Pollution and the Environment

George Bush has lifted some regulations on companies that spew toxins into our environment such as mercury. Just so said companies can make more profit. Theoretically/scientifically, this planet can only support 2 billions people, we are killing ourselves and the planet through over population and choking off earth's resources.

Where exactly did you pull that 2 billion people number from?

we're all gunna die

>>1
If companies make more profits, and the expense of their products go down, the lower costs of manufacturing and production often will ultimately get passed onto the consumer.  The higher costs of goods will then be detrimental to the world's poor. 

If you had to make the decision between a better standard of living, and a somewhat easier life for the poor and middle class, and having a more healthy environment, which would you choose?

Many don't understand that the costs of things like regulation and taxes that is placed on businesses gets indirectly handed down to the consumers.

>>2
"Where exactly did you pull that 2 billion people number from?"

I too would like some sourcing on this.

Kill off sub-saharra africa using anti-negroid genetic biological warfare and replace them with white colonists, then everyone there will be richer and happier. 1 act of genocide to people who were going to die before the age of 30 and with little hope of a decent future for a huge amount of land to be colonised by responsible and motivated human beings. Also this is not racist since they would mostly come from eastern europe and hitler thought eastern europeans were sub-human, so I am not racist for saying that and if you disagree you must hate eastern europeans like hitler and must be racist.

That will reduce the population by 700 million. We should also give some of the shitty tyrannies across the globe a good nuking, that ought to reduce the population by 200 millions or so. We'll leave Venezuela because Chavez is a funny guy and I'd like to see how paranoid he gets, but Cuba and some banan republics will have to go. North Korea of course, maybe we should just carpet bomb the place so the radiation doesn't affect South Korea and the Holy Island of Japan.

We can't do much about China, India and Pakistan and other countries like that, but we can enact population reducing policies in our own countries and when crude oil runs out we ban immigration completely with countries thrown into poverrty. We will built assault courses which require mental aptitude aswell as physical stamina across borders and people who dont get across will fall into mincing machines and used for dog food. Those who do get across will gain full citizenship for having superior genes. Genes are a genetic reality, the assault course will be brutally non-discriminatory so once again there is no way I can be racist and if you disagree you must be pro-discrimination or something and must be a racist.

>>4 Good points.

>>6 Good points.

all american people must die in order for the world to survive

death to america :)

>>9
Or everyone else can die and America can get their resources.

Okay, how long before we need to get off this planet? And how long until that big (I mean, OMG-big, not just big) volcano under Yellowstone throws a shit-fit or Tokyo's inevitable earthquake causes the whole world economy to go bazookas? All it takes is for some snow to stay over the winter and the sub-tempered regions are fucked for millenia. Iran is getting a nuke, although I've heard a lot about this that isn't clear. Then there's China and India, whose people are getting happier while their biospheres are shot to shit and their rivers run black. My issue is not that some people are getting richer and richer, my problem is that they now have the power to push money upwards, be unscrutinized or even questioned about some of their practices and that we waste so fucking much. I believe in capitalism, but I don't accept its eccentricities, because they can quickly accumulate. I believe you can and should trim capitalism without slowing its positive effects, but this will take skill and balance.

Hmm. http://fubini.swarthmore.edu/~ENVS2/scrampt1/essayfour.html

>>11
800 million years tops.

Yeah, the standard of living Americans have tax the world's resources much harsher than that of Europe or Africa.

>>14
Why did you mention Africa?

>>15

Why did mention is mentioning of Africa? Is Africa something of note to you? Because last I checked nobody cared about Africa or most of Europe.

>>16
>>14 was referring to resource taxing economies, so I would have guessed >>14 would have referred to the economies of China and India to make the argument more concrete.

North Korea has nukes.