SPQR, interesting moniker.
Si tacuisses, philosophus manisses.

*To use my mouse plague analogy again, the millions lifted out of poverty are comparable to the mouse population just before the grain runs out*

Ah Squeers, but the actual problem is too many mice for a given
environment, not the fact that some mice ate a bit more then other
mice. Its the same in India and China. If Australian farmers were
forced to farm on an acre or two, they would starve too.

To blame it all on capitalism, if alot of tripe. The best that
capitalism can do is try to find a solution for these people,
its worked better so far then anything else that anyone has put
forward. But Squeers selling his wifes car to comply with his
one car policy, is hardly going to change the fact that 42'000
extra people a day are being added to the Indian population and
they have to go somewhere and do something.

The Chinese and Indians do in fact have choices. Tough choices
admittedly. But choices they would not have had, if we bought none
of their products and let them starve, as they used to.

Today more new cars are sold in China then in the USA. Clearly
a whole lot of people there are doing ok too. The Chinese, despite
the "slave" wages quoted, still manage to save around 40% of their
wages. Once again far better then the options which the had before.

But the initial mess has been created by overpopulation and
Squeers, Poirot and Co pontificating altruism is not going to
solve the mess that it has created in many countries.

Yabby,
the population explosion is a direct result of agricultural and industrial revolution and innovation, driven by capitalism's profit motive! Nothing else could have sustained that growth and our current stupendous numbers and collective appetite. Overpopulation is not the cause, it's the product!

*the population explosion is a direct result of agricultural and industrial revolution and innovation, driven by capitalism's profit motive!*

Sheesh Squeers, so people not starving to death as they used to,
should be blamed on capitalism too, in your book.

Well I remind you that due to capitalism, we also had increased
human innovation such as family planning. Next you will be wanting
to blame the failure of many in the third world not using it,
on capitalism too.

@ Poirot,
<< No one is denying the population problem>>
Your side only ever pays lip service to over population. If your really acknowledged it as a core problem you wouldn’t be trying to peddle the notion that the plight of Indian peasants is a function of the World Bank trying to give them poor economic advice and big corporations trying to rip them off.

<< but that doesn't excuse the more affluent from using all the hot water while exploiting others to pay for it.>>
Your solution to India not having enough hot water is to tell Australians they have got to have shorter showers. And then, impose a climate tax on Australian energy providers.

@ Grim
Ne supra crepidam sutor iudicaret!

Yabby,
So you expect the third world to exercise restraint when it comes to procreation, but there's no restraint on consumption in the first world. Is that how it goes? Consumption's got nothing to do with it, it's all down to how many consumers?
Don't you find the obesity rates in the sanctimonious, pew-sitting-west a distraction--obscene even? So you object to overpopulation but not gluttony?
Which side has quality of life nailed btw: the obese or the starving?