Paul Ehrlich interview on World Population on Diane Rehm's show (NPR)

[bananas]

I haven't listened to it yet: http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/03/paul-ehrlich-interview-on-world-population-bomb-the-dominant-animal-science/

[jwirr]

1. Thank you I read Population Bomb years ago and have saved this

to read later. For anyone who goes into this link be sure to click on the consumption link in the first line of his speech. There is the real point.

[bfarq]

2. Most of our problems are directly related to over population

Or at least that's a strong contributor.

And they will all get worse exponentially as this trend continues. We are already running out of major resources (energy and water). It is not that long before we'll have trouble producing enough calories to sustain this population.

Virtually every war going on today is either about control over real estate or resources. This only gets worse as we add 3 billion people into the mix.

Until somebody is willing to stand up to the major religions with this fact we will be screwed.

[Don Caballero]

3. Overpopulation is the number one contributor to Climate Change

If we do not act swiftly and enact one child policies worldwide we are not long for this world. This program should have started 50 years ago, but it would be so unpopular politically that no one is brave enough to do it.

[jwirr]

4. So the fact that rich countries use the lions share of the resources

has nothing to do with it? It is both. We are overpopulated and we over consume.

[Don Caballero]

5. No argument from me

Resources should be drastically limited to put all nations on par. In concert with drastic birth control measures we may be able to reverse the harm down by Climate Change.

[bhikkhu]

6. Yes, it would be easier for the US to push for "one child" worldwide

if we reduced our consumption to the levels of the rest of the world. As it is, one child here consumes far more than one child anywhere else in the world. Without an agreement we're all screwed, but that doesn't make agreement any easier.

[amborin]

9. agree; but that

doesn't let other developing nations off the hook

take Indonesia or the Phillipines, as two examples....out of control demographic growth, combined with lousy enforcement of laws protecting wilderness areas

in Indonesia, one can see roads and housing projects being constructed in the midddle of a "protected" national park

the population pressure is incredible in so many developing nations

[amborin]

8. +1000

[jwirr]

7. I think that one reason the USA does not take this very seriously is

because they think all the dying will be "over there". We are wrong in that. Mexico is setting right below us and they are soon going to be out of oil to sell in order to buy food. We, especially the southwest will be deeply affected.

Furthermore, when populations in other nations weaken they will be prime targets for a pandemic and that will no doubt reach our shores as well.

We need to wake up and soon. The outcome in Copenhagen is disastrous for the outcome of these problems. Too little too late.

[wuvuj]

10. Our great and incompetent leaders....

...are right on it...increasing spending on our military so we can handle all the coming problems....much of this using borrowed money from China...which is trying to raise it's standard of living and political/financial power before the world's resources deplete. Plus India....etc.

As in 400,000 troops deployed on US soil?

More desperate people spreading diseases increased by global warming...food and water shortages....wars for resources.

Obviously...the US is the worlds major war monger....but we do it for good reasons...just ask us? Ask Israel? Britain?

Terrorism is a reaction to resource and territorial exploitation.