What is the end result of "growing the economy?" In the end it almost seems useless to do so because an economic growth doesn't have anywhere to go but down and in the process of completing a cycle we deplete our resources. Is fictional money really more important than keeping a small world population and preserving our resources?
>>74872470
>little stick people overpopulating the Earth
>all white
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>74872470
Accumulating wealth for the elites until the game can't be played anymore and they "cash out" somehow
>>74872470
Malthusian scaremongers have a bad track record.
>>74873657
>cash out somehow
the elite will free themselves of the yoke of biological existence. their minds will be uploaded to powerful, space-based servers until such time as the earth can be safely populated once more.
>>74872470
Like most people you don't understand what wealth is. Wealth is created, there are no limits to how much wealth can be created. More people means you can have more people generating wealth through productive labor. Also the earth has enormous resources, we haven't even scratched the surface depleting it. Even if we did you can endlessly mine resources outside the planet.
>>74874348
all we need is one hero janitor to trip over the power cord.
>>74874560
This. Honestly, the biggest thing that /pol/ gets wrong over and over and over again is viewing wealth as a zero sum game. If that could change as a general mindset, predictions would seriously improve accuracy here.
>>74874560
Idiot, wealth doesn't exist!
Only labor exists and the rich exploit it to feed, clothe, and surround themselves with empty luxuries.
No wonder this board is so blue pilled. Nobody has read Marx!
>>74872663
Overpopulation is the single worst thing happening to the human race.
Something will happen soon to curb it.
Case A: War obliterates nearly the entire human race
Case B: A disease eradicates nearly the entire human race
Case C: Starvation
Case D: Water goes awa - Mad Max style
Case E: Aliens wipe us out
Case F: Resources run low, few governments horde resources as the rest collapse through an uprising and billions die
Case G (BEST CASE SCENARIO): We limit every family to NO MORE than two children.
>>74874908
this is what idiots really believe
>>74874908
Overpopulation wouldn't even be a problem in the developed world, if it weren't for immigration. Good luck telling Africans, Arabs, Indians and others to stop having children.
>>74872470
>falling for the malthusian trap meme
>>74872470
>>74874908
>>74875168
Overpopulation doesn't exist, overcrowding does. Read up.
https://www.pop.org/content/debunking-myth-overpopulation
>>74872470
Everyone knows overpopulation is bullshit.
>>74875390
>Overpopulation doesn't exist, overcrowding does. Read up.
this.. most of the world is empty space.. people just like to crowd into the same spaces.. like sheep.
>>74872470
buy it now
>>74875390
Overpopulation does exist, retard. It's an obvious outcome for any exponentially growing populace.
The solution is easy: purge the useless bits in the population
>>74872470
are you retarded?
serious question here, you are even ahmurrican, and you question growing the economy?
growth of economy results in raising the standard of living.
look at a country with a shitty economy and see what an average person there can afford, and how much he makes in comparison to your country.
depletion of our resources is far from becoming a reality, not to mention every goverment in europe subsidizing the shit out of "environment friendly" energy and the like.
and finally the myth of world overpopulation.
2012 population of europe 740 million, north america 351 million, out of 7 billion, not to mention various shitskins littering both continents. so in conclusion there is less than 1 billion of whites in the whole wide world. 1/3 of that young, 1/3 of them old (approximation). 330 million young adults and adults. 150 million of them women. if you are a white male 15-40 years of age you are in the 2% of world population.
so please, stop being a retard.
>>74876010
>>74874560
>>74874713
Wealth is almost the same as power and power is a zero sum game, and it's becoming ever more concentrated.
>>74876135
This is not true.
>What is the end result of "growing the economy?"
Flush toilets
I want to POO in a LOO
>>74872470
when the economy stop growing, inflation starts
>>74876175
>>What is the end result of "growing the economy?"
rich get richer poor get poorer
>>74874908
Overpopulation is a leftist meme
I bet you vote Jill Stein or Bernie "Prep The Bull" Sanders
>>74875801
and this is how it have to be. with the current ammount of population we are already fucking the world
niggers are going to reproduce themselves into violently out-of-hand epidemics, starvation, and wars as civil white societies continue to grow more efficient and rich.
this is all in africa. that is where overpopulation is taking place and the carrying capacity of the environment has been overridden. the fact that no wants wants, knows how, or needs to grow food thanks to external subsidies is going to make it all the more worse when aid organization's abilities to prop up these sad little countries wavers.
fortunately they now all know they can just go to europe
the mediterranean might well be able to be walked across in under a decade here due to all the floating, bloated corpses of arabs and blacks
good night niggers
>>74876239
Feel the Bern
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFoix9NbrfM
#MakeAmericaVenezuelaAgain
>>74874908
Overpopulation literally will never happen. Birth rates are below what they need to be to make our current population stable. The only reason any first world country is increasing in population is that a) increased lifespan and b) immigrants. When a society becomes sufficiently developed, the culture ALWAYS shifts and the citizens decide that having kids is too much of a burden. Outside of butthole Africa the world's population is only set to increase 10% over the next century, and then decline.
