Bernie’s World

[Moonglow]

….and how the Democrat Party is in a fight on this day whether to being an American political party, or to take up permanent residence in Bernie’s world.

And what that means for America.



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.




But first, jump to this week, a result of the factors that created Bernie's World....

1.“This past weekend, Americans learned of another mass shooting, …

Every American asks why. What was the killer’s motive? When we read there is “no known motive,” we are frustrated. Human beings want to make sense of life, especially of evil.

Liberals (in this regard, liberals’ views are essentially the same as leftists’) are virtually united in ascribing these shootings to guns. America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, who has a Ph.D. in criminology and is the director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, Mass Murder in the United States: A History.

Duwe’s data reveal: In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than ten mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased two and a half times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, the New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything, has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would.

And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse and much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?"
Why So Many Mass Shootings? | National Review



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.

What happened during and since Bernie’s time?


Explained in this thread….

You know Bernie is neither a Democrat nor a liberal, right, cut and paste Queen?

She cares not when pigeon holing.

 

[Penelope]

….and how the Democrat Party is in a fight on this day whether to being an American political party, or to take up permanent residence in Bernie’s world.

And what that means for America.



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.




But first, jump to this week, a result of the factors that created Bernie's World....

1.“This past weekend, Americans learned of another mass shooting, …

Every American asks why. What was the killer’s motive? When we read there is “no known motive,” we are frustrated. Human beings want to make sense of life, especially of evil.

Liberals (in this regard, liberals’ views are essentially the same as leftists’) are virtually united in ascribing these shootings to guns. America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, who has a Ph.D. in criminology and is the director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, Mass Murder in the United States: A History.

Duwe’s data reveal: In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than ten mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased two and a half times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, the New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything, has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would.

And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse and much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?"
Why So Many Mass Shootings? | National Review



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.

What happened during and since Bernie’s time?


Explained in this thread….

and the crime bill that banned assault weapons expired in 2004. What does this have to do with Bernie?

Since the world is so mess up and men seem to have so many issues, its a good thing to ban assault weapons and over 10 cartridge magazines.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia

As even you can see, the graph verifies the OP.

As for Bernie's world......stay with the thread.

So I don't need to talk about Bernie,

but don't you think since men have so many issues, they should renew the assault weapons ban of 1994??

 

[PoliticalChic]

….and how the Democrat Party is in a fight on this day whether to being an American political party, or to take up permanent residence in Bernie’s world.

And what that means for America.



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.




But first, jump to this week, a result of the factors that created Bernie's World....

1.“This past weekend, Americans learned of another mass shooting, …

Every American asks why. What was the killer’s motive? When we read there is “no known motive,” we are frustrated. Human beings want to make sense of life, especially of evil.

Liberals (in this regard, liberals’ views are essentially the same as leftists’) are virtually united in ascribing these shootings to guns. America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, who has a Ph.D. in criminology and is the director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, Mass Murder in the United States: A History.

Duwe’s data reveal: In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than ten mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased two and a half times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, the New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything, has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would.

And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse and much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?"
Why So Many Mass Shootings? | National Review



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.

What happened during and since Bernie’s time?


Explained in this thread….

You know Bernie is neither a Democrat nor a liberal, right, cut and paste Queen?

Amazing at how truly stupid you are not to recognize how diaphanous your lie is.


Everyone.....EVERYONE.....knows which party the Marxist/Communist belongs to.


And, the astute know that there is less than a 6° of separation between Liberals and Communists, you dunce.
Both stand for this:

The collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.



DSA Sings the Internationale 2017







Thanks for helping prove that I am never wrong.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

 

[Penelope]

I still say over population creates a multitude of evils.

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

 

[Sunsettommy]

….and how the Democrat Party is in a fight on this day whether to being an American political party, or to take up permanent residence in Bernie’s world.

And what that means for America.



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.




But first, jump to this week, a result of the factors that created Bernie's World....

1.“This past weekend, Americans learned of another mass shooting, …

Every American asks why. What was the killer’s motive? When we read there is “no known motive,” we are frustrated. Human beings want to make sense of life, especially of evil.

Liberals (in this regard, liberals’ views are essentially the same as leftists’) are virtually united in ascribing these shootings to guns. America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, who has a Ph.D. in criminology and is the director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, Mass Murder in the United States: A History.

