Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on October 9, 2017
No room for children: the absurd theory of population control
‘Want to fight climate change? Have fewer children.’
That was a headline on the Guardian earlier this year. A study published in Environmental Research Letters measured the impact of certain lifestyle choices when it comes to carbon emissions. The study suggests that having fewer children, along with adopting a vegetarian diet, avoiding long flights and selling your car, will have the most impact in reducing an individual’s carbon footprint.
This argument is based on the idea that more people in the global population means more carbon emissions. Therefore, it should follow that countries with higher populations would have bigger carbon emissions. However, the figures don’t line up. A paper published in Environment and Urbanisation journal found that between 1980 and 2005, sub-Saharan Africa was responsible for 18% of the world’s population growth – but was only responsible for 2.4% of the world’s extra carbon emissions. Compare that with China during the same period, which had a similar population growth and was responsible for 20 times the emissions. True, one could argue that having fewer children in countries like China, the United States, Canada and the UK could have a positive impact in reducing carbon emissions. But the problem is that population doesn’t address the root cause of what allows emissions to occur in the first place.
The overpopulation argument has reared its head in recent years and generally goes like this: It takes a certain amount of resources to keep people alive and there is a finite number of resources on the planet. If the number of people exceed the number of resources the planet can provide, we see an exhaustion of resources. There are areas of the world that have no access to basic resources like food, clothing, housing, clean water etc. Therefore, we have reached peak capacity and cannot continue to allow populations to grow.
Of course, the issue with arguments like this is they ignore unequal distribution and consumption of resources throughout different parts of the world.
In Australia, for example, we have the paradox of a massive amount of food waste (costing each household $3800 per year) yet food insecurity (the state of being without reliable access to a sufficient quantity of affordable, nutritious food) is at an all-time high. According to one article in the Sydney Morning Herald, ‘In a single month 644,000 Australians receive food relief from charities, while 43,000 people are turned away due to a shortage of food and resources … A third of those going without are children.’ So we are currently throwing away tonnes of food each year while people are missing meals.
Between 2006 and 2011, homelessness in Australia rose by 17%. Whilst we have to wait until 2018 to get the official census data on more recent figures, homelessness has increased by 75% in Melbourne (since 2014). Recent events in Martin Place in Sydney suggest that homelessness is on the rise there as well.
But homelessness in Australia is not due to a lack of dwellings. Roughly one million homes were empty on census night. Even if up to 524,779 of the homes were accounted for due to market turnover (meaning they are in a transitory phase and are expected to have tenants shortly) that still leaves an estimate of just under half a million empty homes sitting vacant. Considering we only have 105,237 homeless people currently in Australia, this seems an obvious mismatch. Given these statistics relating to something as vital as food and shelter, we should begin to question if we are really distributing resources in the best way possible. Isn’t this actually an issue of resource management?
Returning to the study published in Environmental Research Letters (ERL), ways to address climate change are framed as being ideologically motivated, as though it’s an issue that can be solved by individual choices. This approach tends to ignore the possibility that climate change is integral to the entrenched, institutionalised ways of operation found in modern-day social structures. In other words, collective industry is making emissions, but the burden of solving climate change is placed on the shoulders of the individual.
We recently learned that that just 100 companies are responsible for 71% of the world’s climate emissions. According to the neoliberal mindset of the ERL study, the average consumer should not only research all these companies and their subsidiaries, they should then boycott them to drive them out of the market. Good luck boycotting ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and Chevron entirely – let alone the thousands of companies that depend on their oil to keep running. I’m sure your act of ethical consumerism will send shock waves throughout the oil industry, driving them to immediate reform!
This isn’t to say that people shouldn’t think about their individual choices, but the reality is because of the way society is currently structured, those choices won’t make that much impact – if any at all – on how industry functions.
