two of the most important stories media wont report on

A place for discussion of current events. Buddhist news would be particularly appreciated.

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby palchi » Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:32 pm

Heruka wrote:
palchi wrote:[quote="Heruka

hello palchi, are you NGO?


no, I'm with the UN



ok. your on mission then?


UNOG

(sorry cannot post direct link to UNOG)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNOG[/quote]

I'm working for UNICEF - the UN Children's Fund. One of quite a few UN agencies...
palchi
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:26 pm

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:38 pm

lets just pick one organ arm of UN, UNESCO and see what the grand daddy of that organization "thinks" its classic tradegy of the commons stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Huxley





Julian Huxley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Julian Huxley as Fellow of
New College, Oxford 1922
Born 22 June 1887 (1887-06-22)
London
Died 14 February 1975 (1975-02-15) (aged 87)

Residence London
Nationality British
Fields Evolutionary biology
Institutions Rice Institute, Oxford University, Kings College London, Zoological Society, UNESCO
Alma mater Balliol College, Oxford
Known for Evolutionary synthesis, Humanism, UNESCO, Conservation, Eugenics
Influences T.H. Huxley, W.G. (Piggy) Hill
Influenced E.B. Ford, Gavin de Beer, Aldous Huxley
Notable awards Kalinga Prize, Darwin Medal, Darwin–Wallace Medal, Lasker Award

Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS (22 June 1887 – 14 February 1975) was an English evolutionary biologist, humanist and internationalist. He was a proponent of natural selection, and a leading figure in the mid-twentieth century evolutionary synthesis. He was Secretary of the Zoological Society of London (1935–1942), the first Director of UNESCO, and a founding member of the World Wildlife Fund.

Huxley was well-known for his presentation of science in books and articles, and on radio and television. He was awarded UNESCO's Kalinga Prize for the popularisation of science in 1953, the Darwin Medal of the Royal Society in 1956, and the Darwin–Wallace Medal of the Linnaean Society in 1958. He was also knighted in that same year, 1958, a hundred years after Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace announced the theory of evolution by natural selection. In 1959 he received a Special Award of the Lasker Foundation in the category Planned Parenthood – World Population. Huxley was a prominent member of the British Eugenics Society, and its President from 1959–1962.



Eugenics and race
Huxley was a prominent member of the British Eugenics Society,[67] and was Vice-President (1937–1944) and President (1959–1962). He thought eugenics was important for removing undesirable variants from the human gene pool; but at least after World War II he believed race was a meaningless concept in biology, and its application to humans was highly inconsistent.[68]

Huxley was an outspoken critic of the most extreme eugenicism in the 1920s and 1930s (the stimulus for which was the greater fertility of the 'feckless' poor compared to the 'responsible' prosperous classes). He was, nevertheless, a leading figure in the eugenics movement (see, for example, Eugenics manifesto). He gave the Galton memorial lecture twice, in 1936 and 1962. In his writing he used this argument several times: no-one doubts the wisdom of managing the germ-plasm of agricultural stocks, so why not apply the same concept to human stocks? "The agricultural analogy appears over and over again as it did in the writings of many American eugenicists." [69]

Huxley was one of many intellectuals at the time who believed that the lowest class in society was genetically inferior. This passage, from 1941, puts the view forcefully:

"The lowest strata are reproducing too fast. Therefore... they must not have too easy access to relief or hospital treatment lest the removal of the last check on natural selection should make it too easy for children to be produced or to survive; long unemployment should be a ground for sterilisation." [70]

Here, he does not demean the working class in general, but aims for "the virtual elimination of the few lowest and most degenerate types".[71] The sentiment is not at all atypical of the time, and similar views were held by many geneticists (William E. Castle, C.B. Davenport, H.J. Muller are examples), and by other prominent intellectuals.

Concerning a public health and racial policy in general, Huxley wrote that "...unless [civilised societies] invent and enforce adequate measures for regulating human reproduction, for controlling the quantity of population, and at least preventing the deterioration of quality of racial stock, they are doomed to decay..." [72] and remarked how biology should be the chief tool for rendering social politics scientific.

