Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Consequences of High Population

Discussion in 'National Politics' started by sunny_10, May 24, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
    Why “Resource Sufficiency Evaluation” is Crucial: Sustainable World Initiatives

    > Sustainable Development is Not the Same as Sustainability:

    Sustainability, from a natural resource perspective, means that we don’t take things from
    nature faster than nature can replace them. For an ecosystem like a forest, it means that
    we don’t harvest trees faster than the forest can regrow them. Otherwise we will eventually
    destroy the forest. For an underground aquifer system, it means that we don’t pump water
    out faster than it is naturally replenished. Making development more efficient, and thus more
    sustainable, is important, but merely making economic activity more sustainable does not
    guarantee that we are living within nature’s means.

    > We’re Already Consuming Resources at an Unsustainable Rate:

    With 7 billion people on the planet and rising levels of affluence, we are already exceeding
    nature’s limits. Every two years, the Global Footprint Network and the World Wildlife Fund
    publish a “Living Planet” report that looks at humanity’s ecological footprint. The latest
    report, issued in 2010, indicates that humankind is already overusing the renewable resource
    capacity of Earth’s biosphere by 50%. Climate change, peak oil, water scarcity, biodiversity
    loss, and recurring food crises are all signs that humanity is overusing global resources.
    Leading scientists warn that we are in biological and general resource overshoot.

    > We’re Already in Danger of Breaking Planetary Boundaries:

    Thirty leading scientists assembled by the Stockholm Resilience Centre have identified nine
    “planetary boundaries,” which, if crossed, could cause irreparable harm to the planet and
    the prospects for future human well-being. According to these scientists, we have already
    exceeded three of these important boundaries: climate change, nitrogen loadings, and the
    rate of biodiversity loss. The other six boundaries—ocean acidification, stratospheric ozone,
    aerosol loadings, freshwater use, land use changes, and chemical pollution—to varying
    degrees are also approaching a scale “where abrupt global environmental change can no
    longer be excluded.”

    > The Challenge is Getting Larger, Not Smaller:

    The demands that we are placing upon the planet are growing exponentially. According to
    U.N. projections, world population—currently 7 billion—is likely to grow to 9 billion by 2042
    and to over 10 billion by 2085. At the same time, the world’s economic output continues to
    rise at 3-4 percent a year, putting enormous pressures on a fragile ecology and a dwindling
    resource base.

    > “Greening” the Economy is Necessary, but Not Sufficient:

    With the world economy on track to quadruple in size over the next half century, any gains
    we make in producing renewable energy or in conserving resources will not, in all likelihood,
    be enough to achieve a sustainable world. Indeed, historical data show that technological
    advances can accelerate the rate at which natural resources are consumed and the
    environment is impacted. Green technologies may help to de-link resource extraction from
    economic growth, but—by themselves—they will not ensure progress toward sustainability.

    > Resource Exploitation has Propelled Human Progress:

    In the past 100 years we have made major strides in improving the human condition. Average
    life spans have more than doubled. Food production has more than quadrupled. Living
    standards in many countries have increased by a factor of at least ten. Our progress has been
    propelled by the extraction of fossil fuels and the exploitation of natural resources, but it has
    taken a terrible toll on the environment, and our resource base is steadily shrinking.

    > Our Very Future Depends on Resource Sufficiency:

    We cannot maintain the progress we have made in eliminating poverty and eradicating
    hunger, unless we maintain an adequate resource base. Continued advances in human
    welfare will require sufficient land, water, minerals, and metals. We will also need healthy
    ecosystems capable of sustaining a wide range of biological diversity, including human life.

    > Sustainability Requires Resource Sufficiency Evaluation:

    We will never know if we have enough resources to maintain human development unless
    we actually evaluate our resource demands and compare them to what is available. No one
    would think of driving a car or flying a plane without a fuel gauge. By the same token, we
    cannot plan for our future without knowing whether we have enough resources to meet our
    projected needs. Every nation, whether its economy is developed or developing, should
    undertake a resource sufficiency evaluation, and the international community should provide
    technical support. At the same time, world leaders must undertake an international resource
    sufficiency evaluation to gauge global progress towards a sustainable world.

