4 ms·
Once you see environmental problems as, despite each being unique, mostly arising from overpopulation, you can't help substitute for the proximal cause "overpop
by spodek 7y ago
Once you see environmental problems as, despite each being unique, mostly arising from overpopulation, you can't help substitute for the proximal cause "overpopulation".
> The scramble for sand is destroying the Mekong
Becomes
> Overpopulation is destroying the Mekong
You might add "one way is the scramble for sand" though there are plenty others.
Learning about various nations' successful, noncoercive programs to lower birthrate that are as far from China's policy, forced abortions, or eugenics as day from night, and that increased prosperity and happiness, leads you to embrace such programs. The book Countdown by Alan Weiss https://www.amazon.com/Countdown-Last-Best-Future-Earth/dp/0316097756 https://www.amazon.com/Countdown-Last-Best-Future-Earth/dp/0... describes several such programs, including in Thailand, Iran, Costa Rica, Mexico, and others.
The most effective solution to the Mekong situation, however partial, is contraception and family planning education.
- throwawayhhakdl 7y agoThey’re not though. That’s a vast oversimplification. There are many individuals who consume and pollute 1000x more than others. You could probably add a few zeroes there and still be accurate. Many problems would continue to exist and continue to get worse if local populations were to start decreasing over time.