[A-List] The truth everyone knows ...

[Bill Totten <shimogamo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

... but no one says

Is it only OK to talk about limiting population after it's too late?

by JMG

Gristmill　(December 22 2007)


Sam Smith, inimitable editor of The Progressive Review, perhaps the
world's first progressive blog (if you count its days as a print
publication), reports that even he finds it difficult to bring up
discussions of population.

I have experienced something like what Smith talks about, where even
mentioning Bartlett (who has been campaigning against exponential
population growth for decades) is enough to get you called nasty names
by liberals and "anti-life" by church members.

Here's today's series of looks at the issue, with Smith's preface first:

Electric Politics recently featured a low keyed discussion of an
extremely hot button subject: population growth. The guest was Al
Bartlett, professor of physics emeritus at the University of Colorado,
who has been working on sustainability issues for decades. It is an
issue that we raise from time to time, get a few letters accusing us of
being racists or eugenicists and then move on to easier topics. But if
what people like Bartlett are saying is true? Then much of we believe
about economics and the environment may eventually seem extraordinarily
short-sighted or just plain wrong. Nothing we do about the environment,
for example, will matter if the world population continues to grow
because that presumes an ever larger depletion of the natural resources
of the earth. Interestingly, we avoid the issue even more than we did 35
years ago when a national commission issued some important suggestions
on dealing with the matter. Some insights follow.

AL BARTLETT PODCAST INTERVIEW

1972 ROCKEFELLER COMMISSION REPORT ON U.S. POPULATION - In March of
1970, President Nixon signed a bill establishing the Commission on
Population Growth and the American Future, known as the Rockefeller
Commission, for it chairman, John D Rockefeller 3rd. In 1972, the
Commission released, its recommendations, including:

* In view of the important role that education can play in developing an
understanding of the causes and consequences of population growth and
distribution, the Commission recommends enactment of a Population
Education Act to assist school systems in establishing well-planned
population education programs so that present and future generations
will be better prepared to meet the challenges arising from population
change.

* Recognizing the importance of human sexuality, the Commission
recommends that sex education be available to all, and that it be
presented in a responsible manner through community organizations, the
media, and especially the schools.

* The Commission recommends that the Congress and the states approve the
proposed Equal Rights Amendment and that federal, state, and local
governments undertake positive programs to ensure freedom from
discrimination based on sex.

* The Commission recommends that (1) states eliminate existing legal
inhibitions and restrictions on access to contraceptive information,
procedures, and supplies; and (2) states develop statutes affirming the
desirability that all persons have ready and practicable access to
contraceptive information, procedures, and supplies.

* The Commission recommends that states adopt affirmative legislation
which will permit minors to receive contraceptive and prophylactic
information and services in appropriate settings sensitive to their
needs and concerns.

* In order to permit freedom of choice, the Commission recommends that
all administration restrictions on access to voluntary contraceptive
sterilization be eliminated so that the decision be made solely by
physician and patient.

* With the admonition that abortion not be considered a primary means of
fertility control, the Commission recommends that present state laws
restricting abortion be liberalized along the lines of the New York
statute, such abortion to be performed on request by duly licensed
physicians under conditions of medical safety.

* The Commission recommends that this nation give the highest priority
to research on reproductive biology and to the search for improved
methods by which individuals can control their own fertility.

* Recognizing that our population cannot grow indefinitely, and
appreciating the advantages of moving now toward the stabilization of
population, the Commission recommends that the nation welcome and plan
for a stabilized population.

* The Commission recommends the creation of an Office of Population
Growth and Distribution within the Executive Office of the President.

* The Commission recommends the immediate addition of personnel with
demographic expertise to the staffs of the Council of Economic Advisers,
the Domestic Council, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the
Office of Science and Technology.

* In order to provide legislative oversight of population issues, the
Commission recommends that Congress assign to a joint committee
responsibility for specific review of this area.


CHRIS RAPLEY - By avoiding a fraction of the projected population
increase, the emissions savings could be significant and would be at a
cost, based on UN experience of reproductive health programs, that would
be as little as one-thousandth of the technological fixes. The reality
is that while the footprint of each individual cannot be reduced to
zero, the absence of an individual does do so.


ROGER MILLER, SUNY POTSDAM - Loss of biodiversity and natural habitats,
depletion of the aquifers, air and water pollution, our eventual
inability to grow sufficient food or to generate sufficient energy are
all problems cause by a large and rapidly growing human population. Not
only is it the primary cause of these problems, but no solution exists
to solving these problems as long as the population continues to grow.

Populations cannot grow indefinitely in a finite environment. The United
States population is currently growing at a one percent annual rate, and
the worldwide population is growing at a 1.3% rate per year; rates that
are fairly low compared to historic levels. If the world's population
continued to grow at 1.3% for approximately 800 years, there would be
one person for every one square meter of the earth's surface, and if it
could continue growing at this rate for approximately 2200 years, the
mass of humanity would equal the mass of the earth. Clearly before this
happens we will reach a zero population growth level if we are lucky,
and if we are not lucky we will have a period of enormous decrease in
the population, whether by famine, disease or some other natural or
man-made catastrophe.


JIM LYDECKER, GROWTH IS MADNESS - The biggest crisis is overpopulation.
Every problem, be it environmental, economic, social or political, is
directly or indirectly connected to the 6.8-billion-pound gorilla in the
room. We have known this for years but it is one of the issues no one,
conservative or liberal, will touch. Instead, the official policy is one
of ignorance allowing the human species to breed itself toward a massive
die-off ...

