[djf]

As I said, we don’t know the number yet.
But what if the numbers said your local community/county could only support 75% of who are there now?
Who do you kill?

I’m just asking questions.
If we agree that the Earth cannot support an infinite number of humans, how do we address the issue?

My point is that if we chose to not think about it, there is only one end, an end predicted by chaos theory, a cataclysmic decline in the population.

[blackbart.223]

"If we agree that the Earth cannot support an infinite number of humans, how do we address the issue"

That was the question I asked you but I didn't get an answer to it.

[Myrddin]

Our food producing capacity with modern machinery, oil derived fertilizers, improved plant genetics and specialized pesticides has made it possible to feed the many individuals on this earth. It only takes the act of a moron like Robert Mugabe to convert an exceptionally productive agricultural economy like Zimbabwe (nee Rhodesia) into a bastion of starvation. Our moron is Al Gore and his enviro-nazi minions. They are chipping away at our massively successful agricultural enterprise. When/if they succeed, we and the masses that we feed will be in serious trouble.

[Dan Evans]

If we agree that the Earth cannot support an infinite number of humans, how do we address the issue? My point is that if we chose to not think about it, there is only one end, an end predicted by chaos theory, a cataclysmic decline in the population.

Think about it but be careful what assumptions you make. Animal populations do not increase to the point of catastrophe. Their numbers grow to a level that is sustainable. The same should be true of humans. Look at the facts. There are many advanced countries that actually have negative population growth. In the absence of immigration growth America's population would be stable.

The real concern is what kind of people are increasing in number and what kind are declining.