Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(21,647 posts)
16. OK, there's a lot there, much of which I followed and generally agree with
Fri Aug 22, 2025, 10:57 AM
Friday

I can’t say I’d encountered the “data as oil” concept before, but I understand it. For my own part, I have done my level best to keep my data mine, however, I know too much about databases, and I realize that corporations are not as careful with my data as I am.

“Eminent domain” is a legal tool which can be used for valid reasons. However, it can be and is abused. It seems now, more than ever.

For me, our #1 priority must be restoration of the ecosystem. #2 (selfishly) is survival of my/our species. On the whole, I think we’ve accomplished a number of worthwhile things. We’re not all Beethoven , Rembrandt or Leonardo, but a few of us are. We’ve done a lot of damage to our ecosystem, exploited one another, and our fellow inhabitants. I fear we have signed “Gaia’s" death warrant. This saddens me. We don’t yet know of life elsewhere on other planets. Gaia may be unique.

We were warned decades ago of the likely consequences of our actions. We selfishly chose to ignore them. The impression I get is that by-and-large, we still choose to ignore them, even as they begin to play out around us (perhaps because they are simply too awful for us to acknowledge.)

I used to say, “It’s never too late to make life a little less miserable for future generations.” I’ve begun to question that. Perhaps I was too optimistic.

My point regarding “family planning” is not that it’s a bad thing, however, while the Earth’s population likely should have been kept at a fraction of what it now is, we need to make a dramatic change in a matter of years, not decades. Using a very simplistic model, if everyone stopped having children today, we might expect the Earth’s population to be cut in half in say… 40 years (that’s just not fast enough.) If those remaining people keep producing carbon emissions at the same rate “per capita” as today, that would be too much.

If we used a more realistic plan (like China’s now abandoned "one child policy”) we would expect the population to decline even less rapidly.

So, while better family planning would have been good 70 or 80 years ago, I’m afraid it is not the solution to our current crises.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»'They're not going to liv...»Reply #16