Clearly, there is a striking discord between popular opinion and the actions of those in the energy industry. A survey conducted by the Lowy Institute this year revealed that ‘81 per cent of respondents wanted policymakers to focus on clean energy sources such as wind and solar even if it costs more to ensure grid reliability.‘ On top of that, 57% of Australians also believe that climate change is a ‘critical threat’.
Those of a more reformist mindset might think this problem can be addressed by our elected politicians – that such representatives might create stronger legislation to address climate change reflecting the will of the people. But the truth is politicians and major parties rarely represent the interests of their constituents, but rather their campaign donors. The fossil fuel industry invests considerable money into our political campaign system – an estimated $3.7 million dispersed the Labor, Liberal and National parties. And it’s a wise investment for them because according to a 350.org (a grassroots clean energy campaign website) report, for every dollar they invest, they will receive $2000 back in government subsidies. So with the mechanisms for change to be enacted through the state sector currently jammed, what is the best approach to dealing with resource imbalances like climate change, hunger and homelessness?
Well, we start with the management of our collective resources, for the solution to this crisis lies in a population that leads more with democratic values and is less beholden to singular or concentrated private interests. Is it likely that empowered people will vote for a new, expensive, destructive and soon-to-be-outdated coal mine, or will they be more invested in renewable energy sources? Allow and empower communities to be more directly involved in the decision-making process of industry and production. Given the figures cited by the Lowy Institute earlier, I think it’s obvious which way people would vote. If given control over food and housing, I sincerely doubt that people would allow food to go to waste and houses to remain empty while people are going hungry and living on the streets.
Want to fight climate change? Let communities and workers be involved in the management of industry.
66 Comments on "No room for children: the absurd theory of population control"
Ghung on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 8:27 am
“A paper published in Environment and Urbanisation journal found that between 1980 and 2005, sub-Saharan Africa was responsible for 18% of the world’s population growth – but was only responsible for 2.4% of the world’s extra carbon emissions.”
What percent of the world’s starving people?
Davy on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 8:42 am
You want to know the answer? There is no answer because we do not have a handle on the human nature of 7BIL people. This amount of people with a huge diversity of human systems of thought in a competitive/cooperative world that leaves us paralyzed to change. We will self-organize in the pursuit of growth. We will see wealth transfer and increasing inequality because the rich will continue to ensure they are rich. The poor will continue to live and reproduce regardless of population control talk. This means we will have to leave change to change. Change is the great initiator of change and a crisis in change will change things. Other than that you can talk all day long about this or that theory or policy. Most theories and policies are corrupted and manipulated by agendas. This comment board is completely corrupted as a reflection of a corrupted world. I am corrupted.
The answer in the theoretical and abstract is draconian demand management and population control. Further we need draconian behavioral modifications. This must happen very quickly and scale up dramatically. This all has to be based on a respect and total subservience to the higher nature of human wisdom. WTF, is that, good question. Use your imagination because it does not matter anyway we are likely incapable of going there as-is. “No” and “less” must guide this process. “No” and “less” is a policy of decay, decline, and deflation. We are in a Ponzi time of bubbles and extend and pretend. Do you see the chasm we must cross? I would say it is impossible until we go to the brink of complete failure. We may not have the option complete failure may be the result of the process of approaching complete failure. IOW, once we drift into that momentum of decline all those growth based systems will implode.
If we are going to have any hope of survival then draconian and all-inclusive population control must be initiated. Things like skipping a generation or two of reproduction is needed. The alternative is famine and killing fields. Death is not fair when humans get involved. Nature is fair and she may be the force that in the end makes this solution reality. Draconian population efforts along with demand management must also be seen as an end game of the growth based status quo of globalism. Liberal democracies and market based economic systems do not survive decline, decay, and deflation. Short term decline, decay, and deflation is cleansing and this is why recessions are so beneficial. The reason we don’t have recessions anymore is because we can’t. In our repressed financial world of quantitative easing with interest rate controls along with a myriad of other exotic efforts a recession pose an existential threat.
