Tuesday, July 21, 2009


Hades, even the Space Shuttle is an old 70s invention, yet we tout it as a Baby Boomer invention.

Look around, almost everything we have in our house /office [except smaller versions] was invented prior to the 80s: this includes plasma TVs, PCs, internet, LCDs, ultrasound, microcircuits, etc, etc....the internal combustion engine was a 1900 invention and we argue if the Japanese do better than the Americans remaking this antique system.

Even today's PhDs aren't publishing like they did in the 60s and 70s. So why have we apparently almost stopped inventing in America?

I believe its because over-crowded nations don't have the "hope" and "dreams" that people have when they have clean air and open spaces. Kids in the 60s and the 70s grew up on like acre lots or more; while some of today's kids live in home owners associations with homes 8' apart [if they're lucky]....a massive chunk of kids today are crammed in 2 bdrm apartments with a single parent barely making it.

More proof of my substantiated allegation is the World Economic Forum's (WEF's) 2007 Rankings of countries in technological innovation. America used to be number one, but with all its recent population growth, has dropped down to #7. That's not bad [Japan's #19, India's #44, Mexico's #49 and China's #59]. But, dinky Denmark is #1 and almost all the top ten slots were grabbed by European countries; i.e., countries that controlled population growth!

I'll give you this historical WEF website reference:


The URL above probably won't work anymore and they stopped tracking population technological rankings at 2007....my guess is America isn't in the top ten anymore with all its population growth and the WEF Rankings are also an apparent embarrassment to globalists outsourcing to Asian countries.

I saved it this Overpopulation website, anticipating the "globalist politics" clouding/mitigating free thought [just scroll down to my 6/26/08 entree].

1 comment:

Pete Murphy said...

The biggest obstacle we face in changing attitudes toward overpopulation is economists. Since the field of economics was branded "the dismal science" after Malthus' theory, economists have been adamant that they would never again consider the subject of overpopulation and continue to insist that man is ingenious enough to overcome any obstacle to further growth. This is why world leaders continue to ignore population growth in the face of mounting challenges like peak oil, global warming and a whole host of other environmental and resource issues. They believe we'll always find technological solutions that allow more growth.

But because they are blind to population growth, there's one obstacle they haven't considered: the finiteness of space available on earth. The very act of using space more efficiently creates a problem for which there is no solution: it inevitably begins to drive down per capita consumption and, consequently, per capita employment, leading to rising unemployment and poverty.

If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit either of my web sites at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com or PeteMurphy.wordpress.com where you can read the preface, join in the blog discussion and, of course, buy the book if you like.

Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph, but I don't know how else to inject this new theory into the debate about overpopulation without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.

Pete Murphy
Author, "Five Short Blasts"