In the opinion of Duvall, "His views fell well within the spectrum of opinion acceptable to the English liberal intellectual elite. He shared Nature's enthusiasm for birth control, and 'voluntary' sterilization." [73] However, the word 'English' in this passage is unnecessary: such views were widespread.[74] Duvall comments that Huxley's enthusiasm for centralised social and economic planning and anti-industrial values was common to leftist ideologists during the inter-war years. Towards the end of his life Huxley himself must have recognised how unpopular these views became after the end of World War II. In the two volumes of his autobiography there is no mention of eugenics in the index, nor is Galton mentioned; and the subject has also been omitted from many of the obituaries and biographies. An exception is the proceedings of a conference organised by the British Eugenics Society.[75]

In response to the rise of European fascism in the 1930s he was asked to write We Europeans with the ethnologist A.C. Haddon, zoologist Alexander Carr-Saunders and historian of science Charles Singer. Huxley suggested the word 'race' be replaced with ethnic group. After the Second World War he was instrumental in producing the UNESCO statement The Race Question,[76] which asserted that:

"A race, from the biological standpoint, may therefore be defined as one of the group of populations constituting the species Homo sapiens"... "Now what has the scientist to say about the groups of mankind which may be recognized at the present time? Human races can be and have been differently classified by different anthropologists, but at the present time most anthropologists agree on classifying the greater part of present-day mankind into three major divisions, as follows: The Mongoloid Division; The Negroid Division; The Caucasoid Division."... "Catholics, Protestants, Moslems and Jews are not races..."

In 1957 Huxley coined the term "transhumanism" to describe the view that man should better himself through science and technology, possibly including eugenics, but also, importantly, the improvement of the social environment.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:40 pm

palchi wrote:
Heruka wrote:
palchi wrote:[quote="Heruka

hello palchi, are you NGO?


no, I'm with the UN



ok. your on mission then?


UNOG

(sorry cannot post direct link to UNOG)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNOG


I'm working for UNICEF - the UN Children's Fund. One of quite a few UN agencies...[/quote]


Im sorry palchi, i dont mean to be too intrusive.

many thanks

:anjali:
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby palchi » Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:49 pm

Heruka wrote:

Im sorry palchi, i dont mean to be too intrusive.

many thanks

:anjali:


no problem... just don't expect me to take the bait... like re your unesco post above...
palchi
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:26 pm

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:51 pm

its not bait but public record, UNICEF is noble cause, but it is not without criticisms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicef#Criticism

Criticism
UNICEF has been criticized at times for its focus or for specific policies. In 2004, the editorial in the Lancet argued that UNICEF's rights-based approach to child welfare, based upon the Convention on the Rights of the Child, whilst in accordance with international development policy, leads to a lower emphasis on child survival and mortality.[10]

The Catholic Church has also been critical of UNICEF, with the Vatican at times withdrawing its donations, because of reports by the American Life League and others that UNICEF has used some of those funds to finance sterilizations and abortions.[11][12] Catholics have also accused UNICEF of supporting abortion through their endorsement of "good quality abortion services" at the International Conference on Better Health for Women and Children in Kenya in 1987.[13]

UNICEF has also been criticized for its financial endorsement of China's allegedly coercive one-child policy through the UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund) by increasing donations from $2 million to $5 million in 1993.[14]

A further example is the emotive issue of intercountry adoptions from Guatemala.[15] The country has ratified the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption of 29 May 1993 with effect from 1 January 2008. UNICEF has been criticised by some interested parties for failing to support adoptions that are underway before the deadline.[16]



http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lance ... 40-6736(07)61451-2/fulltext


