Vanguard1917

Vanguard1917
Banned
Restricted

2nd April 2005
25th September 2016 15:47

More 11 Friends

Recent Visitors

The last 10 visitor(s) to this page were:

This page has had 8,872 visits

Tab Content: Vanguard1917's Activity; About Me; Friends

Tab Content: All; Vanguard1917; Friends; Photos

Older Activity

No Recent Activity

53

TC - 18th December 2010 00:47 View Conversation

Malthusianism is the position that unchecked population growth *causes* economic/agricultural/environmental catastrophe because it is potentially exponential and limitless, but global resources are finite. This is of course not true since population growth is self regulating once a population reaches sufficient technological and economic levels, and resources are themselves also subject to technological expansion. So Malthusianism as a global theory fails.

However, the essentially unrelated observation that in a situation of local, existent depravity, where technological and economic advancement has failed for at least the present time, increased unemployed/unproductive population resulting in an increased local demand, creates an additional strain on the local economy without being the cause of the economic catastrophe (contrary to Malthus's view) - is frankly just obvious.
Sentinel - 12th December 2010 22:17 View Conversation

The link I think I forgot to add in my PM to you: Link
bailey_187 - 1st July 2010 13:29 View Conversation

Comrade, will you be getting Ferraris For All by Daniel Ben-Ami?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ferraris-All...7990789&sr=8-1

Is Ben-Ami a socialist? I have often heard him talk of growth scepitcism being a result of the defeat of the left/working class politics in the 80s and 90s.
bailey_187 - 21st June 2010 08:01 View Conversation

thanks mate
bailey_187 - 20th June 2010 23:24 View Conversation

yo i got a geography exam tomrow for a level and its about biodiversity in South Pacific Islands like Fiji and them places. Some of its about NGO's like WWF who (to quote to prelease material) "WWf are working with coastal villagers to make the trade in aquarium fish more sustainable. This aim is to provide villagers with the means to 'farm' fish and coral on land rather than undertake potentially destrucutive fishing at sea" - what would you say to that?

Also what would you say to the arguments in general that human activities (e.g. palm oil plantations) on these islands is destroying "vital ecosystems"?

thanks
Pavlov's House Party - 3rd June 2010 20:30 View Conversation

it's always fun to hear self professed "Marxists" (opportunists) reject actual marxist theory because it's inconvenient for them, because they've never actual read about it before
Pavlov's House Party - 3rd June 2010 15:37 View Conversation

awesome posts in the history forum
Salyut - 19th May 2010 07:30 View Conversation

Thanks for linking Spiked! I've been looking for a news source like it for some time and I hadn't had any luck.
bailey_187 - 18th May 2010 18:12 View Conversation

Hello, if you dont mind i would like your perspective on this:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/indians-wa...521/index.html

As i am unsure about all this stuff. For reasosn i said in my post in the thread, i dont know what the correct position is on dams, so i am hoping seeing a debate on the issue will help me come to a conclusion.

thanks
bailey_187 - 14th May 2010 15:10 View Conversation

stuff like ending intensive farming, live exports and GM crops. Also, their support of Cap and Trade. Also their anti "mass consumption" stuff and "localization".