Overpopulation is a boogeyman. This is honestly redpill 101 and if you aren't aware of this then you shouldn't be posting on /pol/.
>>74876130
Can't believe how many retards there are on this board that think the earth has infinite resources.
It takes about 2 seconds of thought to recognize that this is a real problem.
>"But we're not out of resources yet, so who cares?"
We don't want to be out! We don't want to be almost out!. Stupid faggots.
>>74876768
>restricting yourself to just the earth's resources
It's like you want to die
>>74876635
>Thinks dindus will ever stop reproducing.
Yea, real redpill. Just send them our money and they'll stop having babies! They promise!
>>74876768
oh really you dumb fuck?
http://fortune.com/2016/05/11/germany-excess-power/
funny how you haven't heard about this.
>>74876885
Playing too much stellaris bro. That's a pipe dream.
>>74876768
And it's monkey-brained simpletons like yourself that doesn't realize that in 100 years we'll have colonies on the moon, and maybe mars. There's a whole asteroid belt ready to be mined.
And while your bloodline will have long died out from guilt the rest of humanity will spread out amongst the stars.
>>74877217
It'll happen a long time before we run out of resources naturally on Earth.
>>74877193
Hurrr there's a local surplus somewhere, that means there's infinite energy!
>>74877263
>I have a speculative theory about what the future will be like, therefore we shouldn't worry about maintaining the resources we have.
There are a million ideas about what the future looks like. Most of the time, people who guess are wrong.
This is just dumb nigger think. Don't worry be happy.
>>74877193
because clearly energy is the only fucking resource that anyone needs ever.
kys
>>74875889
It's time to stop posting Max Keiser
>>74876010
This is just wrong. Some well know historical sociologist (some anon, help me with his name!) predicted that people would grow exponentially to a linear growth farming capability. He predicted:
>1 unit of food will be generated for 1 person
>2 units of food will be generated for 2 people
>3 units of food will be generated for 4 people
>4 units of food will be generated for 9 people
>5 units of food will be generated for 16 people
Turned out he was wrong and people's ability to grow food was faster.
The same will be true for any other resource.
>>74877288
literally every government in europe is subsidizing "green" and "environment friendly" energy. there are literally political parties in every country called something along "greens" and the like that promote such things as their primary political goal.
germany will reach 100% green energy production in like 50 years, says the estimate.
>>74876768
The thing about exponential growth and doubling times is that everything seems well and dandy up until the resources actually run out.
>>74877720
seriously. please fucking kill youself.
>>74877602
oh, so the billions of africans and piss poor asians need the oil, oh and the coal too, right?
not to mention the depletion of said resources will make a huge impact. not only is the depletion of resources so far in the future nobody even cares, the modern world will make the necessary preparations to minimize the impact.
see: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/06/teslas-model-3-orders-are-through-the-roof-heres-what-that-means-for-the-planet/
when the time comes and our dearest resources are depleted it won't even matter.
>>74874560
Nothing is created. You just change things into other things.
>>74877838
whoa, nice counter argument there, if i didn't know any better, i'd say you don't have one.
>>74872470
Ah, you have stepped up from thinking nationally and thinking globally, of perhaps universally, about said subject, good.
Let's see what your next step is, will you announce it in the thread, at the end?
>>74877720
"Green Energy" isn't infinite either. We can't make infinite solar panels; They eventually wear out. They rely on special semiconductors that are a limited resource.
We can't make infinite plastics. There's a hard limit on energy we can get per day, and we're currently approaching a significant percentage of that.
>>74877730
Exactly this.
The second law of thermodynamics shows that infinite growth is not possible.
Eventually we will hit a hard limit.
Before then, we may find ourselves up against diminishing returns, when the cost of obtaining further resources - most likely energy - becomes greater than the yield.
Mining asteroids is unlikely to be efficient in the short-term, and we may find we hit energy limits before we are able to do it.