In December each year UNICEF publishes its State of the World's Children report. That publication regularly carries with it an estimate of global child mortality. But on Sept 10—6 days after we informed UNICEF of the publication date of the paper by Murray and colleagues—and in a break with its usual practice, UNICEF contacted selected journalists about “a major public health success”. For the first time UNICEF strongly publicised its claim that annual under-5 child deaths had fallen below 10 million.
Several journalists were puzzled. The sudden UNICEF contact was unexpected. It was unusually dissociated from UNICEF's annual report. There were no detailed data for journalists to examine in order to interpret UNICEF's claim. UNICEF denies that it released the positive 9·7 million figure to pre-empt the more critical tone of the paper by Murray and colleagues. But a senior UNICEF adviser did tell The Lancet that Murray's work was “ethically troubling” and that “we can't say that we were unhappy to have released our figure first”.
Both of these examples show how UN agencies are willing to play fast and loose with scientific findings in order to further their own institutional interests. When those interests are the preventable deaths of children, perhaps one should forgive their haste. Certainly we share WHO's sense of urgency about translating research into policy. And we support strongly UNICEF's view that scientists should work together to improve systems for tracking child survival.
But the danger is that by appearing to manipulate science, breach trust, resist competition, and reject accountability, WHO and UNICEF are acting contrary to responsible scientific norms that one would have expected UN technical agencies to uphold. Worse, they risk inadvertently corroding their own long-term credibility.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby palchi » Wed Sep 22, 2010 5:03 pm

Heruka, at the speed you are quoting - or rather copy-pasting - criticism of whatever organisation I doubt you have spent any time actually thinking through what you are posting. And you don't spend any time thinking about and acknowledging the positive work the UN and many other agencies are doing in this world.

As I said I don't feel a need to defend either myself, UNICEF or any of the UN agencies... I rather get on with my work...

How are YOU earning your money or engaging in voluntary work?

Otherwise bowing out of this one!
cheers
palchi
palchi
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:26 pm

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Wed Sep 22, 2010 5:31 pm

palchi wrote:
As I said I don't feel a need to defend either myself, UNICEF or any of the UN agencies... I rather get on with my work...

How are YOU earning your money or engaging in voluntary work?

Otherwise bowing out of this one!
cheers
palchi


I think this is quite normal reaction, it seems most people are not prepared to actually look at and or refute the information provided. its a real pitty because its gotten off track from original issue of thread.
Im still waiting for some counter balance to the information I have provided.

Bowing out really serves no purpose, sorry you feel that way.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby ronnewmexico » Wed Sep 22, 2010 5:46 pm

No personal offense Heruka

but these ideas, though they can certainly be found somewhere substantiated on the internet..

the idea Wikileaks and julian asange are double agents really working for the man
the idea global warming is really a corporate push to advance a profit taking related to carbon taxation
the idea that the world is being subject to a world government push to significant reduce the population of the world when our current population stands at more then 6 billion and is growing exponentially every minute we speak...


This stuff generally doesn't pass the giggle test. They are all connected, these theories, to real fact in a way but in a way that is misdirected and thusly produces a faulted product. It is like double thinking a truth into a untruth. Too complex, too convoluted..... things just don't work that way. It's not that people are not looking or intentionally looking away...it is that such double think...it is nonsensical.

The proof is in the pudding. If things are as one thinks they are, one can thusly predict with accuracy the result, and thusly one may profit from the result and perhaps put these profits to charitable concern which assits a cause. Till one can do such a thing....I suggest considering these theories not necessarily fact.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.
User avatar
ronnewmexico
 
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:03 pm

there is no collusion at all, its all a conspiracy.



http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/ ... 226092.htm


Officials from selected countries will share their successes and challenges in establishing regulations for food safety and managing inspections and surveillance within their jurisdiction.