Duwe’s data reveal: In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than ten mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased two and a half times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, the New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything, has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would.

And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse and much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?"
Why So Many Mass Shootings? | National Review



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.

What happened during and since Bernie’s time?


Explained in this thread….

This liberal has firearms in his house and has all his life, and my kids have guns and have all their lives, yet the propaganda you post claims that all liberals have the same views as the Democrats which is untrue , it is another syllogistic fallacy that Policlickbait always tries to post.

I know of democrats who are avid hunters, also support the second amendment.

 

[PoliticalChic]

….and how the Democrat Party is in a fight on this day whether to being an American political party, or to take up permanent residence in Bernie’s world.

And what that means for America.



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.




But first, jump to this week, a result of the factors that created Bernie's World....

1.“This past weekend, Americans learned of another mass shooting, …

Every American asks why. What was the killer’s motive? When we read there is “no known motive,” we are frustrated. Human beings want to make sense of life, especially of evil.

Liberals (in this regard, liberals’ views are essentially the same as leftists’) are virtually united in ascribing these shootings to guns. America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, who has a Ph.D. in criminology and is the director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, Mass Murder in the United States: A History.

Duwe’s data reveal: In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than ten mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased two and a half times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, the New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything, has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would.

And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse and much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?"
Why So Many Mass Shootings? | National Review



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.

What happened during and since Bernie’s time?


Explained in this thread….

and the crime bill that banned assault weapons expired in 2004. What does this have to do with Bernie?

Since the world is so mess up and men seem to have so many issues, its a good thing to ban assault weapons and over 10 cartridge magazines.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia

As even you can see, the graph verifies the OP.

As for Bernie's world......stay with the thread.

So I don't need to talk about Bernie,

but don't you think since men have so many issues, they should renew the assault weapons ban of 1994??

Why do you Leftists always attempt to change the subject?

Is it because you lose every time????

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I still say over population creates a multitude of evils.

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Why 10% of the worlds population doesnt have clean water? Their liberal dictatorship of a country doesnt want them to have either clean water or food, it is the dictators who give out the rations of food and water, that keeps the people on the plantation. Which is what will happen if the socialists of this country ever get control..You can count on that..

 

[Sunsettommy]

….and how the Democrat Party is in a fight on this day whether to being an American political party, or to take up permanent residence in Bernie’s world.

And what that means for America.



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.




But first, jump to this week, a result of the factors that created Bernie's World....

1.“This past weekend, Americans learned of another mass shooting, …

Every American asks why. What was the killer’s motive? When we read there is “no known motive,” we are frustrated. Human beings want to make sense of life, especially of evil.

Liberals (in this regard, liberals’ views are essentially the same as leftists’) are virtually united in ascribing these shootings to guns. America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, who has a Ph.D. in criminology and is the director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, Mass Murder in the United States: A History.

Duwe’s data reveal: In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than ten mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased two and a half times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, the New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything, has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would.

And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse and much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?"
Why So Many Mass Shootings? | National Review



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.

What happened during and since Bernie’s time?


Explained in this thread….

Classic Liberalism began to die in the 1960's, allowing leftists/socialists to infiltrate the party, eventually pushed George McGovern a socialist nut into a run for the White House.

 

[mudwhistle]

I still say over population creates a multitude of evils.

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

Large cartridge/mags means anything over one round.
So Muskets are good to go.

 

[Third Party]

I still say over population creates a multitude of evils.

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

First, who wants to live in Texas, next, the ones without drinking water would not have a problem if they weren't here. Third, I was severely affected by Soylent Green as a young man.

 

[PoliticalChic]

….and how the Democrat Party is in a fight on this day whether to being an American political party, or to take up permanent residence in Bernie’s world.

And what that means for America.



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.




But first, jump to this week, a result of the factors that created Bernie's World....

1.“This past weekend, Americans learned of another mass shooting, …

Every American asks why. What was the killer’s motive? When we read there is “no known motive,” we are frustrated. Human beings want to make sense of life, especially of evil.

Liberals (in this regard, liberals’ views are essentially the same as leftists’) are virtually united in ascribing these shootings to guns. America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, who has a Ph.D. in criminology and is the director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, Mass Murder in the United States: A History.

