FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > The end of all illness and poverty etc.
The end of all illness and poverty etc.
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting?
Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?
Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?
Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?
What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Blimey!
War, disease, famine, poverty etc all keep the population down. I don't think there are enough resources to support unlimited population growth so if disease and poverty were to be eradicated I would hope for some sort of self imposed control on the size of families. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Did you not see my Petri dish analogy the other day?....
.
.
To sum up we were born to die both in a singular and plurally!.
.
.
In fact if I remember correctly there was a guy called I think Tim Garrett who wrote a very good peer reviewed paper on it! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Maybe natural selection will be replaced by a system of artificial population control. One dreads to imagine what powerful people think about with regard that kind of thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting?
Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?
Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?
Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?
What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!? "
As are already pretty much bacteria sucking this planet dry...We don't need to encourage more to breed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting? "
Better than what we have now, that's for sure. Poverty is unnecessary in most of the countries around the world and is used as a base for exploitation and entitlement. Nobody needs to be wealthy, that is just luxury and tends to be something people want rather than need, but everyone should have a standard of living that is at least basic and their needs are tended to, that way we could concentrate on more important things than earning money.
"Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?"
Not really, no. The earth is massively underpopulated by both humans and animals. We could improve our environments by having less of certain types of people in them, but that would also be considered inhumane, i'm personally talking about truly evil people who care about nothing but themselves before anyone asks.
"Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?"
Sure is, resource wise, materialism wise no. But it would include eradicating animal cruelty to a massive degree, also our standard of living would decrease. So the richer you are the more you'd have to downgrade, and we all know the best way of creating a better society is adaption to change...let's see that change. 
"Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?"
Imo, yes it affects our physical health. We can extend life to physically inferior specimens, who then have the chance to breed more inferior specimens. But everyone has the right to do that and we cannot, ethically, pick and choose who has rights.
"What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!? "
I think hardly anyone will read all of that, and reply accordingly either. And this is why society is failing. Nobody cares enough. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Well if I wasn't depressed before I bloody I am now! Cheers Dan! 
Doomed! We're all doomed!!!! "
.
Sadly were all born doomed it's the price you pay for living |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting?
Better than what we have now, that's for sure. Poverty is unnecessary in most of the countries around the world and is used as a base for exploitation and entitlement. Nobody needs to be wealthy, that is just luxury and tends to be something people want rather than need, but everyone should have a standard of living that is at least basic and their needs are tended to, that way we could concentrate on more important things than earning money.
Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?
Not really, no. The earth is massively underpopulated by both humans and animals. We could improve our environments by having less of certain types of people in them, but that would also be considered inhumane, i'm personally talking about truly evil people who care about nothing but themselves before anyone asks.
Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?
Sure is, resource wise, materialism wise no. But it would include eradicating animal cruelty to a massive degree, also our standard of living would decrease. So the richer you are the more you'd have to downgrade, and we all know the best way of creating a better society is adaption to change...let's see that change.
Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?
Imo, yes it affects our physical health. We can extend life to physically inferior specimens, who then have the chance to breed more inferior specimens. But everyone has the right to do that and we cannot, ethically, pick and choose who has rights.
What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!?
I think hardly anyone will read all of that, and reply accordingly either. And this is why society is failing. Nobody cares enough."
.
I'll rise to your challenge... Not that I care.
Your curing the rich but doing nothing with the other problem of the... Ahem layabouts.
You need to define A needs! B resources.... Then you say we cannot morally say who should and shouldn't breed.... To that I ask who morally does it for every other animal on the planet?.... Mother nature, they say she's cruel.... Bitch  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Fuck me... Cheers Dan, you merry fucker!!
I was having such a pleasant day until I read the world's most depressing thread..
If i hadn't been drinking today, I would drive to Dartford bridge and chuck myself off it. But as it's irresponsible to drink and drive, so i won't.
What ever happened to the happy threads! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Fuck me... Cheers Dan, you merry fucker!!
I was having such a pleasant day until I read the world's most depressing thread..
If i hadn't been drinking today, I would drive to Dartford bridge and chuck myself off it. But as it's irresponsible to drink and drive, so i won't.
What ever happened to the happy threads!"
.
Cheer up, could be worse |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Fuck me... Cheers Dan, you merry fucker!!
I was having such a pleasant day until I read the world's most depressing thread..
If i hadn't been drinking today, I would drive to Dartford bridge and chuck myself off it. But as it's irresponsible to drink and drive, so i won't.
What ever happened to the happy threads!"
