Cheryl: there's a scary aspect that I think you miss in this talk of "Malthusian depopping as the Greens' GST" (as stated in King's article too).

Remember that the GST was passed, and now all workers pay that regressive tax - a levelling of tax responsibilities among rich and poor, thereby a more intense stratification between haves and have-nots, and (more disturbingly) between workers/creators and speculators/inheritors. In the bigger economic picture, the haves diverted greater excess of disposable income into more ephemeral activity; the have-nots became more constrained in how much they could contribute to the market of essential goods and services. Over time, bad news for all.

Therefore, GST is part of the furniture now. So what of Malthusian depopping in Australia? Surely the real danger comes from the mainstream party people picking it up and enforcing it by direct or indirect means?

Indications are that they have probably already done so. On a question about water infrastructure, Victorian Premier Brumby stated not so long ago that Melbourne had just "too many people". Then at the federal level, ETS/CRTS, etc., implies anti-population measures where monetarist valuation is applied to every adult and child. Such is the behaviorist quackery in vogue among these model-makers now.

Sure, the anti-people agenda could spiflicate the Greens, which I perceive as no bad thing in itself. But the resulting shrapnel could become more subtle, and thereby more dangerous, when harnessed into the mainstream party apparatus.
---

R.I.P. Jared Diamond: you just got a supportive review from the dag-man himself...perhaps all of Diamond's admirers reek of the beer hall (albeit one where daggett is often seen muttering away to himself, scaring even the most hardened neo-Malthusian genocidalists).

Diamond's sure got company here. Useful to examine their thought processes, away from the glitter of publicists who spruik Diamond's books, TV documentary, even his career.

I put a disclaimer here around Yabby: Yabby backs the bail-out heists, even justifying them on an imagined new "domino theory" without even identifying actual bankruptcy, or distinguishing between such entities as normal commercial banks versus investment banks, hedge funds, etc. Genius!

[cont.]
Yabby seems terribly challenged in discussion of details; much more so in that area we call "nuance" which, for Yabby, would be an entirely foreign country. Yabby finds comfort from single-phrase algebra like: "high population density+resource problems = mass slaughter".

So, my previous (with correction on "Levant"): "However, if we sought a flowchart of causality in the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, logic would compel us to give early entry, if not primacy, to such entirely artificial and political factors as "austerity measures imposed by the World Bank" and "a steep decline in world prices" for Rwanda's cash crops. Without these oppressive, retarding obstacles, Rwanda's economy and population would not have been vulnerable to the explosive dynamics at work by 1994. In fact, Diamond betrays this fact himself when describing how economic and technological development in densely populated Britain and the (low countries) prevented any such situation as that seen around the 1994 Rwandan Genocide!".

Watch the bouncing ball, genocide cheerleaders: "such entirely artificial and political factors" are the difference between surplus production with comfortable, high population on the one hand, and an exploited, vulnerable high population on the other. Fertile Rwanda has been Africa's breadbasket. But undeveloped and exploited by imperialists, Rwanda has had to produce with primitive labor-intensive methods, hence its vulnerable and high population!

To just one of the loaded questions that makes some of these Malthusians seem so proud of themselves when left unanswered...

Q: "...what benefit...from a growing population..."

A: For starters (and forgive the tautologies, inevitable when explaining matters to many neo-Malthusians), there would be more people to settle areas suffering the effects of demographic degeneracy and decrepitude (Australia, Italy, Germany, etc.).

Next is the added bonus of competition. The many dynamic people in the developing world already know this, but it should be stressed here that humanity's evolutionary climb continues to confound the dull and hopeless, overtaking such people as if ridding humanity of the dead weight they represent, gradually improving the gene pool, leaving many people like neo-Malthusians alone with their friends the baboons and bonobo chimps. And Hitler's beloved dog "Blondi".

*Only Cheryl or Mil-ob would think that this is a great situation*

Of course those two can afford to be typical rich, Western, arrogant,
ignorant hypocrites, ignore all empathy for women in the third world
and simply chase their political hobby horses.

Both have the benefit in their own lives, of easy choice about how
many kids to have. Cheryl can run to the pharmacy for the pill,
or have a Norplant, or have her tubes tied, whatever she decides
really, when she decides it. Even a quicky abortion could be sneaked
in between work hours, if the need arose. MO can have the snip, go
pick up his condom supplies at any corner store. He decides how
many kids to have and feed, along with his partner.

So bugger those third world women, they are ok Jack. Lets just
push the political hobby horse in our hypocritical little world.

None can seemingly tell me why those third world women should not
have the same options that they seemgingly take for granted.

According to MO, humanity's evolutinary climb seemingly depends
on more millions of third world women popping out starving babies.
6.5 billion is not enough genetic diversity for him, never mind
educating or feeding the ones we have. Never mind that other species
should be able to have a patch of this planet too. Never mind
biodiversity or sustainability.