“We are global citizens in a global economy with a shared responsibility to help ensure that the foods we eat and feed our families have undergone the most rigorous of scientific reviews and inspection. We are eager to collaborate with our counterparts to help protect and promote public health, not only in the United States but around the world,” said Murray Lumpkin, M.D., the FDA’s deputy commissioner for international programs. “This is a major step toward greater engagement with our Middle East and North Africa counterparts, the beginning of what we hope will be long-standing cooperation.”


http://www.fda.gov/InternationalProgram ... 114632.htm


Codex Alimentarius Commission
Under the WHO umbrella, the Codex Alimentarius Commission develops food standards, guidelines and codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programs. FDA participates and exercises leadership in relevant Codex committees. Harmonization and Multilateral Relations representatives coordinate Codex activities within FDA and other U.S. agencies to encourage the development of science-based, international food safety and labeling standards.



http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:20 pm

there is no collusion at all, its all a conspiracy.



http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/index.php

http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/meeting_2010.html

Bilderberg Meetings

The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 - 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations. Approximately 130 participants will attend of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the balance from North America. About one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds are from finance, industry, labor, education, and communications. The meeting is private in order to encourage frank and open discussion.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby ronnewmexico » Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:42 pm

Here is another story the media will not report on......

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

the flat earth societies web site.... :smile:

It is really a quite humerous entertaining site if one has a few minutes to puruse.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.
User avatar
ronnewmexico
 
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:19 am

ronnewmexico wrote:
the idea Wikileaks and julian asange are double agents really working for the man



a man so public and wanted by "governments" that he can fly around the world undetected and with immunity, whilst 9 year old kids are on terrorist no fly watch lists......... thats a good one for the flat earthers...


give me a break!

:rolling:
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby ronnewmexico » Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:34 am

Well one who is not a american must certainly know a no fly list is a american invention and applies only to those traveling to from or through the US.

Asange as one may know if one has studied him to find out what he is, has a long long history of necessity of covert acting and being necessitated by his particular life story.

Yes if one has studied these things one may find out these things.

What is :rolling: is the fact Daniel Ellsberg can be found, (if again this subject is studied), the man who singularly was most responsible for ending the Vietnam conflict who performed thusly despite threat upon life liberty and certainly career....can be found to be supporting Julians every effort 100%. And claim can still be made amongst the flat earthers.... http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm that Julian is a double agent of some perposterous sort.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.
User avatar
ronnewmexico
 
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:14 am

you know about cointelpro right and how it works?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

Hal Turner being a classical case, the hutaree milita is another, if one is able to concentrate enough to be aware of what is going on around.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:30 am

ronnewmexico wrote:
What is :rolling: is the fact Daniel Ellsberg can be found, (if again this subject is studied), the man who singularly was most responsible for ending the Vietnam conflict who performed thusly despite threat upon life liberty and certainly career....can be found to be supporting Julians every effort 100%.



yes the whole RAND corp leaks were important forsure, but lets not get ahead of ourselves here. i have linked a documentary called the trail of henry kissinger that explores a little deeper the vietnam/cambodia era than just RAND.


ron it is well worth a watch, the investigation inspired by the great chis hitchens. (just in case im acused of being all "right" whatever the hell that means???)

viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2218&view=unread#unread
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:48 am

ronnewmexico wrote:the idea global warming is really a corporate push to advance a profit taking related to carbon taxation



http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1185475433.pdf

you dont think the system is already in place?

that would be a conspiracy right?

http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/

lol, and people thought it was about pollution and saving polar bears.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby ronnewmexico » Thu Sep 23, 2010 5:27 pm

You know if you find obvious inconsistancy in any theory by observable fact you have to remedy or mediate the theory to accomodate the fact.
If one does not that ones product is completely faulted. Some may entertain a theory personally and extend it in a personal fashion despite obvious contradiction as a means to determine if such extension will in some manner allow for the inconsistancies....but that is done in a personal fashion and not presented as rational for or proof of a theory.


NOw Ellsberg 100% supports Julain Assanga and Wikileaks...that has not been allowed for.

NOw the KOyoto protocal which allows for the substantiation and rational for carbon trading was signed on to by 187 mations, to include Venezuela and Cuba.

Now if it was a corporately beneficial idea in singularity, this global warming and response...why exactly would Cuba and Venezuela be doing buying into it 100%?

