Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Domes Dei And Malthus


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#18 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8885 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 10:42 AM

I've heard this condescending crap before. 

 

Hey malform! There's this incredibly sophisticated technology called a mirror! They have them in stores! You should go check them out!

 

Modest suggestion: Tell us why you think what you think. It might be fun! :cheer:

 

 

People that have trust issues only need to look in the mirror. There they will meet the one person that will betray them the most, :phones:

Buffy



#19 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8885 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 10:47 AM

Hey - don't you think that is rather unfair? He was a man of his time, and his theories made sense 250 years ago.  The fact that it is all irrelevant these days does not make him an idiot, or am I missing something?

 

You are quite right, and my overstatement was only intended to be taken in the realm of current understanding of the world.

 

One can argue that Malthus ignored things that "should" have been obvious even is his time, but then most great thinkers of the past did too.

 

 

If you treat every situation as a life and death matter, you'll die a lot of times, :phones:

Buffy



#20 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 797 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 12:56 PM

Getting back to the problem of modern famine, I forgot in my earlier posts about the part Wall St. has to play in elevated food prices in the form of the futures markets.  We have grain, beef and dairy futures markets so the gambling investors can drive the markets up and sometimes down based on speculation.  We supplement our dairy cows diets with corn and soy, and those prices used to be fairly consistent and predictable, but now the market is like a roller coaster.  



#21 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8885 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 01:46 PM

Yes, one of the side effects of distribution of capital upward in combination with reduced competition is that players can purchase large enough long-positions in futures that they can artificially create large upward and downward price shifts and make a killing on the arbitrage. Traders make money off of wild swings, not stable prices, so if they can create them, they will. Goldman Sachs has perfected this technique of market manipulation, but most of the investment banks have followed.

 

If you have money invested with one of the majors and your portfolio is less than $10 million, you're not a customer, you're a source of money for them to mine.

 

 

Every crowd has a silver lining, :phones:
Buffy


#22 petrushkagoogol

petrushkagoogol

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 404 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 08:49 PM

The essence of my argument is : Malthusian theory aims to correlate food and population (growth), the latter more ominous, and in combination with the former, produces a 'doomsday" like scenario... ( also some theology implied !).  :out:



#23 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 797 posts

Posted 30 July 2017 - 10:45 AM

The essence of my argument is : Malthusian theory aims to correlate food and population (growth), the latter more ominous, and in combination with the former, produces a 'doomsday" like scenario... ( also some theology implied !).  :out:

Well, given that Malthusian theory is wrong, the " argument" is moot.  If there is to be a "doomsday scenario, it will be brought about largely by political means.



#24 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8885 posts

Posted 30 July 2017 - 02:26 PM

The essence of my argument is : Malthusian theory aims to correlate food and population (growth), the latter more ominous, and in combination with the former, produces a 'doomsday" like scenario... ( also some theology implied !).  :out:

 

You do understand what has happened to population growth, right?

 

updated-World-Population-Growth-1750-210

 

 

In 5-billion years the Sun will expand & engulf our orbit as the charred ember that was once Earth vaporizes. Have a nice day, :phones:

Buffy



#25 petrushkagoogol

petrushkagoogol

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 404 posts

Posted 30 July 2017 - 09:54 PM

Well, given that Malthusian theory is wrong, the " argument" is moot.  If there is to be a "doomsday scenario, it will be brought about largely by political means.

 

Hunger and fear (of predators) are basic necessities for survival  and politics is a sociological extension of both of these ............... :beer-fresh:


Edited by petrushkagoogol, 30 July 2017 - 09:56 PM.


#26 petrushkagoogol

petrushkagoogol

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 404 posts

Posted 30 July 2017 - 11:45 PM

You do understand what has happened to population growth, right?

 

updated-World-Population-Growth-1750-210

 

 

In 5-billion years the Sun will expand & engulf our orbit as the charred ember that was once Earth vaporizes. Have a nice day, :phones:

Buffy

 

If the world population increases from 7 billion to 8 billion, there are 1 billion more mouths to feed (even if the population growth rate goes down), leading to increased demand for food, and the specter of doomsday becomes more likely ....................  :sherlock:


Edited by petrushkagoogol, 30 July 2017 - 11:50 PM.


#27 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8885 posts

Posted 31 July 2017 - 03:30 PM

If the world population increases from 7 billion to 8 billion, there are 1 billion more mouths to feed (even if the population growth rate goes down), leading to increased demand for food, and the specter of doomsday becomes more likely ....................  :sherlock:

 

The little red squiggly line there? Red so your attention is drawn to it? Means something. If you have questions, please ask! :cheer:

 

By the way, there's no shortage of food in the world today. Some poor distribution, but we actually have way too much food available and in the First World, especially in the US, up to 40% of all food is thrown away.

 

That is, assuming NO GROWTH IN PRODUCTION, that squiggly line says that at least in the US, we will never run out of food. At least not in the next 5-8 generations.

 

 

The older I get the more I realize how simple life is and how complicated we make it, :phones:

Buffy



#28 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 797 posts

Posted 31 July 2017 - 05:02 PM

Hunger and fear (of predators) are basic necessities for survival  and politics is a sociological extension of both of these ............... :beer-fresh:

There is more than hunger and fear to politics, although it may have served as an impetus in the beginnings of tribalism.  Hunger is also a more complex thing than famine.  In famine, you can't eat, whereas with hunger, you may have plenty of food but still want more.  



#29 JMJones0424

JMJones0424

    412.63 ppm

  • Members
  • 1080 posts

Posted 01 August 2017 - 09:22 AM



Hunger and fear (of predators) are basic necessities for survival  and politics is a sociological extension of both of these ............... :beer-fresh:

 

I'll grant you this claim.  However, this is not support for Malthusian theories any more than any other theory.  The Malthusian Theory of Population can be shown to be incorrect with even a cursory examination of the history of food production and population over the last 200 years.

 

You may claim that an increasing human population will affect the global ecosystem in negative ways.  I would not disagree with this claim.  However, if you maintain that Malthusian Theory of Population is an accurate description of reality, then I must disagree, as the last two centuries show that the presumptions he made were utterly unfounded and therefore the conclusions he made were nonsensical.

 

FFS, you opened this thread with a demonstrably false claim.  Food production does not increase arithmetically, and population does not increase geometrically.

 

If you wish to maintain that that which is demonstrably false is true, then you are exhibiting a false belief.  Your false belief isn't a theology until you associate supernatural beings that assert falsehoods and human servants that demand fealty and money in order to support the demonstrably false beliefs.  While there are many adherents to Malthusianism, I know of none that ascribe their demonstrably false beliefs to supernatural origins.  As such, this entire thread belongs somewhere other than in the theology forum.

 

I would argue that it belongs in the silly claims forum, as your claims are silly and historically false, but I am not an administrator.  It is clear that this thread should not be in the theology forum.  It may be appropriate in the Physics and Mathematics forum, if only as an example of an utter lack of understanding of economics.


Edited by JMJones0424, 01 August 2017 - 09:37 AM.