Duwe’s data reveal: In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than ten mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased two and a half times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, the New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything, has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would.

And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse and much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?"
Why So Many Mass Shootings? | National Review



It all changed during Bernie’s formative years…..just before and during the 60s.

What happened during and since Bernie’s time?


Explained in this thread….

You know Bernie is neither a Democrat nor a liberal, right, cut and paste Queen?

It is amusing to those of us with an education, that dunces like this still try to hide the close and intimate connections between Communists, Bolsheviks, and Socialists with Democrats, Liberals and Progressives.

Peas in a pod.

Of course Bernie is a communist......and so are the Democrats.



"The media and the Democrats vilify Trump as a Hitler, a fascist, a racist, a misogynist, a homophobe and so forth. What is more, they do not approve of his hair. Interestingly, they do not disparage him as a Stalin, a Castro or a communist. Why do they not dip into their arsenal of dread phraseology to call him a Stalinist, a Castro or a communist? Is it because they still see these comrades as the good guys? Do they perceive communists as liberals without the red tape? What Henry Wallace once called liberals in a hurry.

What is more, now that the latest edition of Democrat is coming out as a socialist I guess they have all the more reason to stay clear of calling Trump a communist or a Stalin or a Castro. These Democrats are at least Stalinists in the economic sense, and they can always adopt the one-partyism and militarism later."
Who You Callin' Fascist?



FDR was pro-totalitarian, and his greatest decision was whether to bring Adolph or Stalin to the prom.
" Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 48



And today, the Left is still following FDR's lead.....and the dumbest ones imagine they can hide this.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I still say over population creates a multitude of evils.

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

First, who wants to live in Texas, next, the ones without drinking water would not have a problem if they weren't here. Third, I was severely affected by Soylent Green as a young man.

A taste for Soylent Green????

Then you probably know that every day, 400 of the 'greatest generation' pass on.

 

[Third Party]

I still say over population creates a multitude of evils.

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

First, who wants to live in Texas, next, the ones without drinking water would not have a problem if they weren't here. Third, I was severely affected by Soylent Green as a young man.

A taste for Soylent Green????

Then you probably know that every day, 400 of the 'greatest generation' pass on.

I thought it was 300, but ok. Someday I'll debate that 'greatest generation' moniker, but for now I actually did eat something labeled soylent green-too bland to remember, but the crowds, the crowds.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Bernie’s generation took a turn to the Left, away from America’s founding.




4. Couldn’t they have been corralled, checked, controlled?
Nope…too many of ‘em.



One interesting explanation involves the numbers of individual coming of age at the time, who must be civilized by their families, schools, and churches. A particularly large wave may swamp the institutions responsible for teaching traditions and standards.

“Rathenau called [this] ‘the vertical invasion of the barbarians.’” Jose Ortega y Gasset, “The Revolt of the Masses,” p. 53.
The baby boomers were a generation so large that they formed their own culture.
The generation from 1922-1947 numbered 43.6 million, while that of 1946-1964 had 79 million. Would it surprise anyone if this culture was opposed to that of their parents?




5.The human attempt for self-gratification is usually kept in check, within bounds, by religion, morality, law, and, by the necessity to work hard based on the fear of want. Much of the former was removed by the French Revolution, and in modern America, and another restriction was removed by the rising affluence of the last century; suppressed by WWI, and then by the Depression, but released by the 9-year expansion of the 1960’s.
The effect of affluence was increased, multiplied, by the fact that parents, who had known the hardships of the Depression, and WWII, were determined to give their children every comfort that they could.

A leader of SDS wrote :” Without thinking about it, we all took the fat of the land for granted.”
Todd Gitlin, “The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage,” p. 104



Rage fueled by money, unlike previous generations, they cared not that either lack of study, or unacceptable behavior, as barriers in their futures.


Voilà ..we had Bernie’s World.

And we are suffering the results of it to this day.

 

[Penelope]

I still say over population creates a multitude of evils.

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

Large cartridge/mags means anything over one round.
So Muskets are good to go.

10 cartridge mags. If only you men would not have such insane issues.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

Large cartridge/mags means anything over one round.
So Muskets are good to go.

10 cartridge mags. If only you men would not have such insane issues.