The population absurdity....suffice it to say in a world that has significantly declining finate resources and a growing by leaps and bounds population in all third world countries and a declining rate of internal growth in most first world countries.....that theory just plainly flies in the face of the facts.

If the poor were being forced to not reproduce we would certainly have a lowering of their populations not a gross increase, and the rich would be grossly increasing. Check population increases by income in national representations(not allowing for immigration)....and you will find the exact opposite of what you state is the circumstance. LOwer birth rates in the richest nations higher or highest in the poorest....that's the fact.

At some point in time you have to reconciel facts, all known true facts to theory. It must happen for theory to be considered viable.

Now on the internet one may find all sorts of perposterous notions such as I exemplify with the flat earth society. That link was in jest, but there really do exist people who think the earth is flat and will go to any extent to defend their positions. They really do exist and will do such things. There really do exist americans 25% that think Obama was born in Kenya and is a Muslim despite any fact opposeing that view.

I don't know what to call it but it is not rational thinking. The point of all this....


It is important for all of us to not fall into the trap of to much information and too little of the verifyable factual, to explore and study, before we develope or assume others theory on how things are.

YOu will not find any of my challenges to your three theories defeatable because they are facts.And the facts as supplied directly contradict your theory.
Post as many links as you want they will not change the above stated facts...all three.
Nor will you find anyone drawn to your side....not a one if they bother to read what you are stateing and not just assume they know what you are stateing, which to my opinion is part of the problem here..the greater problem of cognitive disconnect prevelent in the general populations, of the west most noteably the US.
So with that I also, now bail out of this conversation.

It has occured to me that some who read this may not know who Julian Assange is. He is the spokesperson for a group called wikileaks who released 70k or so, papers of secret nature from the US government on Afghanistan. He last I checked,(though I am not absolutely current), was suddenly and mysteriously(after release of the papers) being sought for questioning subsequent to a charge of rape or sexual assault in Sweden. His group continues to release the papers, and the US government has initiated several responses to this.
Heruka states he is a double agent really working for the US in some manner.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.
User avatar
ronnewmexico
 
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:40 pm

ronnewmexico wrote:
The population absurdity....suffice it to say in a world that has significantly declining finate resources and a growing by leaps and bounds population in all third world countries and a declining rate of internal growth in most first world countries.....that theory just plainly flies in the face of the facts.

If the poor were being forced to not reproduce we would certainly have a lowering of their populations not a gross increase, and the rich would be grossly increasing. Check population increases by income in national representations(not allowing for immigration)....and you will find the exact opposite of what you state is the circumstance. LOwer birth rates in the richest nations higher or highest in the poorest....that's the fact.

At some point in time you have to reconciel facts, all known true facts to theory. It must happen for theory to be considered viable.





your correct and validate my point, the ratio of western births is 1.6, below the healthy replacment birth rate of 2.1 for any population, in other words the west is slowly dying out. It is no surprise to social engineers that it is the case.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:15 pm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/ ... 2616.shtml



Population Decline Is Bad For Us
Weekly Standard: Innovation Would Suffer With Slackening Demand

(CBS/AP)



Track key population milestones as the U.S. hits the 300 million mark.
.(Weekly Standard) This column was written by Jonathan V. Last

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

Fertility rates around the world are dropping for a variety of complex reasons. While population itself continues to increase — the United States, for instance, recently passed the 300 million mark — this is the product of waning demographic momentum. The rate of increase is slowing, and by 2080 world population will peak somewhere in the vicinity of nine billion before contracting.

Which leads us to the next question: Is population contraction a bad thing?

Some think not. There is a school of thought that argues that smaller populations are good. Population-control proponents claim variously that:



We do not have the food to sustain higher populations.

Our planet already suffers from overcrowding.

The environmental impact of increased populations will bring catastrophe either through pollution or consumption of finite natural resources.

Decreased population will lead to higher wages and a better quality of life as available supplies exceed reduced demands.



These arguments seem reasonable at first, but do not withstand scrutiny.