So your not gonna try kill yourself because you could potentially kill yourself on the way to killing yourself? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we could curb materialism it would be a start. "
Not easy..bet you typed that on a piece of kit that requires minerals from mining etc that you needed to work and earn money to buy  We're all programmed to want 'stuff'
Cars, houses, technology, holidays, etc etc etc.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There is enough food in the world to feed 7 billion people but the issue is distributing it.  "
.
That's debatable?
We could work on ways to create better yields as actually yields have been falling for awhile now!
GM crops could be used more but then they could cause unforseen problems that might need working on themselves..... In the end it becomes the problem of complexity, you spend more and more of your time and resources curing problems you caused by over coming your initial problems!..... I'm afraid all roads lead to collapse they always did and always will, it's the nature of the beast.
The only hope is how long down the road you can keep the collapse from happening |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'll rise to your challenge... Not that I care.
Your curing the rich but doing nothing with the other problem of the... Ahem layabouts.
You need to define A needs! B resources.... Then you say we cannot morally say who should and shouldn't breed.... To that I ask who morally does it for every other animal on the planet?.... Mother nature, they say she's cruel.... Bitch "
we're the rich too, i consider myself to be. i'm not in the 1% but my quality of life would go down also, just not as much as someone who has surrounded themselves with luxury.
'layabouts' exist because of complicated social reasons. i've no doubt there are people who exist and have no problem mooching off others, but mostly it's more complicated than that.
and we have a whole host of issues that need solving, that need people to devote their time to. with more time we would hopefully see those things getting sorted.
people would prioritise the things that are important to them, instead of what is important to their owners. this might actually be a bad thing now i think about it, not sure, suppose it depends on what they prioritise.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting?
Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?
Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?
Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?
What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!? "
What a shit idea
If nobody was ill I'd be out of a job  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *artytwoCouple
over a year ago
Wolverhampton |
Apparently JK Rowling has 'dropped off' the Forbes billionaire list due to giving up 16% of her billion to charity. That means she has only £840 million left, notwithstanding the ongoing massive income from the franchises. Why does anyone need a personal fortune of more than say...£10 million? There are many wealthy philanthropists but what happens to all this money? Why aren't all the diseases cured or at least on the way to being eradicated? Why are there still billions living in poverty?
Huge amounts of money and resource can be found for updating missile systems.
Maybe if something could be done about controlling population growth without compromising the seemingly inalienable right of humans to breed like flies....but that wasn't a popular policy in China.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting?
Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?
Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?
Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?
What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!? "
Anyone see the channel 4 series Utopia? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting?
Better than what we have now, that's for sure. Poverty is unnecessary in most of the countries around the world and is used as a base for exploitation and entitlement. Nobody needs to be wealthy, that is just luxury and tends to be something people want rather than need, but everyone should have a standard of living that is at least basic and their needs are tended to, that way we could concentrate on more important things than earning money.
Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?
Not really, no. The earth is massively underpopulated by both humans and animals. We could improve our environments by having less of certain types of people in them, but that would also be considered inhumane, i'm personally talking about truly evil people who care about nothing but themselves before anyone asks.
Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?
Sure is, resource wise, materialism wise no. But it would include eradicating animal cruelty to a massive degree, also our standard of living would decrease. So the richer you are the more you'd have to downgrade, and we all know the best way of creating a better society is adaption to change...let's see that change.
Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?
Imo, yes it affects our physical health. We can extend life to physically inferior specimens, who then have the chance to breed more inferior specimens. But everyone has the right to do that and we cannot, ethically, pick and choose who has rights.
What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!?
I think hardly anyone will read all of that, and reply accordingly either. And this is why society is failing. Nobody cares enough."
Actually I did. I agree with some of your points. However, limiting human population is the major challenge that must be addressed. If the projected 10 billion on this planet all had the same standard of living as us, and were as p igate with resources, we would need at least four Earths to support them. The Pope needs to sanction use of birth control for a start.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Imagine that illness was totally eradicated from the world. Ditto poverty. Everyone in the world is reasonably wealthy, and live long healthy lives.
Would this be a global utopia, or an absolute disaster in waiting?
Better than what we have now, that's for sure. Poverty is unnecessary in most of the countries around the world and is used as a base for exploitation and entitlement. Nobody needs to be wealthy, that is just luxury and tends to be something people want rather than need, but everyone should have a standard of living that is at least basic and their needs are tended to, that way we could concentrate on more important things than earning money.
Do we need a high level of mortality as a natural check on population growth?
Not really, no. The earth is massively underpopulated by both humans and animals. We could improve our environments by having less of certain types of people in them, but that would also be considered inhumane, i'm personally talking about truly evil people who care about nothing but themselves before anyone asks.
