Thanks for the kind words, and for taking the time to go through the article that might have, in some spots, appeared a little dry. …. And happy parenting in N.Z.

You have a special ability James to understand a person as the whole. And then you have great intelligence and vocabulary.

What a wonderful writer you are.

She can put on a blue dress and go looking for a rich country to snare. She has all the ‘natural’ communications skills, conflict resolution et all and empathy with Villages, ‘intuitive’ understanding of ‘differences’ and ‘diversity’ and of course adaptibility. All things that Ivory Tower Economic Philiosophers lack.

And the country to slide up alongside and seek a cocktail from? And a lift home for coffee or a ’snifter’. One that will buy us all everything we need, so eager are they to get in our pants. China comes to mind. After wooing Hu-ever is in charge, with flattery and a low neckline/hem at high-thigh that exposes just enough to attract the eye (and blame afterwards) for the duration of their five year plan, she can ‘merge’ the two great nations, as in the old fashion of Kings. A Trading Bloc is the usual way of course, but with a human face. Cosmeticised.

After getting a firm grip on them and their markets she can then sue in the Internatioonal Court for a divorce and sling all the Chinese out, allowing some to visit Shanghai every other Saturday – as long as they bring their wallets.

Wow, let me get my coffee and I’ll read it.

Thanks.

I agree, unfortunately the subject of overpopulation has become so overwhelmingly politically incorrect, that it has vanished from all media, not just mainstream. It is a concern that should be addressed, as it is one that we inevitably will be forced to confront, and some are already there.

Note: http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/04/overpopulation-earths-challenge.html

Looking forward to your thoughts on it.

My biggest beef with economists is that they have a huge blind spot – something that they absolutely will not consider, and that’s the consequences of overpopulation. Since the seeming failure of Malthus’ theory about overpopulation and food shortages and the resulting black eye given economists by other scientists who mocked them for wringing their hands while they went to work and solved the problem (or did they?), economists refuse to ever again consider the subject. That’s a pity because they’re missing the most dominant factor behind so many of our world’s problems.

For example, if they’d open their minds to the subject, they may see the relationship between population density and per capita consumption, and the effects of rising unemployment and poverty when population density becomes extreme, and what happens when a nation like the U.S. tries to trade freely with one that is grossly overpopulated (which is actually the root cause of our economic melt-down).

Economists need to get over the whole Malthus thing, stop entertaining themselves with things like “game theory,” and take a hard look at what’s going on around them.

… you might then enjoy this one:

“Such a severe depression and banking crisis could not have been achieved by normal civil servants and politicians, it required economists’ involvement.”