In just a little more than 130 years, humans have run through more than
half the world's reserves of oil and natural gas. Since population
growth is contingent on a readily available supply of cheap oil,
collapse is inevitable. The slippery slide down the slope of peak oil
will be quicker than the trip up.

Without cheap oil and natural gas, the green revolution and the ability
to feed all us billions will be history. Few industries will be affected
as great as agriculture. Two that will be are those medical and
pharmaceutical.

Thus, a future die-off of biblical proportions will be primarily due to
starvation and disease. Throw in mass migrations and social strife and,
boy, do we have problems.


BRIAN CZECH AND HERMAN E DALY, WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN 2004 - A steady
state economy with long human life spans entails low birth and death
rates. In our opinion this is preferable, within reason, to a steady
state economy with short life spans, high birth rates, and high death
rates. The same concept applies to capital and durable goods such as
automobiles. We opine that a relatively slow flow of high-quality,
long-lasting goods is preferable to a fast flow of low-quality,
short-lived goods.

Nothing about a steady state economy precludes economic development,
where development is defined as a qualitative process. Various sectors
may come and go in a steady state economy. For example, organic farms
may supplant factory farms, the proportion of bicycles to Humvees may
increase, and professional soccer may attract more fans while NASCAR
attracts fewer. As long as the physical size of the economy remains
constant in the long run, a developing economy is a steady state economy.

Nor would any type of cultural stagnation result from a steady state
economy.

John Stuart Mill, one of the greatest economists and political
philosophers in history, emphasized that an economy in which physical
growth was no longer the goal would be more conducive to political,
ethical, and spiritual improvements

A steady state economy means a constant rate of employment ... Economic
development continues in a steady state economy so that in the
extractive sector, oilfield roughnecks may decrease in number while
wind-power facility attendants may increase. In the arts, guitar playing
may wax while flute playing wanes. In the sciences, industrial chemists
may be replaced by wildlife ecologists ...

In a steady state economy, the average amount of money in real dollars
earned by workers from the current generation to the next remains constant.

"Real dollars" means that inflation has been accounted for. Because
income reflects the use of natural resources, stabilized income reflects
a stabilized "ecological footprint", which is the area of land required
to support a human being ...

If the steady state economy is established at a relatively low
population level, the potential exists for each worker, and his
replacement in the next generation, to earn a high income. This scenario
is similar to that of a low-density deer population with plenty of
forage per deer. If, on the other hand, the steady state economy is
established at a high population level, less income is available for the
average worker, as in a high-density deer population with little forage
per deer.

We think it important that a steady state economy be established at a
relatively low population level. This scenario is conducive to incomes
high enough to allow retirement savings and social security (in the
generic sense), making the economy more politically acceptable and
therefore more stable. If the steady state economy is established
with-in ecological carrying capacity, each new generation may expect its
workers to accumulate retirement savings of the same magnitude as the
previous generation. So we think it important to establish a steady
state economy as soon as possible. As the population grows, it becomes
less likely the steady state economy may be established whereby incomes
are high enough to support reasonable periods of retirement.

Won't the stock market crash if a steady state economy is established?
... Many people view the stock market as predicated on economic growth,
so they wonder if a stock market could even exist in a steady state
economy. It certainly could and probably would. In a steady state
economy, firms still need to invest in capital - namely, at the same
rate at which capital depreciates.

Publicly traded stocks provide the social benefit of liquidity to
investors and offer an efficient mechanism for the acquisition of
investment capital.

Stock markets tend to expand and contract in concert (though often with
lags) with gross domestic product, the dollar value of newly produced,
final goods and services. There are winners and losers in bullish and
bearish markets, though the winners tend to be more prominent in the
former. The stock market in a steady state economy of stable GDP would
be neither bullish nor bearish for extended periods. It, too, would have
winners and losers, with perennial losers becoming insolvent and being
replaced by more competent firms. But in a steady state economy the
stock market would be less of a casino than in the growth economy.

Economic growth, on the other hand, is bound to cause an extensive and
extended stock market crash because demands for capital eventually will
exceed the productive capacity of the earth.

Therefore, advocating a steady state economy is appropriate not only for
purposes of wildlife conservation but also because it would reduce the
volatility of the stock market.

There are, of course, alternatives to the stock market for purposes of
financing capital investment. For example, capital may be financed by
private banks, cooperatives, and governments. In fact, all of these
institutions are active financiers throughout the world. The relative
prominence of each in a given nation helps to describe that nation's
history, ideology, and "political economy", which brings us to our next
question - a very big one.

Doesn't a steady state economy require a socialist government? More
generally put, what kind of government is most conducive to a steady
state economy? Might it be, for example, a capitalist democracy, a
communist state or a dictatorship? In theory, each is capable of
producing or coexisting with a steady state economy, but we do not think
any of these is particularly conducive. Each has exhibited far more
concern with GDP growth than with other important endeavors, such as
poverty alleviation and, of course, wildlife conservation.

We think the form of government most conducive to a steady state
economy, in the context of twenty-first-century nation states, is a
constitutional democracy somewhat more socialized than the current
American version. "Socialist democracies", as the term is used in
political science, already exist in many nations, most notably such
European nations as Sweden, Switzerland and England.

Economists more frequently call them "mixed economies". These are
democratically operated governments in which the state plays a more
prominent role in the economy than the American government plays in its
economy.

http://peakoil.blogspot.com/2007/12/truth-everyone-knows-but-no-one-says.html


http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com
http://www.ashisuto.co.jp