Are there enough natural resources in the world to cope with the materialistic demands of a wealthy & healthy global population?
Sure is, resource wise, materialism wise no. But it would include eradicating animal cruelty to a massive degree, also our standard of living would decrease. So the richer you are the more you'd have to downgrade, and we all know the best way of creating a better society is adaption to change...let's see that change.
Do advances in medical science actually threaten the very existence of the human race?
Imo, yes it affects our physical health. We can extend life to physically inferior specimens, who then have the chance to breed more inferior specimens. But everyone has the right to do that and we cannot, ethically, pick and choose who has rights.
What do you think casual-sex-site forum dwellers?
Is disease and mortality therefore a good thing!?
I think hardly anyone will read all of that, and reply accordingly either. And this is why society is failing. Nobody cares enough.
Actually I did. I agree with some of your points. However, limiting human population is the major challenge that must be addressed. If the projected 10 billion on this planet all had the same standard of living as us, and were as pigate with resources, we would need at least four Earths to support them. The Pope needs to sanction use of birth control for a start. "
good point, he says it's goes against nature but what if human nature (and sex) is more complicated than just making children?
and the pope does pick and choose who can have abortions. i don't think he has the right to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Let's simply this
.
You get a Petri dish(earth) with a bit of red algae in that provides nutrition(resources) you put a couple of bacteria on it (humans) wait around awhile(200,000 years) and you come back to chocka block Petri dish full of bacteria(humans) keep watching the dish coz very soon all the bacteria will collapse as the basis for them sustaining themselves is sucked up by them..
Matter went from algae to bacteria and guess where it's going back to.
That's right matter.
The only way that human civilisation could not collapse is if you had constant constraint by predator/famine/disease etc etc... Unfortunately due to our bloody brilliance we've overcome some of those issues of constraint.... Population went pretty steady for about 5000 years until some bright spark said hey you know what I think we could get more energy by planting crops instead of wandering around picking them from the wild..... From 400 million to a billon in 5000 years and from one billon to seven billon in 200 years ....that's the exponential maths problem that gives you sudden collapse..... Everything looks rosy at half full, we've still got the same left to go... Next day... Oh were full, fuck I didn't see that coming! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Let's simply this
.
You get a Petri dish(earth) with a bit of red algae in that provides nutrition(resources) you put a couple of bacteria on it (humans) wait around awhile(200,000 years) and you come back to chocka block Petri dish full of bacteria(humans) keep watching the dish coz very soon all the bacteria will collapse as the basis for them sustaining themselves is sucked up by them..
Matter went from algae to bacteria and guess where it's going back to.
That's right matter.
The only way that human civilisation could not collapse is if you had constant constraint by predator/famine/disease etc etc... Unfortunately due to our bloody brilliance we've overcome some of those issues of constraint.... Population went pretty steady for about 5000 years until some bright spark said hey you know what I think we could get more energy by planting crops instead of wandering around picking them from the wild..... From 400 million to a billon in 5000 years and from one billon to seven billon in 200 years ....that's the exponential maths problem that gives you sudden collapse..... Everything looks rosy at half full, we've still got the same left to go... Next day... Oh were full, fuck I didn't see that coming!"
So what's your solution before we over fill the Petri dish and fall over the sides of the earth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
2% growth per year means you double in size every 35 years, population growth has been around 2.4% for quite awhile now.
.
Think of this another way, oil has seen pretty steady growth of about 7% per year meaning it doubles every ten years. That means the decade from 1990-2000 used more oil than the history of oil in 1880ish and with that growth the decade of 2000-2010 will use more oil than that decade plus all that time before and so on and so on.
Copper used to be mined at about 11-16% ore content in years gone by today they mine it at 0.5% in Brazil there digging for ten years round the clock just to get to the ore at 0.5% of course we're using more complexity to over come the problems of having less copper ore, so you get on that treadmill and you run and you run to catch your ever decreasing resources until eventually you can't run any faster and ...snap, your thrown off.....
If you want the "good news" (humans love the nice bits) the fact that your here at this moment in time as a human is about the same random chance as winning the lottery every week using the same set of numbers.... It's incalculably high.... The fact you'll probably be here to see the end of it all, the whole thing go pop, that's just kinda cool |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Actually now I've said it and I've had a few drinks....
If I was a billionaire megalomaniac running the world facing the problem.....I can see a way out of it?...
