If you bothered to look at the fine print on the bottom of the Deagel website, rrreally small in the far left is the sentence THIS WEBSITE BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER™
Would have been better to have not excessively overbred in the first place, but this is not entirely unwelcome news to those of us who thought even the sub-3 billion world we entered was already overpopulated. The big question is who or which demographics will be volunteered to move on?
We are not overpopulated by metric of any natural resource. We could sustainably feed, clothe, and shelter everyone on earth and more, it's just that it isn't the most profitable option.
Wage and class systems don't function well when there is enough prosperity for a large middle class to exist. Fewer people willing to do 'lower class jobs' while the middle class increases the demand for the services provided by the lower class... The middle class that isn't punching down, starts questioning the ruling class...
Overpopulation is misdirection to get people to cuck themselves. There are too many of us to control. We all have high standards of living, we can communicate worldwide instantly, and have access to way more leverage than any other civilian population in recorded history. We could overthrow every government/bank/Corp simultanuously worldwide with little effort if only freedom was as popular as the #ice bucket challenge.
We're overpopulated by the metric of too many people existing. We're overpopulated by the metric of cities of over 15,000 people existing.
If you've ever flown across the US in a window seat, your view out the window shows vast swaths of industrial food production blighting the landscape. Over 5% of people get their food from grocery stores. People 'work at jobs'. Interstate highways are a thing. I could continue with examples of overpopulation even more horrific, but you see the problem.
Everything you mentioned, especially industrial food, is an artificial problem with better solutions already known. You citing these things actually proves my point about only being overpopulated by metric of maintaining the status quo.
Industrial food production is inefficient. It produces very few vitamins, minerals and calories per square ft. Inefficient production(& distribution) =/= lack of resources.
Lmao; cities over 15k? and your solution is depopulation? Do you recommend post-birth abortion as a solution to a family of 5 not fitting in a Lambo too? Over-density =/= over-population.
We are only overpopulated by metrics of the ruling class and their ability to maintain their status quo.
I've worked in food desert mitigation and non-government affordable housing for over a decade. Why do you assume that the only thing possible to change is global population?
I could continue with examples of overpopulation even more horrific
No, you couldn't. You didn't. Why wouldn't you lead with your most horrific examples?
"So to prove my point, here's the worst evidence I have, in fact it isn't really evidence or proof of anything at all really... but they are some things, not even mentioning all the good evidence I have which does in fact prove my point."
Georgia guidestones is another indicator of where we are headed.
Agreed. This still gives us unvaxxed two years to stock up on useful stuff.
If you bothered to look at the fine print on the bottom of the Deagel website, rrreally small in the far left is the sentence THIS WEBSITE BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER™
(/s)
Would have been better to have not excessively overbred in the first place, but this is not entirely unwelcome news to those of us who thought even the sub-3 billion world we entered was already overpopulated. The big question is who or which demographics will be volunteered to move on?
At least the nigs are proactive, and volunteer each other at an impressive rate.
We are not overpopulated by metric of any natural resource. We could sustainably feed, clothe, and shelter everyone on earth and more, it's just that it isn't the most profitable option.
Wage and class systems don't function well when there is enough prosperity for a large middle class to exist. Fewer people willing to do 'lower class jobs' while the middle class increases the demand for the services provided by the lower class... The middle class that isn't punching down, starts questioning the ruling class...
Overpopulation is misdirection to get people to cuck themselves. There are too many of us to control. We all have high standards of living, we can communicate worldwide instantly, and have access to way more leverage than any other civilian population in recorded history. We could overthrow every government/bank/Corp simultanuously worldwide with little effort if only freedom was as popular as the #ice bucket challenge.
We're overpopulated by the metric of too many people existing. We're overpopulated by the metric of cities of over 15,000 people existing.
If you've ever flown across the US in a window seat, your view out the window shows vast swaths of industrial food production blighting the landscape. Over 5% of people get their food from grocery stores. People 'work at jobs'. Interstate highways are a thing. I could continue with examples of overpopulation even more horrific, but you see the problem.
Everything you mentioned, especially industrial food, is an artificial problem with better solutions already known. You citing these things actually proves my point about only being overpopulated by metric of maintaining the status quo.
Industrial food production is inefficient. It produces very few vitamins, minerals and calories per square ft. Inefficient production(& distribution) =/= lack of resources.
Lmao; cities over 15k? and your solution is depopulation? Do you recommend post-birth abortion as a solution to a family of 5 not fitting in a Lambo too? Over-density =/= over-population.
We are only overpopulated by metrics of the ruling class and their ability to maintain their status quo.
I've worked in food desert mitigation and non-government affordable housing for over a decade. Why do you assume that the only thing possible to change is global population?
No, you couldn't. You didn't. Why wouldn't you lead with your most horrific examples?
Why would that be necessary?
"So to prove my point, here's the worst evidence I have, in fact it isn't really evidence or proof of anything at all really... but they are some things, not even mentioning all the good evidence I have which does in fact prove my point."
The worst evidence I have is already overwhelming. You're simply adding to it.
Sorry about my singular kid, there champ. Oh, you were talking to Bill and Melinda. Carry on.