25th November 2009, 07:44 PM
if i am correct
i beleive that if we reduce the carbon foot print, then the simplest way is for us to reinstitute an increase in population in order to supply mannual labour for an elite whom will over see the redistribution of resources along a globalised cultural agenda, so that the elite remain the same.
this will require everyone to become increasingly detached from emotional engagement with children, in order that the household mode of production, is sufficient through many hands make light work, to be compared with a national economic elite, thus the status quo may provide proportional assistance to the monetry income of the socila structured households.
thus we would be lucky if the population does anything other than rise sharply to combat acceptable standards of living, or fall sharply as the world decides that its more efficient to kill a few and carry on.
what do you think?
:face-huh:
i beleive that if we reduce the carbon foot print, then the simplest way is for us to reinstitute an increase in population in order to supply mannual labour for an elite whom will over see the redistribution of resources along a globalised cultural agenda, so that the elite remain the same.
this will require everyone to become increasingly detached from emotional engagement with children, in order that the household mode of production, is sufficient through many hands make light work, to be compared with a national economic elite, thus the status quo may provide proportional assistance to the monetry income of the socila structured households.
thus we would be lucky if the population does anything other than rise sharply to combat acceptable standards of living, or fall sharply as the world decides that its more efficient to kill a few and carry on.
what do you think?
:face-huh:
txt is
Mike
Mike