Never mind preserving even our closest relatives, bonobos and
chimps, which reveal so much about our own species and share
98% or so of our dna. Just ride that political hobby horse
of his into the dirt, is the answer. Ha!

I thought sooner or later the anti-pops would end up with the Bonobos. It's logical extension of their 'argument'.

You could be right about the GST mil-ob. But turning to the no-kids, one-kid or xxx kids policy of Yabby and his ilk - so Yabby, you reckon Kanck and middle class, white socks and sandle-wearing regressives from the Unsutainable People lobby are going to do third world woment a favour.

Listen: they are advocating sterilisation programs for third world women. Let me say that again. They are advocating sterlisation programs for third world women. Their reproductive rights will be taken from them and delivered in to the hands of the state.

Do you understand that bit.

Secondly, 90 percent of the feral Unsustainable Unpeople lobby reckon it's TOO LATE. They've given up the ghost. We're goners. See ya Gaia. They have shut the gate after them and said, well, all we can do now is limit the fall out. Slash and burn population - in the third world.

I don't believe it's too late but I agree that we should reduce carbon emissions mucho pronto. I know you guys think you're in some avant guard humourless revolutionary 'save us from ourselves mode'. But really, you're just being very silly.

The problem with you Yabby is that you're rabbiting on about the Bonobos while Mil and others have so effectively trounced Kanck and her Unsustainable Unpeople argument.

I'm going off to check my contraceptive device.

it seems freaky that a few nutters get off on phyco babble[little realising the grabbing at straws they resort to in furthering their phocopathic murderous adgenda's]

we long heard how science will feed the world[little realising this feeding of the world would consist of mutating the worlds food supply[that feminises the males..reflecting the wide infertility of the soy/canola/transfats..raised males realise their infertile,..due to femail estrogenes in our waters and foods]

the greenie adgenda is able to achieve both their extreemist aims with the global carbon tax,on both big bu-sin-nes and the useless eaters..[as they see it]

they spout on about giving woman back control over their procreating when the real adgenda is to sterilise them via a racist campain of genocide of the unborn of those deemed infiriour race

we could have plenty if the worlds bread baskets wernt made into war zones...[if kids were given plows not guns..[if food was grown not cotton]

the adgenda to sepperate mankind from the means to produce their own food, has greated giant cities as the kids left the family farm,to go work for food and rent in the multinationals factories

we were sold fluffy dreams in the seventies how oceans of food would be made in seas and deserts..[yet we just create more deserts and have near fished out the sea..[thus we see fishermen turn to piracy]see kids with guns and multinationalistic food cartels raping and plundering the last of the food growers

with carbon credit the final nail in mankinds coffin is fitted..[that may mean shutting down the net first,..but they have proved capable of doing whatever it takes to extinct the human race,..dupont and MON-santos and murdoc...gates,rothchild and the bilderbergers,cfr,imf,world bank have spun their vile murder completly and skillfully..[but by their deeds are revealed and reviled]

[yabbies delusion re 98 percent sameness..[2 percent=3000 mutations]..lol..has been rebutted many times and like most of his other delusions dont even deserve a fullsome corrective response..again.

mil-objectionable wrote, "R.I.P. Jared Diamond: you just got a supportive review from the dag-man himself..."

Huhh!?

This is what I wrote: "I happen to think that Jared Diamond's books have limitations and flaws, but they remain groundbreaking and invaluable."

Because I don't claim that Jared Diamond is absolutely right on every question, mil-ob presumes the right to claim that I accept his complete dismissal of Jared Diamond.

---

I note, mil-ob has finally brought himself to quote Jared Diamond's own words, but, interestingly, not one of which he challenges.

Rather, he attempts to attribute all sorts of nefarious motives to Diamond for either not agreeing with him that the World Bank, globalisation and misgovernment were entirely to blame for Rwanda's genocide or for having omitted other information and thereby not having expanded "Collapse" to a 3,000 page tome.

---

Notwithstanding all of those 43 of Jared Diamond's own words quoted on this one occasion by mil-ob, I think my earlier point stands:

"... the lesson to be drawn from this is that people would be well advised to read for themselves the words of those whom mil-ob attacks and not just take his word for it, ..."

---

The list of points that mil-ob and Cheryl have neither acknowledged nor responded to continues to grow ever longer:

1. Divergence's point about how a typical Rwandan family of six can be fed and have all their needs met on half of the current three quarters of an acre now available to them on average if Rwanda's population doubles in 25 years;

2 Yabby's point that many other countries, that have also been treated poorly by the World Bank and the IMF, have not endured famine and genocide similar to what occurred in Rwanda;

3. My point about Mexico City's current water crisis. Where do mil-ob and Cheryl imagine the water needed by residents of Mexico City after the population doubles again and the aquifers run dry?;

(tobecontinued)