Adam L. Beberg
Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:07:16 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Clay Shirky wrote:

> Nope. The opposite. Its falling birthrates that correlate with rising
> per capita income. We win by lowering the birthrate elsewhere, which
> means raising the opportunity cost for having babies, which means
> educating women everywhere.

Of course, the goal is to get democracy and education in. Education and
womens ability to control reproduction will follow. The rest fixes itself,
at which time, whoever has the most people wins.

But... before you can do that having land that can support plant life might
do them some good. We should be evacuating the landmine filled wasteland,
there are less people in all of Afghanastan then in the Chicago metropolitan
area. Is there something in Islam about living in a wasteland I dont know

The "west" will win becasue our land is green, and we'll get over the oil
addiction as soon as we can, and "they" will just have rocks.

> If "the West" stands for anything, it's that man's relationship to man
> should be defined in political rather than biological terms.

Bullshit. A mans relationship to man here in the US of A is about how green
you are, not how black, white, brown, or republican you are. Ask anyone who
isn't green enough. No politics are involved.

Green under your feet and green in your pocket. Kermit was wrong, it's easy
being green, god/allah/budda wont do you any good if you're any other color.

> We, on the other hand, are set, because more Americans arrive every
> day.

Wait, are you agreeing or disagreeing with her ;)

- Adam L. "Duncan" Beberg