    > Methodologies Already Exist for Doing Resource Sufficiency Evaluations:

    Scientifically-based accounting methodologies, such as the ecological footprint, are already
    available to conduct resource sufficiency evaluations. These methodologies, and the biophysical
    ‘balance sheets’ that are generated, will give policymakers and the public a clearer
    understanding of sustainability and what is needed to achieve it. Our future depends on it.
    Resource Sufficiency Evaluation is our Road Map to a Sustainable Future.

    Resource Sufficiency Evaluation is our Road Map to a Sustainable Future.

    http://www.populationinstitute.org/external/files/Fact_Sheets/SWI_2_Pager.pdf

    Sustainable World Initiative
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2012
    1 person likes this.
  2. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Increase standard of living and you'll solve population problems.
     
  3. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
    thats what the Indian government is trying for too, but I certainly dont find India to be capable enough to have high living standard for 1.2billions, if US on comparison can't have the same for just 320mil population, without borrowing debt, with much more natural resources than india :disagree:

    its a good thinking but an enough efforts too is required to reduce the overall population :tup:
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
  4. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978

    World faces overpopulation 'disaster' as number of people is set to rise by 75 million EACH YEAR

    Global population is expected to peak at 9.5bn in 2075

    Annual rise is the equivalent of entire UK population


    [​IMG]

    The world is edging closer to overpopulation Armageddon as swelling cities drain the planet of its vital resources, a report warns today.

    Population growth, especially in newly developing countries, is the 'defining challenge of the 21st century'.

    It represents a greater potential threat than climate change, according to the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.

    Over the next six decades the world's population is expected to explode, soaring from 6.9billion to peak at 9.5billion in 2075, the report says.

    [​IMG]

    Each year the number of people in the world is due to rise by 75million - equivalent to the entire population of the UK.

    Most of the growth will be in the African continent, which is following in the industrial footsteps of Asia, and in cities.

    The world's urban population is likely to increase from a 2007 figure of 3.3billion to 6.4billion in 2050.

    But without drastic changes there will not be sufficient resources to provide people with basic human needs such as water, food, energy and shelter, says the report, entitled Population: One Planet, Too Many People?

    Climate change is likely to place even more stress on resources, resulting in as many as a billion people moving from inhospitable regions.

    Water requirements are projected to rise by 30 per cent by 2030 while food resources will be stretched by a doubling of demand for agricultural produce by 2050.


    Slum living, already forced on a third of the world's urban populations, will become even more widespread as cities became increasingly packed with people.

    As a result billions could be at risk of hunger, thirst and appalling living conditions, creating tinderbox conditions that could ignite civil unrest and conflict.

    The report, compiled with the help of more than 70 engineers around the world, sets out a series of 'engineering development goals' as a first step towards averting the looming disaster.

    It calls for a global engineering initiative, modelled on the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals, to tackle the key problem areas of energy, water, food, urbanisation and finance.

    Lead author Dr Tim Fox said: 'Towards the end of the century the world is going to come face to face with the challenges of the largest population explosion in human history.

    'These headline figures really are staggering from a resources point of view and for the provision of the basic needs of human society.'

    Engineering solutions such as reducing energy waste, improving food storage and extracting water from underground aquifers would allow the world to sustain a population of 9.5billion, said Dr Fox.

    The cost would run into many trillions of pounds, but would be affordable if richer nations were willing to share financial as well as technological resources.

    A key necessity is to help poorer nations 'leapfrog' the resource-hungry 'dirty' phase of industrialisation.

    As population levels soar in newly emerging industrialised countries, those in developed parts of the world such as the UK and US are likely to stabilise or even fall, said the report.

    The population of Europe is expected to decline by 20 per cent by 2050. However, the impact of global population growth would still be felt around an increasingly connected world where changes in one region could have an impact 'many thousands of miles away'.

    World faces overpopulation 'disaster' as number of people set to rise by 75 million EACH YEAR | Mail Online
     
  5. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Well, yes, it's a closed circle: with too large populace, you can't have high standard of living, and without high standard of living, you have to put very hard work at reducing populace with acceptable means. As for US, it isn't that they can't have acceptably high living standards for everyone, but that they don't want to: 2% of populace owns 20% of wealth. These 2% also control politics, and they aren't about to give their enjoyable lifestyles just to help the poor.
     
  6. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
    here we have report from world bank that around 60% people of India are living with income less than $2.0 per day, as below :facepalm:

    here, how is it wise to have high population if you can't give them good life? how is it advisable to have more population this way???

