[antidisestablishment]

I thought Malthus wad dead. I guess a few of his disciples somehow survived the end of all things.

[JRandomFreeper]

His assumptions are wrong. We don't live on a finite world. We live in an infinite universe.

We won't run out of room, resources, or energy anytime soon. The only thing in short supply is common sense.

/johnny

[beethovenfan]

Bullcrap. The only limits are those put on us by communist-envirowackos.

[Fungi]

Nonsense. That book has been thoroughly discredited. We also used to have a term called "carrying capacity," which referred to how many people the earth could support. When that number was exceeded, it was conveniently left in the dustbin of "scientific facts," only to be replaced with yet another undefined term--sustainable. The left is constantly on the prowl to keep the world in a “sky is falling” syndrome, only to keep us distracted from the truth. It never ends. Read Job, the same tactic is used there.

[mrsmith]

It’s an interesting read, surprisingly.
The effect he is obviously talking ‘around’ is government intervention: regulation, debt, mis-subsidization.
I’m not claiming he realizes that’s what he’s talking about...

Bureaucracy will kill us all. I’m convinced it’s what killed civilizations like the Aztecs amd other ‘lost’ civilizations.

[arthurus]

There really are limits to growth and they trace primarily to government growth and growth of market warping regulation and taxation, to control by political actors who deny the laws of economics. In an actual free market economy there will always be innovation that will substitute for and replace declining or failing structures and resources. Rulers prefer that there be nothing new and that they control all that is. New things may be out of their control so must be prevented.

[4Liberty]

Try reading the recent book, “Abundance,” instead of the dreary LTG nonsense.

[Vince Ferrer]

I am not a Malthus supporter, he has been effectively refuted. But I am not extrapolating an infinite projection of growth either, and do think a population collapse is getting more likely. But unlike peak oil people or other such neoMathusians, the decline is not lead by resource scarcity. The decline will happen despite resource availability, which makes it even more hard to predict or explain.

Declining population, and as a result of that, a declining economy, for the next hundred years is getting more likely. In fact, most industrialized nation's births are already below replacement level, and the developing world is not far behind. At some point in the near future, the chief problem every country may face will be how to get the birth rate up.

[Rembrandt]

This is hogwash. Capitalism thrives everyplace it’s introduced. It has flourished in America. It works in Europe even with a lot of binders thrown on it. It works all over.

Vietnam was going down the tubes til the Commies introduced “limited capitalist experiments” in the ‘90’s, then the economy took off. China has had great success with capitalism and is now surpassing the U.S. which has been burdened with OButthead. Even Cuba is now introducing capitalism on a very small scale since they don’t have an Obama in charge.