Let's start with food. The worry about mass starvation is a remnant of Paul Ehrlich's 1968 sensation "The Population Bomb." Ehrlich wrote that, in the face of expanding populations, "the world will undergo famines — hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death."

As Ehrlich himself admits, this prediction proved faulty. Instead, the availability of food has greatly increased, even with growing population. Demographer Philip Longman notes that, between 1980 and 2001, the price of food declined by 53 percent. Famine, observes Longman, has become "a political problem — a matter of fair distribution, not of inadequate supply."

How did this happen? The Danish economist Ester Boserup upended the classical Malthusian model of agriculture in 1965 by proposing that population increase fosters agricultural innovation, which, in turn, spurs leaps in production. Her theories have been borne out.

What about overcrowding? Everywhere you go today, you find traffic jams and sprawl, with people packed into condominiums and crowded malls. But this is a problem of density, not population. There's plenty of land available out there. The problem is that people who used to live in the countryside have relocated to cities: There are fewer people living in the Great Plains today than there were in the 1920s.

Environmental concerns are more interesting. However, such end-of-the-world warnings are not new. In the 1970s, many scientists were concerned about a new Ice Age. But leave aside global warming, on which science is conflicted, and take the other concern principally cited by environmentalists: that the Earth has a finite supply of resources that we shall surely soon deplete.

This, too, is an argument we have heard before. As Massimo Livi-Bacci explains in his "Concise History of World Population" more than 100 years ago, economists "feared that coal supplies would be used up, and about 30 years ago the Club of Rome made similar predictions regarding other raw materials." Instead, markets and human innovation stepped in to provide greater efficiency.

For instance, in the America of 1850, you needed an average of 4.6 tons of petroleum equivalent to produce $1,000 of goods and services. By 1950, you needed only 1.8 tons, and, by 1978, 1.5 tons. Markets are exceptional engines of conservation.

Which leaves us with the economy. In 1971, Simon Smith Kuznets won the Nobel Prize in economics for his theory of "tested knowledge." As Kuznets explained: "More population means more creators and producers, both of goods along established production patterns and of new knowledge and inventions."

Kuznets was codifying what others had noticed before. Adam Smith remarked that "the most decisive mark of the prosperity of any country is the increase of the number of its inhabitants." As Livi-Bacci observes, "All things being equal, population increase leads to increased per capita production."


.....................................................................................................................................................................



http://www.globalenvision.org/library/8/1776/


Europe's future demographic decline is not due to plague, starvation, warfare, climate change or some other calamity. It's the result of women and men choosing to have fewer children than needed to ensure population replacement. With the exception of Albania, all nations of Europe are experiencing low fertility. In many countries, such as Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, the Russian Federation, Spain and Ukraine, fertility levels are now closer to one child than two children per couple.

Two-thirds of the European countries view current fertility levels as too low and half of the countries have adopted policies to raise fertility, the most recent being Germany. Many European governments seek to address the underlying causes of low fertility and adopt polices to encourage couples to have more babies. Job security, maternity and paternity leave, childcare, after-school programs, cash grants and allowances, priority housing, flexible work schedules and part-time employment are incentives already adopted or seriously considered by governments.

Will government policies, programs and other pro-natalist incentives raise birth rates sufficiently to attain replacement-level fertility? European fertility levels will likely increase somewhat above the low rates of today as the lowering effect of postponing childbearing runs its course. However, most European governments probably cannot raise fertility to replacement levels in the near term.

In addition to population decline, Europe's population continues to age, an issue of concern for most European governments. Whereas in 1950 the median age of the European population was 30 years, today it's 40 years. Europe is the world's oldest region, on average about 10 years older than Latin America and Asia and 20 years older than Africa. By 2050, Europe's median age is projected to reach 47 years.