So we are in a catch 22 of needed degrowth but requiring growth. We are in a human system in need of behavior management. We need demand management to allow the incorporation of the new renewable technologies and control pollution. Above all else we need population management. Our current human system in no way can address these needs. We are paralyzed to these kind of must have changes. Because if we had the strength to do these things people would react violently to the controls required. Further our problem is legitimacy of who would lead these efforts. The moral hazard of the past 50 years is so bad that there are no legitimate forces. We can’t even trust our scientist, academics, and moral leadership anymore. It is almost as if we are systematically overextended on every level from physical to the spiritual. We may limp along for some more years because the changes ahead are so epic and large but eventually a huge event and or a process of events will unfold. It will be terrible and all inclusive.
Sissyfuss on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 9:02 am
As the conditions of life continue to deteriorate the offered solutions will accelerate ad infinitum. The masses cannot wrap their distracted heads around our predicament that is devoid of solutions. We as a species have done and are doing what our programmed DNA requires of us, grow and consume. Looking for reasons why this is so is also in our program, unanswerable as that may be without religious fervor. I myself am no longer a participant in the human melodrama, merely an observer. Oh look, Dr Phil is doing a show on the Vegas shooter. See ya.
Shortend on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 9:07 am
Total BS piece of nonsense…surprised it made its appearance on PO…but than again, look at some of its membership…don’t have to name, names.
fmr-paultard on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 9:13 am
sis dear, we can’t talk about population control because alex jones gained his fame and cult following attacking anyone who slightly touches on the subject, and I think it was unwarranted.
Now if we have an “alex jones” who succeeds in promoting the bumpski for shooting extremist supremacist tard nazi preachers then game over for them.
supertards came from corporate environments. they work for oil industries or flying planes and adopt permaculture. But when I said it’s more of a permacultist vision, I got my point across. I am forgiving and i welcome them at our local industrial ag. supermarkets. no veil needed.
supremacist extremist tard nazi preachers on the other hands are impervious to all soft measures…
Outcast_Searcher on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 10:49 am
As if in a world with finite resources and shortages of things like food, water, energy, land, medical care, decent housing, etc. is many parts of the world, population doesn’t matter.
Just because things aren’t distributed according to a Marxian utopia doesn’t mean population doesn’t matter. Tying it to that is as invalid as tying it to whether or not you like any OTHER irrelevant fact.
Sys1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:27 am
Thank you for this great article, now I understand that 500 billions humans is the same as 1 billion humans.
onlooker on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:33 am
Wow, Outcast, we are totally agreeing on something. What type of idiocy cannot make the connection between overpopulation and resource shortages and deprivations. You can say Overpopulation is at the root of many of our current problems
Anonymous on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:48 am
Demography is destiny.
Cloggie on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 12:54 pm
Exactly right. Expect the losing demography to apply extreme measures:
https://youtu.be/k4H6qn7g9nI
And they have a lot of friends in Eurasia.
Apneaman on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 2:20 pm
Fight climate change – another mean nothing phrase.
If cancer cells were conscious, I wonder if they would try and convince themselves that they had any real control over their breeding? I wonder how many of the cells would need to pretend they were not the authors of their own doom (no later than 2100) so as not to go insane?
Overpopulation is self solving.
The water under Colorado’s Eastern Plains is running dry as farmers keep irrigating “great American desert”
Farmers say they’re trying to wean from groundwater, but admit there are no easy answers amid pressures of corn prices, urban growth and interstate water agreements
“A Denver Post analysis of federal data shows the aquifer shrank twice as fast over the past six years compared with the previous 60.”
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/10/08/colorado-eastern-plains-groundwater-running-dry/
Overpopulation and the Green Revolution
The Green Revolution saved many from starvation, but its father, Norman Borlaug, knew it was only half the answer. The other? Slowing population growth.
“Through “technical optimism,” Vallero added, “engineers ‘mess up’ the Malthusian curve by finding ways to accomplish this (e.g., Borlaug spoiling Ehrlich’s predictions).” This was a typical conclusion: by enabling millions more to eat and live, Norman Borlaug had refuted Ehrlich and Malthus’ panic-mongering about overpopulation.
