[ExI] Fwd: Scientists remain PC

Lee Corbin lcorbin at rawbw.com
Wed Aug 6 05:07:44 UTC 2008

Dagon wrote (From: Dagon Gmail Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 7:16 AM)

> It goes smack in the face of the typical 20/30 year old soon-to-be breeder that
> his or her lifestyle is causing, by a small increment, the destruction of the planet.

This is a *highly* disputed pronouncement, not something to
be taken as matter-of-fact. Julian Simon and many others have
adduced a good deal of evidence that population growth, other
things being equal, is good for society, good for economies, and
good for humanity in general.

In some countries, where the population growth is pronounced,
such as the United States, there is clearly a great shortage of people,
considering how many opportunities evidently exist for those able to
emigrate there.

> Even then, countries with biggest problems tend to be countries
> with religious extremism, authoritarianism and rather inadequate
> democracies.

Yeah, that's the other hand, all right. But their problems are not
so much population growth per se, but retarded economies due
to the world-wide unequal distribution of capitalism. 

> It just doesn't sink in that the more people you have, the less each
> individual is worth. 

Perhaps you intend that your following remarks qualify that, but
I don't quite see how.  That's an outrageous statement, on its
face!  Do you mean to suggest that John Adams was worth less
than Cicero because there were so many more people in John Adams'
time?  Or, in terms of locality, I would be worth much more if I
moved to a tiny hamlet in a small country on an underpopulated

> Having an excess of cheap, desperate individuals means cheap
> labour, which is in the interest of those in power, or those with
> money. This is a conundrum that can not be resolved with current
> science and current democracies.

You seem to believe that the number of jobs is somehow fixed,
and that this fixed quantity of jobs will just cause the "excess"
of "cheap, desperate individuals" to have to share them among
them, bid down each others' wages, and live off charity.  It's not
so! Under the right circumstances, more people means more
jobs, as the larger number of individuals discover new creative
niches within an economy. (It's true that too few countries have
"the right circumstances", but we should be pushing for more
freedom, democracy, rule of law, protection of private property,
and all the rest of those things that make it possible.)

> Nobody will address it, except for a few with vision, and they
> will be scorned in return.

:-)   Thus the fate of all of us who seem to be ahead of our
times, e.g., us cryonicists. 

> My single best argument we need immortality treatments in
> the 7/11 NOW. Once people have to face consequences
> they'll change their tune really fast. I see no other way to 
> resolve many of our problems. 

I might agree.  But your opening remarks will just be echoed
by those who think that there are too many people, and it's
high time some of the old ones died off.


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list