If you think you have it bad...

[::::BASSIST::::]

Hong Kong's cage homes: Tens of thousands living in 6ft by 2ft rabbit hutches | Mail Online

Reading things like this makes it really hard for me to justify owning multiple expensive amps, cabs and basses.

 

[ADbassman]

Huh, I and the people of Hong Kong have something in common now.

 

[waleross]

Worse than Prison, for sure......................

 

[fourstringdrums]

Huh, I and the people of Hong Kong have something in common now.

Just curious, navy?

I'd say you have it much better.

I was curious what the exchange rate was, and I guess $200 in HK is only about $25 here. Still..

 

[Jim Nazium]

GC: House? You were lucky to have a HOUSE! We used to live in one room, all hundred and twenty-six of us, no furniture. Half the floor was missing; we were all huddled together in one corner for fear of FALLING!

TG: You were lucky to have a ROOM! *We* used to have to live in a corridor!

MP: Ohhhh we used to DREAM of livin' in a corridor! Woulda' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woken up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House!? Hmph.

EI: Well when I say "house" it was only a hole in the ground covered by a piece of tarpolin, but it was a house to US.

GC: We were evicted from *our* hole in the ground; we had to go and live in a lake!

TG: You were lucky to have a LAKE! There were a hundred and sixty of us living in a small shoebox in the middle of the road.

 

[carlthegroover]

I don't want to sound cruel or oversimplifying, but why do they proliferate so much, then? Less people would mean more space to live. Maybe not hugely improved conditions, but better ones for sure.

You reap what you sow, as it's said.

Still, poor people. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.

 

[Kaa]

I don't want to sound cruel or oversimplifying, but why do they proliferate so much, then? Less people would mean more space to live. Maybe not hugely improved conditions, but better ones for sure.

You reap what you sow, as it's said.

Still, poor people. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.

Overpopulation is the root of about 90% of the ills in the world in my opinion.

 

[MatticusMania]

Overpopulation is the root of about 90% of the ills in the world in my opinion.

I dont think its overpopulation so much as it is overvrowding. Roam this country, and you'll find that there is a lot of space not being put to goood use. Its just that everyone wants to live so close to one another.



Or not.

 

[Kaa]

I dont think its overpopulation so much as it is overvrowding. Roam this country, and you'll find that there is a lot of space not being put to goood use. Its just that everyone wants to live so close to one another.



Or not.

Actually that's a valid point Matticus. The question then becomes, how do you defeat the overcrowding without population control?

 

[MatticusMania]

Actually that's a valid point Matticus. The question then becomes, how do you defeat the overcrowding without population control?

Well, overcrowding of urbanized areas is a concern, but I also think that overpopulation is a problem as well. I dont think either one stands alone, really.
One idea towards defeating overcrowding without population control would be, as you'll see in California, developing these more sparse regions into their own urban enviroments.
This is why we see areas like Rancho Cucamonga begin to grow. I think that eventually, as people move further from Metropolitan areas like Los Angeles, we'll see more smaller urban areas spring up stretching outward.

 

[sloasdaylight]

Hong Kong's cage homes: Tens of thousands living in 6ft by 2ft rabbit hutches | Mail Online

Reading things like this makes it really hard for me to justify owning multiple expensive amps, cabs and basses.

Not for me it doesn't.

 

[Kaa]

Well, overcrowding of urbanized areas is a concern, but I also think that overpopulation is a problem as well. I dont think either one stands alone, really.
One idea towards defeating overcrowding without population control would be, as you'll see in California, developing these more sparse regions into their own urban enviroments.
This is why we see areas like Rancho Cucamonga begin to grow. I think that eventually, as people move further from Metropolitan areas like Los Angeles, we'll see more smaller urban areas spring up stretching outward.

And yet, as more people move outward from a centalized metro area, the population backfills right behind them, and, certainly seems to lead to more issues in that area.

If it were a matter of just moving the population around, fine, but we still have to slow/stop the population growth. Also, with population growth under control, you eliminate the nedd for outward movement.

 

[MatticusMania]

And yet, as more people move outward from a centalized metro area, the population backfills right behind them, and, certainly seems to lead to more issues in that area.

If it were a matter of just moving the population around, fine, but we still have to slow/stop the population growth. Also, with population growth under control, you eliminate the nedd for outward movement.

I dont think that controlled population growth eliminates the need for outward movement, as even under control the population is still growing and we need room for those people. But, I do think that controlled population growth might eliminate that backfill you mention, as you wont have people rushing out of the Metropolis, but rather people moving outward slowly as space becomes available.

 

[metron]

Seems like being actually homeless might preferable

 

[MatticusMania]

Seems like being actually homeless might preferable

"Only when youve lost everything are you free to do anything."

 

[Kaa]

I dont think that controlled population growth eliminates the need for outward movement, as even under control the population is still growing and we need room for those people. But, I do think that controlled population growth might eliminate that backfill you mention, as you wont have people rushing out of the Metropolis, but rather people moving outward slowly as space becomes available.

However, since people are also dying everyday, the goal would be to achieve population stability (i.e: one birth=one death). Ideally it would be to go into negative numbers for a couple of decades, then achieve stability.

This would allow us to make the most out of our current resources, without additional movement from the metro areas. Thus keeping the metro areas nicer due to the tax base staying in the area, and being able to support local infrastructure.

 

[MakiSupaStar]

This happens to some degree in every large city. In Tokyo there are people permanently 'camping' in the parks because their job is in Tokyo, but they can't afford to live there. Dudes in suits are homeless.

 

[Kaa]

I agree it's nothing unique to the US.

In fact I'd say overpopulation hits us MUCH, MUCH less than a lot of poorer countries where it could literally mean life or death.

 

[Chebass88]

Wow. Many people would benefit significantly from listening to Professor Albert Bartlett's lectures.

 

[carlthegroover]

Overpopulation is the root of about 90% of the ills in the world in my opinion.

Couldn't agree with you more, man. I think it is hard to counter because it requires each person to actually develop a full sense of control over our basic impulses (mostly, to parent; some, to avoid promiscuity or become sterile before engaging in multiple sexual relationships). Some, in poorer countries, erroneously think that having more children may mean more money in their tables. They also need to be educated about this issue.

I dont think its overpopulation so much as it is overvrowding. Roam this country, and you'll find that there is a lot of space not being put to goood use. Its just that everyone wants to live so close to one another.



Or not.

That too. We tend to overpopulate certain areas and we are compelled not to move on and spread to less habited ones.

One idea towards defeating overcrowding without population control would be, as you'll see in California, developing these more sparse regions into their own urban enviroments.
This is why we see areas like Rancho Cucamonga begin to grow. I think that eventually, as people move further from Metropolitan areas like Los Angeles, we'll see more smaller urban areas spring up stretching outward.

Some would say that that will eventually lead to the dreaded "megalopolis", where huge strips of land in between major cities have been urbanized, overpopulated and overcrowded.

On a less cynical view, this may be a reasonable solution as long as each new urban area has enough autonomy and geographical isolation to truly be a new urban area as opposed to an extension of a big city.