That conclusion, however, was not shared by Borlaug himself. His Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech ended not in triumph, but with a warning:
The Green Revolution, Borlaug often said, essentially bought the world another generation or so to resolve the population problem. For the rest of his life, he served on the boards of population organizations, even as he continued crop research to feed the multiplying millions his work had added to the global census.”
http://www.utne.com/science-and-technology/overpopulation-zm0z14uzlin
Cloggie on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 2:29 pm
“If cancer cells were conscious, I wonder if they would try and convince themselves that they had any real control over their breeding? I wonder how many of the cells would need to pretend”
The Chinese were very well able to control their breeding, which refutes your theory that humans cannot control their breeding. Well provided that said population is smart and disciplined enough to be able to create an effective, authoritarian state.
Apneaman on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 2:30 pm
Human overpopulation will be 100% solved before 2100.
Carbon emissions from warming soils could trigger disastrous feedback loop
26-year study reveals natural biological factors kick in once warming reaches certain point, leading to potentially unstoppable increase in temperatures
“What appears to happen is that once warming reaches a certain point, these natural biological factors kick in and can lead to a runaway, and potentially unstoppable, increase in warming.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/05/carbon-emissions-warming-soils-higher-than-estimated-signalling-tipping-points
There are dozens of positive feedbacks underway and they are unstoppable. Even if the humans disappeared they would still go on, but slow down.
Cloggie on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 2:33 pm
“Human overpopulation will be 100% solved before 2100.”
You will certainly be solved long before that date. The rest you just sucked out of your thumb.
Apneaman on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 2:53 pm
China faces looming energy crisis, warns state-funded study (EXCLUSIVE)
Fossil fuel decline puts Chinese and global economy at risk
“A new scientific study led by the China University of Petroleum in Beijing, funded by the Chinese government, concludes that China is about to experience a peak in its total oil production as early as next year.
Without finding an alternative source of “new abundant energy resources”, the study warns, the 2018 peak in China’s combined conventional and unconventional oil will undermine continuing economic growth and “challenge the sustainable development of Chinese society.”
This also has major implications for the prospect of a 2018 oil squeeze — as China scales its domestic oil peak, rising demand will impact world oil markets in a way most forecasters aren’t anticipating, contributing to a potential supply squeeze. That could happen in 2018 proper, or in the early years that follow.
There are various scenarios that follow from here — China could: shift to reducing its massive demand for energy, a tall order in itself given population growth projections and rising consumption; accelerate a renewable energy transition; or militarise the South China Sea for more deepwater oil and gas.
Right now, China appears to be incoherently pursuing all three strategies, with varying rates of success. But one thing is clear — China’s decisions on how it addresses its coming post-peak future will impact regional and global political and energy security for the foreseeable future.”
https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/chinas-economic-boom-is-about-to-be-cut-short-by-peak-oil-warns-state-funded-study-exclusive-2533df2aeb6b
JuanP on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 2:55 pm
“This argument is based on the idea that more people in the global population means more carbon emissions. Therefore, it should follow that countries with higher populations would have bigger carbon emissions.” No, it doesn’t follow. This retard must have never heard of economic inequalities, imports and exports, different types of ecosystems, unequal distribution of resources, etc.
I never cease to be amazed by how the most stupid and ignorant people believe they understand and know everything. This retard most likely has children and it is because of people like him that I am extremely glad that I will never have any.
Apneaman on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 3:09 pm
Kerry Emanuel: This year’s hurricanes are a taste of the future
Climate scientist describes physics behind expected increase in storm strength due to climate change. – Watch Video
“In a detailed talk about the history and the underlying physics of hurricanes and tropical cyclones, MIT Professor Kerry Emanuel yesterday explained why climate change will cause such storms to become much stronger and reach peak intensity further north, heightening their potential impacts on human lives in coming years.”