    => Poverty headcount ratio at $2 a day (PPP) (% of population) | Data | Table
     
  7. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 12, 2014
  8. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
    NASA / NASA Reported Ground Water level going down in North India

    NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s satellite imagery submitted a Report to the scientific paper US Based said that Level of Groundwater getting down every year.

    Groundwater levels in Punjab, Rajasthan, Haryana and Delhi are falling down one foot every year and this issue can lead to extensive socio-economic stresses for the region’s 114 million residents in North India. :facepalm:

    The Images took from NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE), a pair of satellites that sense changes in Earth’s gravity field and associated mass distribution, including water masses stored above or below the Earth’s surface.

    International journal Nature Published a report in the paper saying 109 cubic km of groundwater has been lost in just six years (2002-08) and this could be the India’s largest surface reservoir Upper Wain Ganga and Doubled than the government’s estimation. :tsk:

    Report also says that from the August 2002 and October 2008, the region lost 109 cubic km of groundwater; almost triple the capacity of the largest man-made reservoir in the U.S, Lake Mead. This a serious issue which need to think more seriously as it could be the reason of collapse of agricultural output and severe shortages of potable water. :tsk:

    NASA / NASA Reported Ground Water level going down in North India:eTI


    => India’s groundwater crisis

    Water security is widely recognised as one of the major challenges to India’s economic and social development.1,2,3 The nation’s average annual rainfall is extremely abundant by global standards, yet much of this rain falls in relatively brief deluges during the monsoon and there is great disparity across different regions. The combination of these climatic conditions with a range of man-made pressures has driven India’s farmers, households, and industry to increasingly depend on groundwater rather than surface water in rivers and lakes. But this dependence is leading to a rapid and very worrying deterioration in the nation’s groundwater resources, a deterioration that is underlined by current events.

    The first two months of the 2012 monsoon have seen remarkably weak rainfall, but existing groundwater bores in many areas can no longer be relied on as an alternative to surface water: the lack of replenishment from the rains is exposing the simple fact that the water table has fallen too quickly due to over-extraction. Previously productive tube-wells are now dry. Extreme water shortages are currently widespread in some major cities, as they were across the country during the 2009 drought. Whilst a lack of reservoir infrastructure is also a contributing factor to current shortages, the fact that groundwater resources are unable to compensate as before indicates that what was once a problem of long-term sustainability has developed into an urgent crisis – one that is fundamental to India’s broader water security today and for a long time to come.

    Groundwater is a critical resource in India, accounting for over 65% of irrigation water and 85% of drinking water supplies.4 However, on current trends it is estimated that 60% of groundwater sources will be in a critical state of degradation within the next twenty years.4 In the most seriously affected north-western states, recent satellite measurements indicate an average decline of 33 cm per year from 2002 to 2008.5 Local observations of annual water table decline exceeding 4 metres are common throughout India.:facepalm:

    India’s declining groundwater resources are the product of a number of drivers. Utilization of groundwater facilitates irrigated agriculture in areas far from rivers; in fact, this was key to the agricultural “green revolution†that occurred from the mid 1960s. In places where surface water is available but unsafe for drinking or farming—more than 70% of India’s surface water resources are polluted by human waste or toxic chemicals—groundwater has often been seen as a safe alternative. Urban water supply infrastructure is often poor and unreliable: well drilling is typically the most economical means of obtaining household water.4 In Delhi, the local government estimates that 40% of the water transmitted through the mains system is lost through leakages; for many, the only other alternative to bores are expensive supplies purchased from water-trucks.

    In rural areas, electricity subsidies allowing farmers to pump groundwater cheaply have become entrenched in the political landscape.9 They are likely to become even more so as energy requirements increase to extract water from greater depths. Low cost encourages excess water withdrawal, an inefficient usage pattern commonly exacerbated by ineffective application methods and the wastage of agricultural produce between farm and market. In order to feed a growing and wealthier population, it is projected that agricultural water demand in the India of 2030 would need double to 1,200 billion m3 if these inefficient practices continued.11 The problems are only going to get worse unless urgent changes occur. :toilet:

    So we have some sense of why India’s groundwater is being unsustainably exploited, but why is this so important? Aside from the physical absence of the resource, the state of groundwater quality in India is a critical health issue.7 As wells are drilled deeper in pursuit of the falling water table, the water which is extracted frequently displays higher levels of arsenic, fluoride, and other harmful chemicals. The attendant health effects have been well documented throughout India12,7, particularly in poorer rural communities where there is no alternative for drinking water. Falling water tables can also induce leakage from a contaminated external source13, such as saline water in coastal areas or surface water polluted by sewage, agricultural fertilizers, and industry. Depletion of groundwater is not simply a case of drawing down a replenishable resource, but potentially one of permanent degradation.

