>From Steve Kurtz

 

Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 5:58 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: [Ottawadissenters] The world's biggest problem? Too many people
(L.A Times)

 






 

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-harte-population-201107
21,0,715317.story

 


The world's biggest problem? Too many people


Our unsustainable population levels are depleting resources and denying a
decent future to our descendants. We must stop the denial.


By Mary Ellen Harte and Anne Ehrlich

July 21, 2011

Think back on what you talked about with friends and family at your last
gathering. The latest game of your favorite team? "American Idol"? An
addictive hobby? The new movie blockbuster? In a serious moment, maybe job
prospects, Afghanistan, the economic mess? We live in an
information-drenched environment, one in which sports and favorite programs
are just a click away. And the ease with which we can do this allows us to
focus on mostly comforting subjects that divert our attention from
increasingly real, long-term problems.

Notice that we didn't mention climate change above, or the exploding
population/consumption levels that are triggering it - the two major factors
threatening humanity's future. Sure, if you're not too far from the Western
wildfires or Midwestern floodplains, the conversation might have turned to
the crazy weather that is finally forcing some media to actually talk about
climate change in the context of daily events.

But population? Get out. Way too inconvenient a truth. Take
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/media-industry/radio-
industry/npr-ORNPR0000040.topic> National Public Radio, for example. Of
NPR's sparse record of population pieces, just one or two actually address
unsustainable population growth. But as the political right whittles away at
family planning clinics across the nation, the latest NPR series, "The Baby
Project," devotes a plethora of articles to pregnancy, with the most serious
subjects the problems some women have conceiving and birthing. If there is
even a hint of too many babies, it is well hidden. This, even though a 2009
NPR story on U.S. pregnancies reported that half - yes, half - of all U.S.
pregnancies are unintended. That's a lot of unintended consumers adding to
our future climate change.

And that's what the right calls the "liberal" side of the mass media. The
politically conservative U.S. mass media cover unsustainable population
levels even less.

That pretty much reflects the appalling state of U.S. public education today
on population. The U.S. approach to population issues across all levels of
government, in terms of such things as education, attacks on family planning
and tax deductions for children, is an exercise in thoughtlessness. The
ramifications, however, are far more insidious and brutal. Women are
culturally conditioned daily to welcome the idea of having children -
plural, not one or none. How to support those children economically is not
discussed. Indeed, our abysmal lack of adolescent sex educational programs
ensures there will be plenty of young women who secure their destinies, and
those of their babies, to brutal poverty and shortened lives through
unwanted pregnancies and lack of choice. The latest available statistics
from the National Poverty Center at the
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/education/colleges-universities/university-of-
michigan-OREDU000044.topic> University of Michigan tell the story: 1 in 5
American children lived in poverty in 2008; 1 in 3 if they were black or
Latino.

Sure, there's much talk and concern that birthrates are down and will result
in not enough workers to support the elderly. But this argument is
overblown; after all, a 70-year-old can be more economically productive than
a 7-year-old. And a large, pre-working population inflicts costs on a
society. Furthermore, the birthrates in developing nations remain high, and
the consequences affect us all.

Globally, the effects of overpopulation play a part in practically every
daily report of mass human calamity, but the word "population" is rarely
mentioned. Wildfires threaten ever more people because expanding populations
are moving nearer and into forests. Floods inundate more homes as
populations expand into floodplains. Such extreme events are stoked by
climate change, fueled by increasing carbon emissions from an expanding
global population.

Overpopulation is also fueling desertification and further deforestation
around the world. We can dream of drastically decreasing overconsumption by
the wealthy, but even realistic potential decreases are voided by sheer
human numbers in all countries, rich and poor. Our unsustainable population
levels are depleting resources and denying a decent future to our
descendants.

What to do? Stop the denial. Perpetual growth is the creed of a cancer cell,
not a sustainable human society.

Promote and support family planning education at the family and community
levels as a cheap way to reduce poverty and severe climate change. Support
organizations that are trying to get
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/health/birth-control-HETHT000011.topic>
contraceptivesto the 200 million women in the world who lack and want them,
and help them obtain equal rights, education and job opportunities. Access
to contraceptives and reproductive freedom are rights, not luxuries, that
ultimately benefit all of humanity. Vote for leaders who vigorously promote
those humane solutions. And demand that media start educating the public
every day on the role played by the unsustainable human numbers behind
environmental degradation and human calamities - and start covering the
solutions. The public needs a constant message: "It's time to stop growing
and become sustainable."

We can do many things to solve environmental, economic and social problems,
but each is a lost cause if we cannot bring our populations down to
sustainable levels.

Mary Ellen Harte is coauthor of " <http://www.cooltheearth.us/> Cool the
Earth, Save the Economy." Anne Ehrlich is a senior research scientist at
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/education/colleges-universities/stanford-unive
rsity-OREDU0000292.topic> Stanford University. John Harte and Paul Ehrlich
contributed to this piece. All are biologists involved in the study of
climate change and sustainability.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------







__._,_.___

 
<http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97476590/grpId=15209059/grpspId=1705083512/msgI
d=15486/stime=1311717468> 



Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional 
Change settings via the Web
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ottawadissenters/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJnbWlyb2ZqBF
9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzE1MjA5MDU5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA4MzUxMgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsaw
NzdG5ncwRzdGltZQMxMzExNzE3NDY4>  (Yahoo! ID required) 
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20
Digest>  | Switch to Fully Featured
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20Deliv
ery%20Format:%20Fully%20Featured>  
Visit Your Group
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ottawadissenters;_ylc=X3oDMTJlajNjaXR0BF9TAzk
3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzE1MjA5MDU5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA4MzUxMgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNocGY
Ec3RpbWUDMTMxMTcxNzQ2OA--> | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> | Unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> 





__,_._,___

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to