Jump to content

Observer II

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Observer II last won the day on August 8

Observer II had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

146 Excellent

About Observer II

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. So operation scare monger is still in full swing, with a continuation of the speculation advanced by the Cameron Gov prior to the referendum - which didn't impress the majority. Yes, a no deal will cause disruption, but it's the job of Gov to overcome it and move on. In the new scenario it will be in the interest of both the UK and EU to rectify adverse effects that will hit them both - so pragmatism will out.
  2. Even if they legalise cannabis; there's a range of drugs that would have to be considered, most of which are a danger to life and certainly ruin lives, so I'm not sure HMG would ever go that far in legalisation; which means the existing criminality surrounding drugs, would continue - so no change. Perhaps in the case of coke, any youngster using it, could be banned from public office - which could keep some hypocrits out of Parliament ! 😉
  3. There are already dangerous drugs in circulation IE: alcohol and tobacco; which make that much money in tax, HMG won't ban them; so if they add a few more, they're just being consistent !
  4. I suppose one could be forgiven for thinking that the Referendum vote was to Remain !
  5. Seems the battle lines are now clearly drawn in Parliament, between Remainers and Leavers. On one side, we have a Gov, with a wafer thin majority threatened with a vote of no-confidence, if they allow the will of the people and of Parliament (in legislating for article 50), to occur on 31st Oct. On the other, we have a rabble of conflicting egos, determined to renege on their commitment to article 50, in the belief they can agree on anything together. Perhaps BoJo will call an election for 1st Nov, which should allow Brexit on 31st Oct, while they are all out campaigning ? !
  6. Having been paid for whilst children.🙄😎
  7. 😄 It's the dilemma for future Governments; whilst they may wish control population levels, they have to preserve a balance between young and old. China has tried it with it's one child policy, the problem was, the Chinese prefered male offspring, which has caused a gender imbalance; there is also in poorer countries, without advanced social security provision, the idea that children will provide parents with security in their old age. The theoretical balance would be one new born for every death, but as reproduction is ultimately a personal matter, Governments aren't really in control.
  8. Yes, they are "being lifted out of poverty" by rescue charities in the Med; with virtue signalling Hollywood actors visiting them on board, for a photo op; doubt Richard Gere will take them back to his many homes. With TV and the social network, the global poor can now view the rest of the world, so it's no surprise that they will seek "a better life", especially in Countries with advanced social security provision. With corrupt Governments, religious inspired wars, inadequate infrastructure to meet extreme weather events; their lot is not a happy one. India has now entered the space race; it receives overseas aid from wealthy countries; but has a new ultra-wealthy class that pays little tax. Meanwhile, it has a huge population that is denied basic sanitation. Iraq currently swelters under a 40C heatwave, but most can't afford the energy to run air conditioning. Anyway, I digress; back to over population: the key to population control is female education, empowering women to decide the size of their families, but such empowerment is denied to many due to religious and cultural ignorance. Then we have the issue of longevity, if we have less children, who will support a growing elderly population - so that driver remains.
  9. Where's the evidence that the global wealth gap is narrowing ? The evidence suggests quite the opposite - millions of economic migrants from Africa and the M/East heading to Europe for a better life; S/Americans heading to the US. Meanwhile corporate food giants are buying up land in Africa to export produce to the richest countries; palm trees are replacing rain forest in S/E Asia, to provide palm oil, which apparently goes into everything from toothpaste to ice cream; and the Amazon rain forest is being cut down for grazing land in order to keep us supplied with burgers. Supply and demand.
  10. 😄 and I thought you were well travelled Asp.
  11. Not really Con; animal behaviour is controlled by their surrounding environment and now by human destruction of that environment. Humans believe they have conquered and can control that environment. Whilst to an extent, your correct; but can you really believe that a cultural halt will occur in India or China for example, where in China State intervention has even been tried ? The presumption that "social development" will correct matters, presumes that the required level of social development will occur, the population is split between extremes of wealth and poverty, unlikely to be corrected. As for longevity, that brings an additional time bomb, as insufficient youngsters are available to support the elderly; as in Japan.
  12. Any given region can produce a given amount of food, depending on weather conditions, which in turn governs the size of population it can sustain; therefore finite rather than infinite. The reason Homo Sapiens migrated out of Africa in the first place, and occupied every corner of the planet, was the never ending search for food sources. Modern technologies allow us to maximise food production, but we still have episodes in some third world regions where population exceeds the ability to produce sufficient food, hence the periodic starvation episodes, well advertised by charities. As population increases, so will consumption, to unsustainable levels - a fairly obvious observation I think.
  13. Afraid that's the way it's heading Sid; unless nature does it for us, with a post antibiotic purge.
  14. Having watched a fantastic prog like "SERENGETI" , shows how nature designed the system - the plant eaters (which probably produce most gas) are kept at sustainable population levels by the availabilty of food and the activity of carnivores, in other words the food chain. Unfortunately, the animal that has secured the position of top of the food chain, appears to have an insatiable appetite for earth's resources, in it's quest for "growth"; and the more humans reproduce, the more they exploit the capacity of the planet. So whether we become vegans or not, the basic problem is, there are just too many of us.
  15. Like the Remoaner doom and gloom over Brexit; the tree huggers are into a full blown operation fear - what amused me was the idea that animal farts are causing global warming ! Well, if that is the case, surely the answer would be to kill everything that farts, including 7 billion humans ! 😆
  • Create New...