    Unsustainable groundwater depletion is a very serious issue. And it is a very difficult problem to address.14 Groundwater is a classic example of a ‘public good’ – a resource where it is difficult to exclude potential users and it is not in the self-interest of the individual to use the resource in a collectively beneficial manner: if one user reduces the volume of water they withdraw the overall impact will be minimal. The likely result? All users compete with each other to extract as much water as they can while the resource still exists and everyone is worse off than if they cooperated and each reduced consumption. Of course, it does not have to be that way: we easily could envisage a situation where neighbouring farmers in a single community are able to cooperate effectively. But what are the prospects of voluntary cooperation between a large number of different communities using the same aquifer? Or how about millions of households across a major city?

    Environmental public goods typically require some form of government regulation to change the incentives of users and produce socially optimal outcomes. In India, however, it would seem almost impossible for the national government to manage the estimated 25 million groundwater extraction structures already in existence9; this is particularly the case given that India’s government institutions require significant strengthening and responsibility for groundwater management is fragmented throughout different official departments4. What’s more, India’s state governments have primary jurisdiction over groundwater usage and, in many cases, state agencies are even more poorly equipped. Both underground aquifers and above-ground rivers traverse the borders of Indian states; competition over water use is already a major source of inter-state conflict2, as well as between users at a local level.4 To date, the difficulties of regulation and collective management of India’s groundwater resources have been overwhelming, and are a fundamental cause of the state of crisis.2,4

    The link from water to food security and health in India compels urgent solutions to the unsustainable levels of demand for its dwindling groundwater supplies. But, given the multiple levels of the problem outlined above, this is no simple task. A comprehensive World Bank study concluded that high-level policy reform in the shape of regulatory measures, economic instruments, or tradable groundwater extraction rights is simply not a credible way forward.4 Instead, this report proposed that “bottom-up†community management may be the only hope. Other studies have supported this proposal9, with particular focus on community level groundwater recharge and the use of communally managed alternatives to groundwater, such as small dams. Notably, the International Water Management Institute administered a successful trial targeting farming villages in Gujarat state, the results of which are now being incorporated into national policy.

    Asking whether India’s groundwater crisis will eventually be addressed might actually be the wrong question: solutions will simply have to be found. What these solutions are, how long they take to find, and how serious the consequences become are the more relevant issues.


    India’s groundwater crisis | Global Water Forum
     
  9. DaRk KnIght

    DaRk KnIght Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,142
    Likes Received:
    1,295
    These states must learn from Gujarat. Gujarat is the only state which actually increased her ground water level.
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978

    Western Scientists: 'One-Third Of The Human Race Has To Die For Civilization To Be Sustained

    [​IMG]
    Western Scientists say at least 2 billion dead bodies will be burned and converted into fossil fuels.

    WASHINGTON—Saying there's no way around it at this point, a coalition of scientists announced Thursday that one-third of the world population must die to prevent wide-scale depletion of the planet's resources—and that humankind needs to figure out immediately how it wants to go about killing off more than 2 billion members of its species. :facepalm:

    Representing multiple fields of study, including ecology, agriculture, biology, and economics, the researchers told reporters that facts are facts: Humanity has far exceeded its sustainable population size, so either one in three humans can choose how they want to die themselves, or there can be some sort of government-mandated liquidation program—but either way, people have to start dying. :toilet:

    And soon, the scientists confirmed.

    "I'm just going to level with you—the earth's carrying capacity will no longer be able to keep up with population growth, and civilization will end unless large swaths of human beings are killed, so the question is: How do we want to do this?" Cambridge University ecologist Dr. Edwin Peters said. "Do we want to give everyone a number and implement a death lottery system? Incinerate the nation's children? Kill off an entire race of people? Give everyone a shotgun and let them sort it out themselves?" :facepalm:

    "Completely up to you," he added, explaining he and his colleagues were "open to whatever." "Unfortunately, we are well past the point of controlling overpopulation through education, birth control, and the empowerment of women. In fact, we should probably kill 300 million women right off the bat."

