I disagree fundamentally with many of your premises and assertions, but I do agree with some. Let's leave it at that!

@NEStalgia - Yeah, it gets more and more expensive as you get to the coasts. When I lived in the NW, I could pay extra to learn information like the animal’s name, what it did in its spare time, and sometimes chat with the farmer who raised, and ultimately, butchered it.

Here in the heartland, I can drive 20 minutes west from the center of a good sized city and arrive at an on site farmer’s store chock full of organic, grass fed beef. It’s unmanned and works on the honor system. Take what you want, leave the cash in a locked box. It’s been like this for generations, so has their farming methods. They were organic before “organic” meant money, and the cows are grass fed because that’s what they eat.

I only go for the novelty these days, because I have now have multiple ways for the same meat to be delivered to me, and it’s usually advertised if it’s served at a restaurant. All this aside though, I know from experience that it’s definitely cheaper and easier for me to acquire good meat and produce where I’m living now as opposed to other places in the country.

I've also considered getting an electric vehicle as there is a charging station not TOO far away, but the initial costs, the fact that my area is mostly rural, and the fact that my state is slowly killing incentives to get a greener vehicle have kind of nixed it for me for now. Besides, my 2012 Corolla is in decent shape.

It stinks as I'd like to help decrease our environmental footprint, but red tape, politics, and the lack of some greener resources and recycling that can be taken for granted elsewhere just don't exist in my area.

Oh puns, how I love thee....

@Tyranexx Oh a Toyota? Yeah you can ride that till the doors fall off. My Taco and I are still putting around after 12 years.

@Ryu_Niiyama In my experience, Toyota is generally a reliable brand. The only internal component I've had to replace so far (knock on wood) is the battery.

External is a different story. Besides a full tire replacement a couple of years ago and a cracked windshield early this year (thank you insurance!), I've also had to have both bumpers and the grill replaced. Someone backed into my car when it was parked one time, so they fielded that one. The front bumper and grill were the result of me accidentally hitting a fox on Christmas night almost four years ago. Insurance fielded that one too; I didn't even know what it was except for the color.

Man I love living in Japan. Even in a part of Japan that Japanese people consider super rural, I still don't need a car. Lived here 4 years and the only thing about having a car that would have been nice is the ability to buy things too large to carry without shipping. But shipping is muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch cheaper than gas, insurance, maintenance, and the cost of the car itself.

Anywhere I want to go I just walk over to the train station and catch a ride. Anywhere else I can get to by bus or on foot. In 4 years there hasn't been anywhere I've needed or wanted to go and couldn't without my own car. Good riddance!

Not looking forward to moving back to the US in 2020 and having to drive again... yuck!

@Tyranexx LOL yeah I lost a fight with a bush and my back bumper once. Luckily (well not really) someone hit me like 2 years later and while they didn't replace the bumper (as it was existing damage) they did straighten it back out. I'll get it replaced eventually.

Years ago, I had an ‘01 Camry with 380k+ miles. I bought it high mileage in a private sale and drove it for almost four years before it got smashed up. The insurance company gave me more for the total than I paid for it. Can’t go wrong with a Toyota. Tacomas especially. I’m a Honda/Acura person personally, but Toyota is my backup.

@Ryu_Niiyama Not a bad consolation! The only noticeable ding on my car currently, barring a few door marks (you'd think people would be more careful.... 🙄), is that my front license plate is slightly bent from where someone's vehicle apparently nudged my car. I'm not entirely sure when it happened since it was a couple of days before I noticed it.

@Heavyarms55 As claustrophobic with people as I am, I'd love more public transportation options in the rural US. Sure, I have access to Amtrak not too far away, but it's not exactly high-speed rail.

@bimmy-lee Yah, I like the smaller Tacoma models.
I had a mid 90s Celica All-Trac once. That was fun. Swapped it at the track for a 99 Eclipse GT-S

@Tyranexx The super crowded trains in Japan that you likely have seen on TV are the extreme, not the norm. Even in Tokyo itself, one of the most populated cities in the world, it only really gets that bad during rush hours in holiday seasons. It would be more annoying if I had to commute by train every day - because that would always be during the commute rush hours, but outside of that I've been the only one in the train car before. Let me tell you, that's spooky! Especially at night!

Every time I try to go and complete Lego Jurassic World on the Xbox I just kinda end up switching to Netflix to watch whichever movie I'm currently at again.

... Sometimes I even end up stuck reading a wiki.