Europe is the world's oldest region, on average about 10 years older than Latin America and Asia and 20 years older than Africa.
Also during the coming decades, Europe's population age structure will undergo a dramatic transformation, with marked declines in the working ages and corresponding increases in the population 65 years or older. The population aged 25-49, for example, is expected to decline by approximately 75 million and those aged 65 or older to increase by nearly 70 million by mid-century. In the absence of immigration, the projected declines in the working ages are more striking, with the population aged 25-49 declining by nearly 100 million, a 20 percent decline from today's level.

Although Europe receives many immigrants, today's numbers - an estimated net flow of some 1 million per year - are not enough to offset the demographic consequences of low birth rates. Europe would need to double its current annual level of net immigration to halt its population decline, triple the level to maintain the size of its current working-age population and quintuple the level to keep worker/elderly ratios at roughly today's levels.

Moreover, and in contrast to the past, the ethnic composition of immigrants in many instances differs markedly from the populations of the receiving countries. Immigrants in the past were largely from countries in southern Europe, including Italy, Spain and Portugal. Many of today's immigrants to Europe come from Africa and Asia, raising concerns in host communities about cultural integrity and assimilation. While the absolute numbers of immigrants are comparatively small, concentrations have increased visibly in recent decades. Adding complications is the presence of large numbers of migrants who have entered illegally or lack documents for legal residence, many of whom are poorly educated and low skilled. These conditions contribute to greater ethnic diversity and tensions within and among countries, raising concerns about cultural integrity, national identity, integration and national security.

Do Europe's future population decline and aging offer promise or peril? Not surprisingly, the answer to this question varies considerably. Many European governments are increasingly alarmed about the economic, social, cultural as well as geo-political consequences of shrinking and aging populations. Some countries, such as the Russian Federation which by mid-century is expected to decline by a fifth, or more than 30 million people, consider low birth rates a serious crisis, jeopardizing the basic foundations of the nation and threatening its survival. Some countries consider low birth rates a serious crisis, jeopardizing the basic foundations of the nation and threatening its survival.


Economic growth, defense, pensions and health care are areas of major concern. Faced with demographic decline and rapid aging, many European governments adjust their migration policies with the aim to maintain or increase the size and quality of their workforces, which in turn is expected to reduce fiscal pressures on pensions and health care.

Others view Europe's population decline as a welcome development. Much of the public already feels that the continent is overcrowded and would prefer less density and congestion as well as lower levels of immigration, especially illegal migration. In addition, many analysts see future population decline as reducing the harmful effects of modern production and consumption patterns on the environment, especially with regard to global warming. Others, such as environmentalists and those who support sustainable development and population stabilization, question the widely held orthodoxy that an ever-increasing population is required to maintain economic vitality and societal well-being.

Promise or peril, there's little doubt that the nations of Europe - as well as Japan - sail into uncharted demographic territory. Voluntary population decline and demographic aging of this order and scale have few, if any, comparable historical parallels. Since this occurs at a time when for variety of reasons, for example, growing fear of religious extremism and threats to national security, countries are reluctant to open the immigration door, the challenge for the governments is greater. Population decline can no longer be left to economists and demographers to ponder about as it fast rises to the top of the political agenda.






Contributed by Joseph Chamie, managing director of the Center for Migration Studies and editor of the International Migration Review. Reprinted with permission from Yale Global. Copyright © 2007 Yale Center for the Study of Globalization.
>



.................................................................................................................................................




World Population Becoming Grayer as Fertility Rates Go into Decline
From the Archives

Posted on June 6, 2006
Previously filed under: General Globalization

What lies ahead when so many countries' fertility rates are below the population replacement levels?

http://www.globalenvision.org/library/8/1099/
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: two of the most important stories media wont report on

Postby Heruka » Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:46 pm

Until some new developments arise, i think i will end on this last few links on blood taking of newborns to be stored in genetic government run database, for research. Much to chew over.

http://genes-r-us.uthscsa.edu/

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-1858

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex ... =s110-1858

http://www.cchconline.org/pdf/S_1858_NB ... eFINAL.pdf

http://www.cchconline.org/pr/pr040908.php
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

PreviousNext

Return to News & Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dan74, jeeprs and 6 guests

>