Ahh Ludwig, I am in the same boat as you !
Oil production decline will lead to a decline in world population as
our population has only reached this level because of cheap energy.
It enabled much higher food production per farmer.

Without cheap energy a farmer will only produce a tenth of his present output.
So we will need ten times the number of farmers or one tenth the world population.

No ifs, no buts. No way around it.
Starve or malnutrition for 6 billion people.

rehctub What rubbish <<To others, he did say it was a bad statement to make, so you can't hang him for that, and yes Paul, he Obviously did read it before he posted it.>>

How does saying <<Now for the really controversial bit>> suddenly become "bad statement", CONTROVERSIAL; of, pertaining to, or characteristic of controversy, it does not mean bad.
Even the Nazi's thought gassing Jews was "controversial" they never said it was "bad".
Ludwig, you could have easily said "It is not something I agree with, and it is controversial, but perhaps in the long term this could actually be a good thing, if it brings the human population down by a couple of billion."
You never said anything of the sorts in your opening statement. You now profess your opinion to be; << Hey, OF COURSE my last statement in the opening post is highly controversial. And OF COURSE we don’t ever want TB or any other disease to result in a loss of human life to the extent of it actually bringing the global population down significantly... or ANY loss of life at all for that matter.>> fortunately you added the last line to that statement, as it could have been interpreted that if the number of deaths was insignificant, say 500 million out of 7 billion, then that would be quite okay. Ludwig I'll take on board your later position, not your opening position.
So, now that you are on this thread, are you going to discuss the REAL subject that I have raised? Yes, super bugs spreading uncontrolled disease pose a terrible threat to mankind. We tend to given them scant regard whilst they proliferate in the the third world, but if they raise their ugly heads in the developed, well then it becomes a completely different story. We should be spending a lot more on research long before they become our problem, because then it might be too late.

If we don't want to kill but not overpopulate either then there's only one solution, birth control !
Some morons are even against that.

Well, maybe the $7 a visit for medical research would have been
a good thing after all.

Bazz 7 dollars a visit would have been a good thing, even if all it did was reduce the entitlement mentality of so many in our community. Any contribution to the deficit would also be useful.

After a blood test, & 3 doctors visits this week that would have cost me $28.00, if we had bulk billing out here in the sticks.

As it was it cost me $52.00, cheap at 3 times the price, & certainly not a good enough reason to live in suburbia, where it would be bulk billed & free.

Nice waffle Paul, as I caught his drift in his first post, I also suspect you did as well but some just have to have a crack at people, perhaps you're one.

So, as Ludwig has said, are you going to add to this thread, or just sit on the outside throwing stones.

Can't help but wonder if this outbreak in PNG has come from the illegals given that poor young fellow has all but died from a cut foot. The first step in stopping TB from entering Australia woukd be to stop people coming here, legally or illegally.

As for our situation, I don't think we are over populated at all. It's just that 90% of our people choose to live on 10% of the land. Figure of speech.

Having said that, if we continue down the path of entitlements, we will be very much over populated, over populated with hanger onners that is, sitting back expecting others to carry the can. But I doubt.by Abbotts actions so far that he will allow this to continue, or he will die trying. Politically that is.