    Because the world's population may double by the end of the century, an outcome that would lead to a considerable decrease in the availability of food, land, and water, researchers said that, bottom line, it would be helpful if a lot of people chose to die willingly, the advantage being that these volunteers could decide for themselves whether they wished to die slowly, quickly, painfully, or peacefully.

    Additionally, the scientists noted that in order to stop the destruction of global environmental systems in heavily populated regions, there's no avoiding the reality that half the world's progeny will have to be sterilized.

    "The longer we wait, the higher the number of people who will have to die, so we might as well just get it over with," said Dr. Chelsea Klepper, head of agricultural studies at Purdue Univer**sity, and the leading proponent of a worldwide death day in which 2.3 billion people would kill themselves en masse at the exact same time. "At this point, it's merely a question of coordination. If we can get the populations of New York City, Los Angeles, Beijing, India, Europe, and Latin America to voluntarily off themselves at 6 p.m. EST on June 1, we can kill the people that need to be killed and the planet can finally start renewing its resources."

    Thus far, humanity has been presented with a great variety of death options, among them, poisoning the world's water supply with cadmium, picking one person per household to be killed in the privacy of his or her home, mass beheadings, and gathering 2.3 billion people all in one place and obliterating them with a single hydrogen bomb. :fencing:

    Sources confirmed that if a death solution is not in place by Mar. 31, the U.N., in the interest of preserving the human race, will mobilize its peacekeeping forces and gun down as many people as necessary.

    "I don't care how it happens, but a ton of Africans have to go, because by 2025, there's no way that continent will be able to feed itself," :toilet: said Dr. Henry Craig of the Population Research Institute. "And by my estimation, three babies have to die for every septuagenarian, because their longer life expectancy means babies have the potential to release far more greenhouse gases going forward."

    While the majority of the world's populace reportedly understands this is the only option left to save civilization, not all members of the human race are eager to die.

    "I personally would rather live, but taking the long view, I can see how ensuring the survival of humanity is best," said Norwich, CT resident and father of three Jason Atkins. "I guess if we were to do it over again, it would make sense to do a better job conserving the earth's finite resources."

    "Hopefully, the people who remain on the planet will use the mass slaughter of their friends and loved ones as an incentive to be more responsible going forward," he added.

    Scientists: 'Look, One-Third Of The Human Race Has To Die For Civilization To Be Sustainable, So How Do We Want To Do This?' | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
     
  11. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978

    among all of above, British Rule had controlled the population somehow, in fact, which the today's India couldn't control to date. (population at 341million in 1947 to around 1.3 billion right now :tsk:.)

    and the the outcome of the high population is as below........:tsk:. India does need foreign Rule to keep this part of the world safe enough :tup:

     
  12. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
    Few Key Points I always mention on this Topic as below:

    these are my own ideas so it does require criticism by other members to make the topic interesting :tup:


    1st; if the poor of India ask the Western nations to share the burden of subsidies then they will simply kick these shiits of India, isn't it? and if its only Indian Middle Class who is generating money and running government and also paying heavy price for the welfare/subsidies for poor, then they do have a right to ask the Indian Government, "to what extent they will have to bear this burden of tax just to feed poor, and whether they will remain capable enough in future also to bear this burden on long run if the government doesn't control the population?????????" :facepalm:

    like the news as below, around 50% indian population is based in agriculture only, around 600mil, while even 200mil population may produce the same agriculture output? and the same in cities of India, around 50% people just try to earn a decent salary which they can't, simply because too many mouths and limited resources. and Indian Middle Class is just paying high price to feed these around 600mil excess population, but still there is no effort to have a control on this growing population???????

    2nd; here for example of Pakistan and Bangladesh, right now overly populated Pakistan is full of target killings, simply because too many mouth and no resources to feed them. its also similar to 'genocide' itself????????? and Bangladeshis just want to run from Bangladesh, mainly to India. its the worse to see people dying without dignity than controlling population by force

    3rd; many economists of India advocate "food security"/ "free medicines"/ "right to get a job" etc in India which is not possible until the Indian government may control its population. they simply can't feed 1.2bil population from the limited natural resources they have . USA is 3 times bigger in area than India but population of India is 4 times to USA? and on the top of that, Indian government wants to give welfare/ heavy subsidies to its people? if India face a sudden fall like ASEAN in late 90s and South America like in 80s, all these they will have to withdraw after that so better they keep habit to live in less and get rid off the unnecessary subsidies/welfares . for example, we always find Pakistan increasing petrol and diesel prices as per market prices as they can't afford to give subsidies while the people of Pakistan are poorer than India, but Indian government always hesitate to do so? but the day India will reach level of Pakistan, just one good economic fall is required, and India will learn all by themselves. :wave:


