Re: Miss Pop Ulation (was: population, homosexuality)

EvMick@aol.com
Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:30:47 EST

In a message dated 12/2/99 8:21:59 PM Central Standard Time, spike66@ibm.net writes: 

>

> I propose the thing that must give is our comically inefficient way
> we use land. I flew over the US today, New York to Dallas to
> San Jose. It was clear and I spent most of my trip looking at the
> ground and marvelling, as I often do when I make that ride, at
> how *empty* is most of this country. The population is highly
> concentrated along rivers. Look at it next time you fly over. There
> are huuuuge expanses of open land, with plenty of water, growing things
> that are of no direct benefit to humans, such as scrubby non-lumber
> trees. The riverbank land is subject to flooding, whereas all that
> good sloping land is nearly untouched.

I'm in total agreement.

As I've mentioned...I travel on the order of a hundred thousand miles a year via the highway. There is unbeleivable emptiness....hiway 50 across Nevada and Utah for example....or Texas between San Antonio and El Paso........

Or Canada....Canada is larger than the contiguous 48 yet has only approx one tenth the population (as I recall...i may be in error)....of which the greater percentage live within 200 miles of the US border...

My God is Canada ever EMPTY......and Siberia.......(Dreams of a sub-bering straite tunnel......for the London to Terra de Fuego "Interstate"...now THATS LONG HAUL!!!!!)

Speaking of Texas......I've heard it said that the entire population of the earth could be put in Texas with no greater population density than is found in some European countries.

I think that "over population" is another successful meme which has little relation to reality....

EvMick