“Emanuel said that overall it is water, not wind, that causes the vast majority of damage from such storms, though most people underestimate the severity of the water impact. To illustrate the point, he showed a short, dramatic video of a hurricane-produced storm surge striking a building. “It is hydrodynamically the same thing as a tsunami,” he explained, as the clip showed water rushing steadily in and quickly engulfing an entire house.
“I wish everyone who lives in zones subject to these storms could see films like this,” he said, adding that the scene depicted was clearly not survivable. “Water is the big killer.””
http://news.mit.edu/2017/kerry-emanuel-hurricanes-are-taste-future-0921
Apneaman on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 3:14 pm
Wounded Tropical Forests Now Emit 425 Million Tons of Carbon Each Year
https://robertscribbler.com/2017/10/09/wounded-tropical-forests-now-emit-425-million-tons-of-carbon-each-year-restoration-fossil-fuel-emissions-cuts-now-urgent/
Apneaman on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 4:05 pm
Why Megafires Will Shape Your Future
Climate change, industrialization and forest mismanagement creating a perfect firestorm, warns new book.
“This summer British Columbians got a smoky taste of the new realities. A record fire season in the Interior displaced 45,000 people, racked up nearly $500 million in firefighting bills and charred almost a million hectares. Meanwhile, urban dwellers choked on the smoke and beheld orange-hued landscapes.”
“Fire and forestry scientists foretold this unfolding horror story long ago. As Struzik documents, it is only politicians who don’t yet appreciate that climate change has ended business as usual in our forests. As a consequence, the continent now has passed into a singular hell of megafires from California to Fort McMurray.
Canada is squarely part of the problem. Despite being a boreal nation shaped by northern forests that were “born to burn,” as Struzik puts it, the federal government has made things worse by gutting its ability to respond to wildfires.
Canada was once a leader in fire research, but no more. This year British Columbia could barely stay on top of its record-breaking fire season. In 2015 Alberta cut its wildfire prevention and management budget by almost $15 million just months before being humbled by the “Beast” in Fort McMurray.”
https://thetyee.ca/Culture/2017/10/04/Megafires-Will-Shape-Future/
I don’t need the book to tell me the new reality, I’m living it & paying for it too. 2 of the last 3 years I/we sucked wildfire smoke for many weeks and 2015 was the most expensive wildfire season for BC until this year. All time records are being smashed every year or other year on all things AGW Jacked. Anyone want to venture a guess on how long that can go before your society is busted? This is on top of the already retard levels of debt. Could we have possibly done more to sell out the recently born than we already have? Shame. As the great unraveling continue I become more grateful that I have no children to have to answer to.
Apneaman on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 5:00 pm
“When our debts catch up with us, society will collapse, violent disorder will ensue and martial law will be inevitable.”
https://extranewsfeed.com/from-oilslick-to-tyranny-e35d04b31fc3
Go Speed Racer on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 5:44 pm
Hi Sleep Apneaman, yeah I was going thru
Portland and Seattle and Cough Cough
Choke Choke Wheeze Wheeze for the entire
length of Washington state the whole place
was totally smoked out, really bad.
This is exactly why nobody should be worried
about burning sofas and tires in our backyards.
After all, I never had a garbage fire that
smoked out entire cities or stank up the
air one whole state away. So they should go regulate forest fires instead.
Go Speed Racer on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 5:49 pm
oooops
somebody set California on fire again
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/09/us/california-fires-evacuations.html
good thing there is no global warming
or those fires could be getting worse.
peakyeast on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 6:07 pm
“costing each household $3800 per year”. That sounds unbelievable to me.
Those must be the rich people. I dont know any poor or even middleclass people who waste so much. Not even close.
Danish food prices are 30% above the EU average – so I would expect them to be at least on par with AU.
Our family of 4 uses about 300$AU per month on food – and we live quite luxurious if you ask me – with high amounts of meat and lots of juice. So that is 3600$AU per year. We would IOW have to throw out 100% of our food to reach that number.
