Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the New World Order -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (206)	12/13/2003 2:23:11 PM
From: MSI	Respond to of 512

I must be a radical. I believe the ideal and sustainable carrying capacity for this finite planet is no more than 1 Billion human resouce destroyers. There's the confusion... When you decide to create an ideal lightly-living situation, you can do so in a way that's practically invisible to the environment. The "you" in that sentence is not Dow or Monsanto of today (altho' it might be tomorrow, esp if somelike me owned them, lol!) , its the engineers who simply put together existing technology with that end in mind. Designing a dwelling on 1/2 acre can include almost everything, except recycled materials like metals. It's all about intent, not actual numbers of people. Engineering can take care of the technical issues. Political and especially cultural leadership will be necessary, regardless of the numbers. Right now, both are hijacked by primitives. The hope is that they are making themselves extinct. Even a tiny fraction of that idealized one billion people, if angry, suicidal, or accidentally amoral can blow the place up or unleash biowar organisms to eliminate all life. Technology will not decline, so ability to destroy more and more with fewer and fewer 'evildoers' will only increase. That's the primary problem to be solved if we're to continue as a species, imo.