The various developed and developing nations will not play nicely where the last natural resources are concerned. When oil starts to run out, the petrochemical fertilisers that we rely on to support our farming will mean starvation.
Tl;dr - while we may not hit a theoretical limit, we will hit a practical limit sooner than you think. And it will be unpleasant when we do.
>>74878079
true, but we don't only harness the sun, but the wind, the rivers soon even the tide of the sea.
nuclear energy is an option too, the only problem being disposal of the nuclear waste.
if you're not pilled on this, get out more. even adjacent to highly crowded areas, the world is mostly empty space. when you get rural, it literally is. overpop will never be an actual issue. with the way civilized peoples breed, if we ever get the world civilized, it will never even be .0000000000003 percent of an actual issue. for human purposes, space on earth is infinite.
>>74878299
The wind and sea are driven mainly by the sun though.
I'm not saying we're out of options. I'm saying we're approaching the point where we should be seriously considering the problem.
>>74876168
George Soros has more power in his left foot than everyone on this board combined. The grand delusion of modern plebs, even the so called "red pilled", is that our society in any way benefits you. The economy, the laws, all of it is not built with you or me in mind. It's built for people like Soros - and neither of us will ever be close to his company.
>>74878580
Life in Norway must be hard.
>>74878299
Nuclear waste doesn't even exist with fusion based energy.
>>74878636
>Nuclear waste doesn't even exist with fusion based energy.
Of course it does. The sun is extremely radioactive, so would be any fusion core.
>>74878257
well, if we are being hypothetical, then the developed nations will overpower everyone else.
when you take into consideration, for instance the west, which comprises of little less than 1 billion people (NA around 350m and europe 750m i'm saying less that 1b because of the immigration.) and take into consideration the downward birth rate, suddenly you don't need much at all to keep everything running smoothly.
something tells me when the time comes, the west is gonna weather the storm better than anyone else involved.
>>74872470
White people is not the problem of overpopulation y'know
Just 100 years ago retards like some in this thread argued that we would run out of wood because they couldn't conceive that a more convenient system was going to be discovered.
By the time we run out of a resource, its prohibitive price will have made it so alternative solutions, which perhaps are not so convenient, have replaced them, because they become more economically viable than the resource which is becoming expensive as fuck. The last petrol barrel will be sold by 0$ because by then nobody will give a fuck about petrol.
Besides, the amount of waste generated by companies goes down and down as we progress scientifically, everything has an use nowadays and we're much better at managing resources.
If we consider all this and how we're already looking out of this planet for resources and potential ways to extract them, I seriously doubt any of us or the upcoming 100 generations know what missing a resource feels like.
>>74872470
For prosperity, fampai. That's really what the goal is. Overpopulation is only really a spectre when there is no technology to deal with it.
>>74878036
How can creation be real if creating isn't?
>>74877702
Malthus.
>>74878769
Fision does. Not fusion.
http://m.phys.org/news/2016-02-scientists-germany-nuclear-fusion.html
Resource depletion is a major issue if you want a high quality of life, of course we could have a huger population but we would all be living like in commie blocks eating GMO soy products. People seem to think that technology will save us when technology is the reason we use so many resources in the first place
Soil quality loss, erosion, desertification, diminishing returns on pesticide use... Malthus wasn't wrong, he was just ahead of his time
>>74879042
Magical thinking. The fact that we've been lucky enough to make use of new resources doesn't imply it's going to continue to happen.
>>74879282
I'll say it again: Any fusion core is going to be highly radioactive. It doesn't rely on uranium, so you won't have depleted uranium at the end...
but anything you use to shield your electronics from the huge blasts of radiation produced by the fusion core is going to be completely irradiated. It will be extremely radioactive and will have to be disposed of in some special way.
>>74877702
>This is just wrong. Some well know historical sociologist (some anon, help me with his name!) predicted that people would grow exponentially to a linear growth farming capability. He predicted:
I'm not basing my thoughts on that. I'm basing my thoughts on the hard energy limits that our planet is subject to.
We will find ways to use a higher percentage of what we're getting, but it's obvious that there's a limit.
>>74878769
Fission power creates extremely radioactive heavy element byproducts like Plutonium.
Fusion power fuses hydrogen atoms into helium, with byproducts of heat and helium.
A hypothetical fusion reactor would be radioactive, but at levels comparable to a fission reactor, and the long-term radioactivity of the irradiated materials would be thousands of years less than materials from a fission reactor.
The Sun is an uncontained continuous nuclear explosion that runs by transmuting more mass than the Earth every day for the last five billion years.