It appears that the essence of this thread is either too painful or too erudite for you.


Democrats/Liberals attempt to switch topics more frequently than the Kama Sutra recommends.

 

[mudwhistle]

Be specific.

Worldwide, there is no overpopulation.

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

Large cartridge/mags means anything over one round.
So Muskets are good to go.

10 cartridge mags. If only you men would not have such insane issues.

Ten is the smallest mag they make for an AR-15.
Most semi-auto pistols hold 15.

 

[Penelope]

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

Large cartridge/mags means anything over one round.
So Muskets are good to go.

10 cartridge mags. If only you men would not have such insane issues.

Ten is the smallest mag they make for an AR-15.
Most semi-auto pistols hold 15.

I want to ban AR15 and do they make 5 cartridges for pistols? That would be fine, gives a bad shot a shooting chance in a home invasion. Hunting rifles are different.

 

[Penelope]

The most recent reports also show that about 783 million people, which are about 10% of the world population, are lacking access to quality drinking water.

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

Large cartridge/mags means anything over one round.
So Muskets are good to go.

10 cartridge mags. If only you men would not have such insane issues.

It appears that the essence of this thread is either too painful or too erudite for you.


Democrats/Liberals attempt to switch topics more frequently than the Kama Sutra recommends.

No issues with it, as most conservatives are mass shooters and male. What does Bernie have to do with this topic about guns.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And how is that related to overpopulation?



Have you seen this?

"The entire world population could fit in the state of Texas and it’d only have the population density of New York City!
1. People freak out all the time about how we’re overpopulating Earth and we’re all going to die, because we can’t sustain ourselves. There isn’t enough land to produce enough food to sustain us, let alone have any space to move around at all. There are 6.8 billion people on Earth.
2. Calculations show that if we wanted to make everyone in Earth live on a space that had the same population density as New York City, we could fit everyone in about 666,265 square kilometers, which is less than the size of Texas!
3. Not only does that leave the other 49 United States open, but it leaves all the other countries clear and open, too. So, it is pretty safe to say that we have enough space, the entire world except Texas, to farm and ranch for our food supply.
4. Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to servehttp://www.omgfacts.com/lists/10333/The-entire-world-population-could-fit-in-the-state-of-Texas-and-it-d-only-have-the-population-density-of-New-York-City

"If it comes down to the numbers the entire world’s population can fit in Texas. This has been said many times and when it comes down to basic math, it is true. Texas is 268,581 Square miles, if some amazing engineer were to design the father of all complexes; basically a China housing unit on steroids is the only thing that would work. The building would cover the entire state of Texas. Rivers, ponds, and creeks included; literally every square inch of Texas would be engulfed in this building. There would be one thousand square feet per person." The Entire World Population can Sink into the State of Texas


"According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft).

So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth." Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth - Overpopulation is a myth


Well, the initial calculation was done by Thomas Sowell in 1984, when the world's population was 4.4 billion.http://www.carlopelanda.com/econaut/...n%20Growth.htm

Quote:

In 1984, it was proven by the economist Thomas Sowell that the entire world population (4.4 billion at the time) could live comfortably in the state of Texas. He wrote “Every human being on the face of the Earth could be housed in the state of Texas in one-story, single-family homes, each with a front and a back yard. A family of four would thus have 6,800 square feet- about the size of the typical middle-class American home with front and backyards.”(Carter 99) According to more recent research on the topic, all of the world’s 1997 population (5.84 billion) could fit on the small Island of Bali in Indonesia.(Stiefel 98)

According to my rough calculations, if we assume a world population of 6.7 billion, all the people in the world could fit into Texas and occupy an area of ~1,118 sq. ft. each.

Typical marxists. Take away the guns. Get your totalitarian on.

We do not want your guns, just the assault weapons and large cartridges. Gee you got it all wrong again.

Large cartridge/mags means anything over one round.
So Muskets are good to go.

10 cartridge mags. If only you men would not have such insane issues.

It appears that the essence of this thread is either too painful or too erudite for you.


Democrats/Liberals attempt to switch topics more frequently than the Kama Sutra recommends.

No issues with it, as most conservatives are mass shooters and male. What does Bernie have to do with this topic about guns.

Check the title, dunce.

It isn't 'guns.'