Posted on 06/09/2008 3:58:56 PM PDT by frencle
East of the town in post #48, which is about 2 hours north of Rawlins. The Green Mountains (in the background of that photo) are “Rolling wooded hills with streams full of fish!" although you would starve trying to live on the trout, but lots of Elk, pronghorn, Mulies, bears, moutain lions and prarie dogs!
Summon the Viking kittens there assistance is needed.
OMG, that’s funny. Coffee ended up on my kitty who was sitting by the puter.
Of course it's true.
In addition, no one I know lives in Nirvana. It's kind of nice to earn a living, and most can't do that living on empty, rocky, wind swept plains with no jobs in sight.
If I could make a living living, support my family in a town of 200 people, 60 miles away from any economy to speak of, I might consider it.
But that isn't possible for me, and probably 80 percent of people.
That's why I said, the areas of good economies, good climates, harbors, resources, etc, etc are all but full up.
Why do you think empty, desolate land, far from any economy is generally dirt cheap?
I think everybody in the world could get a one acre plot in Alaska, and have room left over.
Unfortunately, after 24 hours, they'd kill each other and turn cannibal...Those standing on their acre in the high elevations, would quickly freeze, roads would be solid gridlock etc etc.
It's nice to make analogies like that, but it's really pie in the sky.
Ya see, there are many regions on this planet, that are all but uninhabitable, and not able to sustain an economy, major populations etc etc.
It's just the way it is.
That’s terrifying.
Hiya CC,
Thanks for the belly laugh.
= = =
Quix, ping to post #60, ‘Sir I’m going to have to ask you to leave the Internet. You’re just too ... stupid.’
I meant post #69.
There is a big difference between saying the world is over populated and saying that too many people want to live in the same place you do. A lot of people tend to live in densely populated cities because they like the amenities that come from living where a lot of other people do- like jobs, culture, nightlife, schools ect. The mere fact that a lot of people are in a place doesn’t mean that there aren’t a lot of other fine places for people to live if they will do without the niceties of the city.
Oh, poppycock. How about Russia, Georgia and the Ukraine ? All are resource rich, and woefully under populated, depopulating, in fact.
When people have more children, they'll be enough to fill them up, exploit their resources, and make all those good economies you are looking for.
People come first, then make the nice places to live and the good ecomonies; not the other way around.
Ever see a picture of Phoenix, Los Angeles, or Las Vegas before a lot of people lived there and made it all nice and green, with houses, stores, and well, economies ? It was barren desert, just like the pictures you decried. PEOPLE, and lots of them, made those nice places.
People are the ultimate resource, not the problem.
But that's not what I said above.
A lot of people tend to live in densely populated cities because they like the amenities that come from living where a lot of other people do- like jobs
Jobs are not amenities as you described. It's a necessity and requirement for survival.
Oh, poppycock. How about Russia, Georgia and the Ukraine
Poppycock eh?
I was basically referring to the U.S. as I know this country.
You bring up Russia? I do know that place sucks, their climate sucks, and everyone living there wants to come here or some place more desirable.
All (Russias) are resource rich, and woefully under populated
Tell me, why aren't people moving to Russia by the millions?
I'll tell ya why, plain and simple, it's not desirable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.