Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Bob434
There are 3,119,884.69 square miles in the lower 48 alone, of which 2,959,064.44 square miles are land. Multiply that by 640 acres per square mile, and there are 1893801241.6 acres or 6.31 acres for every man, woman, and child in the US. Not all choose to live away from the urban concentrations, and that would leave considerably more per person who wants to live out of town. That does not count Alaska or Hawaii, nor territories nor possessions of the US.

Considering tens of millions prefer the denser populated urban areas, there is plenty of land left if we just keep the Government from driving people off it.

66 posted on 10/04/2015 7:28:50 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: Smokin' Joe

exactly- more and more people are moving to the country- but the fact that people live in cities should in NO way infer that we should control the population- Those advocating such liberal drivel are insane- Their basic mantra is “I don’t like sitting In traffic, traffic causes pollution, therefore we should restrict how many people there are” Or “A state or two is going trough a drought, therefore we should restrict how many people there are”

BRILLIANT reasoning!

Then you’ll likely hear them wexclaim with all due alarmism that “We’re using up all the resources in areas- therefore we need to restrict how many people there are” (apparently not realizing that resources are NOT overwhelmed throughout the us and CAN be imported ot cities just fine

Then they will likely exclaim “People are starving all over the world- therefore we should restrict how many people there are” But the FACT is that these people are not starving because there isn’t enough food- (The world actually produces enough food to feed billions more people than there are on the planet)- The problem is that people do NOT want to spend the money to get the food to those who are hungry- It’s a selfish problem,, NOT an overpopulation problem, and advocating a solution that restricts how many people there are is NOT the answer-

Then you’ll likely hear “It takes a lot of space to produce all the wood, food, resources that man consumes- therefore we should restrict how many people there are”- Again this is liberal nonsense! There is still a VAST amo0unt of livable workable space untouched In the world- We haven’t even scratched the surface yet!

Depopulationists are sick twisted Anti-God, Anti-life proponents who can think of no one else but themselves- They don’t sitting in traffic, so their solution is to cull the population- They don’t like conserving water when they CHOOSE to live in a desert, so their solution is to restrict the amount of people- They don’t like smelling exhaust from vehicles, so their solution is to require people to forgo families

Margaret Sanger would be proud of the sick twisted logic of the left these days


68 posted on 10/04/2015 9:36:43 AM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

To: Smokin' Joe

7 acres does not sound like a lot, but it’s a huge amount taken as a whole for every person In the us- Especially when you figure most people do not get the full 7 acres- like you said meaning those that do live in country get far more per person (Where I live I could head into the woods, and walk in a straight line and not get to civilization for weeks- most of it being habitable land)

Considering that you could take all the people In the world, and not only fit them into texas, but they would get approx. 1,100 square feet of room- meaning they could all live in an average sized home- and you would have the rest of the world uninhabited

Put these folks in skyscraper apartment buildings, and you would have much of texas open and free country as well- with plenty of open free land to grow crops, store refuse, get materials from etc- We still wouldn’t exhaust the resources of the world, much less the US-

This example of course is NOT to state we should do such a thing, but to illustrate how ridiculous the idea is that the world is overpopulated- When you take into consideration that billions prefer to live in small spaces, that leaves vastly more land per person for those that don’t, and that leaves vast swaths of land completely untouched

Even taking into consideration the resources needed to feed, cloth etc this concentrated population, there would still be a majority of the world’s useable livable land untouched-

The simple fact is that people only look at cities, where people prefer to group up, and declare the world is overpopulated based on things they see and don’t personally like, such as having to sit In traffic, having to conserve water during drought seasons (after which there is plenty of water)

Again, the logic used by the left/depopulationists is simply illogical propaganda driven, anti-God, anti-life scare mongering


69 posted on 10/04/2015 10:03:47 AM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson