Yuku free message boards

On to overpopulation: Well to begin with, a minor "tail between the legs moment" in that I was asking why I was wrong to think question the loss of the 10%. I wasn't being rhetorical, I was hoping for someone to explain to me why I was being a twat for being unsure/leaning in favour of the culling. Humm.
To begin with of course a reduction in population would fail to have any effect on total consumption, if per capita consumption increased accordingly, and given today's consumption patterns it is entirely likely that it would, hence offering no direct benefit. However surely a reduction in population would ease the task of reducing individual consumption; petty yes, although just reducing individual consumption is similarly flawed, for while again were all other things equal a reduction would reduce the total I am inclined to believe population would increase accordingly. As you say it is overall consumption that is the problem, nonetheless either a reduction in population or per capita consumption could reduce it.
To be honest I'm a little confused by your mention of how production increases faster than population, since, well that certainly is quite obvious, and that the problem with over consumption is resource depletion (overgrazing and the like included).
And then of course you are absolutely right that the West's really rather horrific wastefulness of resources is to blame (both in directly and through the general propaganda to LEDCs that they are somehow less well off because they don't have the ability to get the latest model of cell phone every couple of months). However again as you say it is rather difficult to persuade overfed westerners to cease their consumption, since it has become so engrained into the culture that to not do so is to either be outcast or just of lower social standing (neither of which people seem to like). It always amazes me how prior to engaging on a Village Camp (get back to nature or whatever) most seem so apprehensive of losing all their things, enjoy (or at least pretend remarkably well) the actual event enormously, and then when it is over manage to say how stupid it was. All that I can put it down to is the "cool factor". It's like that really I think; I can't think of anything other than peer/society pressure that causes people to want to consume so (actually, there is also the evil of disposability/laziness). I've been thinking about that a lot lately; I'm currently looking for a new job and can't think of any reason why I should want anything more than the most lowly paid of jobs, since other than peer pressure I can't think of any reason at all that I would want lots of pointless stuff.
Anyways, back to the children: The meeting around the cabinet table certainly did show how they were pathetic little selfish people, however just as they were all too concerned with the trees so (I felt) was Gwen. Yes, when they decided to protect themselves they were certainly in the wrong; however at the time they had little choice to basically agree to the 456's terms, for while I am inclined to respect someone sacrificing themselves for their belief(s) if there is no one left to know then it is rather pointless. Basically giving in to the 456 may have had some (at least) questionable consequences, however given that in 40 years they had had no success in finding a method to stop them, buying extra time with the children would seem a sensible measure (for as much as the viewer has come to learn that a magic wand is always waiting somewhere close to the end, the ER world people don't seem to realise that yet). Also here they do (at least in theory) donate 10% from each country, not randomly, which as I said before is regrettable (although given the chance I have little doubt that most of the poorer peoples of MEDCs would consume just as much as the rich if given the chance). However I also have little doubt that Gwen would have displayed the same anguish had the children been entirely random, and that was my main problem with Torchwood's view: their response seems largely emotional. Humm. Sorry, but I'll have to finish this at some later time.

Oh, but finally: I would be perfectly happy to have myself killed for the benefit of my species, by my thoughts the individual is worthless unless they have some great idea, and the chance of any individual having one of those is so slim that, well, I am worthless. However just as most other actions by lone individuals are worthless so is the death of one. If, say, 60, 40, 20% of the world's population were to agree to die too (by there own accord, for as you sort of imply such a sacrifice carries little worth if one is unable to do it by one's own accord), then I would, for then, while the remainder probably wouldn't take any real notice, they might at least ponder for a few moments, and people rarely are given cause to think…

Reminiscent of the whole national defence thing, eh?

But why does Gwen spare so little angst for the despicable soldiers? They had a choice just as did the cabinet. They were pathetic too.