Our food waste is in the range of maybe 50 $AU per year. And we do not even try to be economic.
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 6:22 pm
Juan, you are correct. Most have no idea what the rest of the world is like. Especially Americans. They base all of their ideas on American propaganda, not facts and differences. They want to be superior, but they are actually inferior where it counts.
How do you compare an American living in a 2,000+ sq.ft. house with all the bells, whistles and waste of the American lifestyle to that of a Filipino family of five, living in a 200 sq.ft. house made of local materials, no electric, appliances, vehicle, or even running water? Answer: You cannot. As different as gold and lead. But some like to try to do so for their own personal satisfaction. They don’t want to see their own problems.
Boat on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 7:28 pm
mak,
Because we don’t live in filth in tiny areas doesn’t mean we cant hook up our computers to our 60″ tv screens and see how you live. You call that our problem. lol We saw people like you on Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom as kids. We know the first world. I work to stay out of it.
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 7:33 pm
Boat, you arre aperfect example of the tyical brainweashed Amerikan. LOL
“Most have no idea what the rest of the world is like. Especially Americans. They base all of their ideas on American propaganda, not facts and differences.”
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 7:34 pm
Corrected… Boat, you are a perfect example of the typical brainwashed Amerikan. LOL
“Most have no idea what the rest of the world is like. Especially Americans. They base all of their ideas on American propaganda, not facts and differences.”
Davy on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 7:46 pm
Mad cat, not all Americans live in 2000 sq/ft houses. That shows how how out of it you are.
fmr-paultard on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 8:03 pm
extremist supremacist tard nazi preachers left charlottville in a rush because they feared the bumpski
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzKb6CS4dYI
anytard can do this. I know we’re all helpless because I was a helpless tard too. but everything takes practice.
Oh and you can’t kill extremist supremacist tard preachers because they’re supremacists, duh? The risk all yours, bullet will bounce back and hurt you.
fmr-paultard on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 8:14 pm
see i’m thinking the bumpski radicalizes extermist supermacist nazi tard preachers.
do the preachers have a choice or is it the bumpski make the choice for them.
life is strange
GregT on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 8:30 pm
” We saw people like you on Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom as kids.”
When you were a kid Boat, Makati was likely serving in the U.S. military. Something that you undoubtedly did not do.
“We know the first world. I work to stay out of it.”
We? There’s that multiple personality thing again. And Boat, no need to work to stay out of the first world, the 3rd world is in your future, whether you work towards it or not.
Go Speed Racer on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 8:57 pm
Most Americans live in 4000 sq ft houses.
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 9:28 pm
Davy, the average is about that size. I lived in houses from 800sf to 2800sf
“I think the average of all occupied single family homes that we think of as “houses” is close to the 2,100 square feet, and may be even smaller. This will include an enormous number of older homes that are much smaller which were lived in over the last century and still stand today as a testament to the resilience of the product we call a home.”
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-house-size-in-America
The average sized house is about 800sf per capita X the average household of 2.53 people comes to about 2,000sf average.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/183648/average-size-of-households-in-the-us/
http://www.elledecor.com/life-culture/fun-at-home/news/a7654/house-sizes-around-the-world/
Do the math … IF you are capable. LOL
GregT on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 10:18 pm
“not all Americans live in 2000 sq/ft houses. That shows how how out of it you are.”
The delusionalist finally said something that reflects reality. Wonders never cease.
Did you finally go and talk with someone about getting back on the meds? Or just one of those increasingly rare lucid moments?
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 10:40 pm
Greg, I don’t know, or care, how old Boat is but I served from 1965 to 1976. Two years enlisted and nine years as an officer. Was he even born then?
GregT on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:01 pm
I believe that Boat is about my age Makati, so yes, you were serving in the US military for most of his childhood. Not surprisingly, Boat obviously has no respect for those who have served ‘his’ country.