The scale and situation is so different there isn't really any comparison to be made.
>>74877702
>we live in a world of infinite resources
toppest kek
>>74880100
>The scale and situation is so different there isn't really any comparison to be made.
That's where we got the idea for a fusion reactor though. It comes from that comparison.
>>74872470
No, that's idiotic. Does a $400 iPhone in 2016 need more resources than, say, a refrigerator that (adjusted for inflation) cost the same in 1950? Of course not. The rate of resource usage is falling fast. "Growing the economy" is a weird metaphor that is misleading in many ways, but the problems with economic growth have nothing to do with resources.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oil-exploration-idUSKCN0YE1F5
>Oil discoveries sink to lowest since 1952: Morgan Stanley
>Including the United States, where the rapid expansion of the onshore shale industry unlocked major resources over the past decade, global discoveries rose to 12.1 billion figure - but still the lowest since 1952, when the oil industry was one-seventh of its current size
>Despite a big increase in exploration spending since the start of the decade, when oil demand rapidly rose, there have been few major hydrocarbon discoveries
>BP last week announced the surprise departure of its exploration boss, and a shift in its oil search strategy that is focusing mainly on expanding existing fields rather than venturing expensively into the unknown
m-muh infinite resources
>>74872470
The jews don't care about your quality of life. They're sitting in their mansions with their mountains of shekels that can purchase infinite goods and labor of any sort they could ever want.
>ctrl f climate refugees
>0 results found
oh /pol/
>>74877720
But see, all those green technologies and their government subsidies do nothing to cover the needs we have created using cheap energy, and they probably never will. Not to mention the fact that those supposedly clean energy sources are hardly ever clean. Like looking at small engines in hybrids creating just as much emissions as larger engines and li-ion batteries being so detrimental to make
>>74878071
Kill all niggers
There's 2 options my friend.
1. We continue growing until the end of time, leaving Earth to exploit more resources.
2. We never manage to leave and end up trapped here in a permenant medievil era until a mass extinction event fuck us over.
>>74880689
They can become software engineers and contribute to the ever expanding GDP, arable land is just a meme
>>74878536
Space is not the biggest issue. It's the density of rare elements that the few people that are on earth use so much of
>>74872470
the moment someone innovates and makes a motor that consumes half the ammount of oil with the same outputs, suddenly oil resources would have been doubled!
Do you actually get what a resource is?
ofc no, you're an uneducated stupid beast
>>74880274
It's the same principle of creating incredible heat and pressure to cause hydrogen atoms to fuse into helium.
A fusion reactor is not self-sustaining, it is completely contained and shielded, it does not include billions of kilograms of heavy element contamination in the fusion process, it does not produce its own high energy magnetic field, etc.
The point is that while a star operates on the same principle, you can't really compare the end result when one is on a scale billions of billions times larger than the other. It's like grinding two stones together to simulate an earthquake.
>>74880314
An iPhone, like most modern electronics, does require small amounts of a variety of very scarce and expensive rare earth metals.
>>74880397
As it says right there in the article, even in the parts you quoted, oil companies are not venturing new expensive explorations because almost all of them are in shitter since the value of oil has crashed over the past year. Many are struggling just to keep normal operations going, they don't have spare millions to go prospecting.
>>74881732
No it says that even in the past 10 years, when oil prices have been the highest ever, they still had trouble finding new deposits
>>74881832
>Oil discoveries in 2015 fell to their lowest since 1952 as energy companies slashed exploration budgets in the wake of the oil price fall
>The sharp drop in oil prices over the past two years has led companies including Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell to sharply reduce budgets, particularly for exploration
>BP last week announced ... a shift in its oil search strategy that is focusing mainly on expanding existing fields rather than venturing expensively into the unknown
>"The return on exploration dollars spent has clearly deteriorated in recent years. On top of this, oil companies increasingly need to consider scenarios for oil demand in which there may not be much need for further exploration."
I wonder what the author considers a "major" discovery when they don't mention the fact that shale tech has effectively doubled usable oil supply in the US alone.
>>74880397
Oil prices are down
It is not worthwhile to explore more expensive ways to mine oil
We are probably less than 50 years away from a renewable oil alternative anyway. It is at least one good thing the liberals are going to do.
We have finite resources, but god damn do we have a shit ton of them. We would turn the entire earth grey with industry and construction before we've run out of resources. By that time we'll be colonizing space and mining asteroids.
>>74881595
Yes, and then everyone drives twice as much, because after all, it is much more efficient now!
>>74882328
Shale is not conventional oil.