    4th; here we have report from world bank that around 60% people of India are living with income less than $2.0 per day, as below

    here, how is it wise to have high population if you can't give them good life? how is it advisable to have more population this way??? :facepalm:

    => Poverty headcount ratio at $2 a day (PPP) (% of population) | Data | Table


    5th; Population of India was hardly around 341 million at the time of freedom, in 1947, and we can't have more than 700 million people, and we need a national consensus on it.

    and as Overpopulation of India is directly related to consumption of natural resources of the world, high pollution and hence Climate Change due to high consumption of energy. reduced water level has also been caused in India due to the same high population and hence high demand reasons, hence India is directly answerable to the rest of the world about the measures it is adopting to reduce its population to 700 million, say by 2050
    :tup: :cheers:

    we can't let India become one of the reason for the destruction of this world, as the Earth belongs to every person of the world, regardless any nationality :india:


    6th; here, first there is no control on the population, as much as India can have, and on the top of that, they want to feed them for nothing too :rofl:

    => At Rs 1,25,000 cr, Food Security Bill largest in world: Implementation a challenge, says Morgan Stanley - Economic Times
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2013
  13. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978

    India is still a Shiit as it has no control on the religious shiits

    looks a good news for india, in fact :coffee:

    out of 1.25 billion population, hardly 210million in this list? while we have many news that half of the population of india, around 650million, are either poor or in a bit better state only?????

    india has to reduce its population to 700million, twice to its population at the time of freedom in 1947, no more than :nono:. this additional 600million are the only reason for this type of news we read on time to time...

    this 600million people are not only the shiits but also a burder on the Indian economy, which Indian Middle Class bear by heavy subsidies to them, while there are many shameless minority communities of India who just fcuk and throw their hungry kids on the streets of India for the subsidy/tax money of Indian middle class, which is still not enough, and still we have this type of news for India :tsk:

    religious politics of India, to appease minorities by either means, is the main reason behind this type of news, who never let any 'forceful' population control technique to come in application, similar to Chinese One Child Policy. and these shiits of indian minorities first eat subcidies/tax money of Indian Middle Class and at the same time insult the whole nation on the world platform this way too :facepalm:

    Population of Hindus was 88% at the time of freedom while its now 80%, then why dont we have any way to first bring down population of the minorities to the 'ratio' it had at the time of freedom in 1947, at 12.5% of total population, when Indian population was hardly 341million? why Indians wants shiits on the streets, just because the minorities there may do this?????
     
  14. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
    We need "Population Tax" on evey 'additional' child of India :india:

    to be paid to India and rest of the world, both


    with the above suggestion of OCP or TCP, i favor 'Population Tax' on every child after the first one. say, $100,000 for the second one, $500,000 for the 3rd child, and $2.0million/ $5.0million each for the next ones.....

    I mean, if soneone want to put any burden on the country, on the world as whole/ on the environment, then he/she would first pay for it :tup:

    I even favor, 50% of the "Population Tax" to be paid to the world bank, to handle the global environmental issue due to India's 'additional' population. i mean, if any person wants more than one child, then half of the "Population Tax" to be paid to the Indian government to handle the related consequences on India, the nation, and helf of the Population Tax to be given to World Bank to handle the environmental issues due to India's "additional" population :cheers:

    (and hence, the same we may demand from the rest of high population countries too, pay "Population Tax" to World Bank to handle the related environmental issues :coffee:.)
     
  15. sunny_10

    sunny_10 BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    978
    look, we need money to reduce high population effects on the Environment, on the climate change, and hence, those who want more than one child gotto pay for the expanses, thats it :cheers:


    =>
    look, you can't have rights to fcuk others, you get the point? :fighting1: :scared1: this is what being discussed here in this thread, that those who have more than one child, those who may fcuk the country and the whole climate this way, we want them to pay for that first, thats it :coffee:

    look, India is not a communist country like china, who may straight fcuk those like you who want to fcuk the nation, china, by having more than one child. but my this effort is to unite the whole world against those like you, who not only fcuk here and there, but they in fact fcuk whole climate this way, by having more than one child :tup: :tsk:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page