The delusionalist apparently doesn’t either, and just like Boat, I seriously doubt that he has ever stepped up to the plate.
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:16 pm
Maybe the dinner plate, but I doubt that the military would have him, or not for long. A short temper would get his ass kicked by the others or he would be court marshaled before he got out of basic. Tactical officers try to get you to lose it. It is a way to weed out the unwanted. It is obvious from his emotions here, that he could not take orders and would have a short military experience. lol
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:18 pm
I don’t think Boat has respect for anything except greed. Many Americans share his same obsession. The fall is going to be very painful.
Boat on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:49 pm
mak,
The good news about the 4000-5000′ homes I see going up in Houston is the foam insulation, triple pane windows, low flush toilets, electric water heaters, manifold with pex lines with individual shutoffs, efficient heat pumps etc. Smart, efficient homes are now standard in upscale America.
makati1 on Mon, 9th Oct 2017 11:58 pm
Boat, cardboard and plastic shacks with a bit of paint is ALL they are. Sticks and sawdust held together with glue until the first storm, flood or fire takes them down. You forget that I was in construction for most of my life and saw how those houses are built. Minimum standards and materials that look pretty but are not meant to last. Built for quick profit, not longevity or even safety. Big shacks. Nothing more.
You are just a greedy American who is going to commit suicide when it all goes poof! The 3rd world is already in America and coming to your neighborhood. Be patient.
GregT on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 12:00 am
There is nothing smart about a 4000-5000 sq/ft home Boat. Especially when people all around are living in poverty.
That would be more like a sickness.
GregT on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 12:08 am
“Sticks and sawdust held together with glue until the first storm, flood or fire takes them down.”
My second to last home was built in 1953. Tight grained, first growth fir construction, ship lapped exterior walls and roof, and lath and plaster interior. That house will be around for many decades after my last house bites the dust, which was built in 2003. Everything built in the boom after WW2 was made to last, nowadays, everything is built to turn a quick profit, and nothing more.
Boat on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 12:34 am
mak, greggiet
War is not for me. Not the idea of it but how badly our politicians have executed policy.
Boat on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 12:40 am
greggiet,
Those older homes are energy hogs. After a complete renovation, they are good for more decades. Homes don’t die like they used to. You just replace parts.
Boat on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 12:44 am
GregT on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 12:00 am
There is nothing smart about a 4000-5000 sq/ft home Boat. Especially when people all around are living in poverty.
That would be more like a sickness
Better 1 billion rich than 7 billion in poverty. Much less sickness.
GregT on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 12:58 am
“Better 1 billion rich than 7 billion in poverty. Much less sickness.”
As per usual, you aren’t making the slightest bit of sense.
makati1 on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 1:16 am
Boat, when there is no energy to cool your plastic box, it will not matter which is an energy hog, will it? If you Texas box is not designed for natural ventilation that can cool without electric, it will just be another oven. And foam insulation is nothing more than gasoline in solid form when there is a fire.
Fiberglass insulation is not new. It was in use in the 5os and is much better than foam. It does not come from an oil well and does not burn as easily. You live in a fantasy world like Davy. The pain is going to really be great for people like you. Be patient.
makati1 on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 1:18 am
Greg, Boat does not realize that “rich” can only happen if you have a lot of slaves providing the wealth. Another painful lesson he has to learn, I think, when he is a slave to the government/police state in the future. Oops! He already is.
GregT on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 1:19 am
“Homes don’t die like they used to. You just replace parts.”
Which ‘parts’ would you be referring to Boat?
The oldest standing structures were made of stone. Many will still be standing for a very long time, after anything from the modern era has long since collapsed.
GregT on Tue, 10th Oct 2017 1:37 am
“You live in a fantasy world like Davy.”
Boat is what he is, you can’t fix Boat. He will always be Boat.
The delusionalist, OTOH, does have options, but his condition will continue to deteriorate if he does not get help.
There is a huge difference between capacity, and health.