However it still involves the end for you lot
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's a pity that conspiracy thread ended....I was going to mention the one about all those millions of plastic coffins the US government have been moving around the country into various locations!!!... Oh well |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh there is no solution!.... Come on this ain't fucking Hollywood .... Wait I think hear Bruce Willis at the door!  "
Hollywood could have the solution though.....Skynet and The Terminators! Stephen Hawking warned about artificial intelligence the other week, and if it is not kept in check with proper controls it could lead to new ways of controlling the human population. Once robots become so advanced that they become self aware they could see us as inferior and try to enslave the human population or destroy us.
Sorry if the thread wasn't depressing enough. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's a pity that conspiracy thread ended....I was going to mention the one about all those millions of plastic coffins the US government have been moving around the country into various locations!!!... Oh well "
Another fb fave re floated  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Leaving aside all the valid points above about materialism, distribution of resources etc, humanity needs challenges to progress. War stimulates technology innovation. It's a Brave New World scenario. Or if you prefer Miranda for Firefly fans. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leaving aside all the valid points above about materialism, distribution of resources etc, humanity needs challenges to progress. War stimulates technology innovation. It's a Brave New World scenario. Or if you prefer Miranda for Firefly fans."
i kind of agree. without a lot of the gross and inhumane things that happened during ww2 we wouldn't have advanced so quickly in the medical field either. but it came at a huge price to the people experimented on, and those who overlook that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We are facing the end of effective antibiotics as many bacteria are developing resistance thanks to our overuse of them. So, perhaps all the things that used to kill us will do so once again. And then there is the spectre of mutated flu viruses, killing vast swaths of humanity in pandemics...
Good morning! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Oh there is no solution!.... Come on this ain't fucking Hollywood .... Wait I think hear Bruce Willis at the door!
Hollywood could have the solution though.....Skynet and The Terminators! Stephen Hawking warned about artificial intelligence the other week, and if it is not kept in check with proper controls it could lead to new ways of controlling the human population. Once robots become so advanced that they become self aware they could see us as inferior and try to enslave the human population or destroy us.
Sorry if the thread wasn't depressing enough. "
.
It's the numbers game though...7.2 billon people, you kill one every second 24hrs a day 7 days a week 365 days a year it will take you about what 180 years? Of course you'd have alot of other humans in that 180 years quite possibly another 7.2 billon so that could be more like 360 years!....
The numbers game is always difficult to overcome with hand to hand combat hence why were still here coz sadly we've had a good go at that ourselves without needing terminators .
That's why I said this ain't Hollywood, every creature requires habitat like the bacteria in the petri dish need the algae the minute the algae is gone all the bacteria die together all in one go!..... Viruses somebody mentioned, well let's say you have a very high communicable rate like measles about 70% and it has the same death rate as the most severe ebola strain 90% that still leaves...errr about 2.6 billon people left...
Bacteria is a pretty effective one but not really going to cause an extinction, it doesn't really evolve that quick or communicable enough.... No I'm afraid earth's stuck with us come hell or high water, terminators and pandemics... There's only one thing that will wipe us out and that's us! .... Still at least the elephants will be happier |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Oh there is no solution!.... Come on this ain't fucking Hollywood .... Wait I think hear Bruce Willis at the door!
Hollywood could have the solution though.....Skynet and The Terminators! Stephen Hawking warned about artificial intelligence the other week, and if it is not kept in check with proper controls it could lead to new ways of controlling the human population. Once robots become so advanced that they become self aware they could see us as inferior and try to enslave the human population or destroy us.
Sorry if the thread wasn't depressing enough. .
It's the numbers game though...7.2 billon people, you kill one every second 24hrs a day 7 days a week 365 days a year it will take you about what 180 years? Of course you'd have alot of other humans in that 180 years quite possibly another 7.2 billon so that could be more like 360 years!....
The numbers game is always difficult to overcome with hand to hand combat hence why were still here coz sadly we've had a good go at that ourselves without needing terminators .
That's why I said this ain't Hollywood, every creature requires habitat like the bacteria in the petri dish need the algae the minute the algae is gone all the bacteria die together all in one go!..... Viruses somebody mentioned, well let's say you have a very high communicable rate like measles about 70% and it has the same death rate as the most severe ebola strain 90% that still leaves...errr about 2.6 billon people left...
Bacteria is a pretty effective one but not really going to cause an extinction, it doesn't really evolve that quick or communicable enough.... No I'm afraid earth's stuck with us come hell or high water, terminators and pandemics... There's only one thing that will wipe us out and that's us! .... Still at least the elephants will be happier "
I bet you're a right cheerful laugh down't pub |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
)
Mr ddc