The only thing I find fascinating about this is why he just doesn’t go live there himself. He’s one of these Howard Hughes types, squirrely luney tunes who believes that the planet is over populated. He thinks he should be the only one living and probably wears Kleenex boxes on his feet so he doesn’t catch some disease the stupid, over-populating, breeder, unclean masses might give him.

American could, for a short time in the USA’s history, save up enough funds to live comfortably in their old age without having to breed their own caretakers.

Dark-Star on May 8, 2009 at 10:29 AM

Actually, that’s an illusion.

It doesn’t matter how much money you have if there’s no one producing goods and services. As the number of consumers outpaces producers, you eventually encounter runaway inflation of the “wheelbarrow full of money for a loaf of bread” variety.

We as a civilization have probably planted the seeds of our own destruction. The only questions now are whether we’ll allow ourselves to starve to death or allow the country to be flooded with immigrants (think 200 million, not 20 million); and just how long can we go before there’s no longer an American culture left. And that’s BEFORE you factor in the Obama effect.

Our only hope is to somehow convince our twenty-somethings to have 3+ kids per couple. Strikes me as a longshot.

One-child policy has reduced China population by 250 million, that is not a success in a grossly overpopulated country?

greenLibertarian on May 8, 2009 at 2:52 AM

“Success” must include not only achievement of goal, but also acceptable cost. China’s policy has an unacceptable cost. By your definition, if a doctor performs surgery to halt the spread of cancer, and the patient dies on the table, since the spread of cancer is halted the operation was a success.

I don’t think the Army is for us.

Perhaps. But how do you explain the NAVY?

And also, why would they NOT use te Army against us.\?

I believe that China will do what China always has done in the past.

Obviously, somebody is ignoring China’s long history of maritime misadventures in the Pacific and its attempts to expand into India and Central Asia…

China will expand North Eastward and absorb the “Northern Resource Zone” of the Siberian plain. Gold, Uranium, Oil, Farming, Timber, are all there and are best retrieved and worked by young, strong males. Russia population is fading and simply does not have the guts to take on a multimillion man army in an exhausting campaign to defend her eastern border. China tends to surround herself with weak states as a defensive measure. My guess is that they will stop short of the Ural Mountains, absorb the Siberian oil fields and vast mineral wealth to send back home, while using the natural barriers to shield her from any push back from Russia. With a demographic of 1.2 births per White Russian couple, there is simply not the manpower to mount a counter offensive. The current purchasing of raw materials all over the world is clearly the run up to a land grab.

Ok, so the Chinese go in, conquer Siberia from a nation that has been trying to ALLY with them, and populate it. Not unreasonable, and certainly possible, but THEN what? They still have this massive army doing nothing, this mysterious naval buildup that has been harassing the Phillippinos and ourselves, and the fact that Alaska (which is also underpopulated and rich in resources), Taiwan (a historical part of China and filled with natural resources and Industry), Indochina (Resources, manpower), Indonesia (see Indochina), the Phillippines (See Indonesia), and dozens of potential Casus Bellis dangling around.

Do you REALLY think they would stop there?

Also there is a “Time Limit” to their actions. If the front of the demographic curve gets too old, they will consume without being able to serve, so you want to time the military buildup so that your young army is ready about the same time the new satellites, cruisers, tanks, etc are in top shape and maximum readiness. Say about 3 to 5 years.

Fair enough, though that also puts their naval buildup into new context, and one that runs directly counter to your thesis (do you REALLY think the Chinese need a massive navy to destroy the Russian Navy in the Artic or whatever they need to do in this “Northern Resource Zone” scenario of yours?)?

We may well be bystanders for this one.

Or we may well be the roadkill. Never underestimate how bitter China is over Korea, and don’t underestimate their hostility towards us, as we are their greatest ideological enemy, and one that must be crushed in order to bring the CCP’s dreams into fruitation.

I hope you’re right, but my gut and by brain tell me otherwise.

And why is this male/female ratio such a big issue? After many wars, we’ve had more imbalanced male/female ratios.

The ratio itself is of little concern, it is WHO HAS IT that IS.

Check out the Soviet Union in the 1950’s.

And guess what the USSR did in the 50′s, Einstein?

Surely, China can endure such an imbalance once as part of a demographic transition.

Yes. Millions of innocent Chinese, on the other hand, CANNOT.

Yes, but the And those “extra” men may be very useful when China and the rest of the world actually catch on to the fact that Islam is as evil as Nazism. Soldiers will be needed.

Only the Chinese are not all that CONCERNED about the Islamists.

More likely, they are going to send all those excess men after US!

Get some common sense, rat.

I believe that China will do what China always has done in the past. China will expand North Eastward and absorb the “Northern Resource Zone” of the Siberian plain. Gold, Uranium, Oil, Farming, Timber, are all there and are best retrieved and worked by young, strong males. Russia population is fading and simply does not have the guts to take on a multimillion man army in an exhausting campaign to defend her eastern border. China tends to surround herself with weak states as a defensive measure. My guess is that they will stop short of the Ural Mountains, absorb the Siberian oil fields and vast mineral wealth to send back home, while using the natural barriers to shield her from any push back from Russia. With a demographic of 1.2 births per White Russian couple, there is simply not the manpower to mount a counter offensive. The current purchasing of raw materials all over the world is clearly the run up to a land grab.

Also there is a “Time Limit” to their actions. If the front of the demographic curve gets too old, they will consume without being able to serve, so you want to time the military buildup so that your young army is ready about the same time the new satellites, cruisers, tanks, etc are in top shape and maximum readiness. Say about 3 to 5 years.

We may well be bystanders for this one.

Seems to me you need a few more mega families here in the U.S. to cover your aging arses.

caygeon on May 8, 2009 at 1:29 AM

Only because our nation’s economy and especially Social Security have been mismanaged to the point of irrecoverable damage. Historians will surely remark on the fact that a responsible American could, for a short time in the USA’s history, save up enough funds to live comfortably in their old age without having to breed their own caretakers.

Stewart not Steward

Actually it is Lebowitz and not Stewart. Funny how he didnt want to use his actual name and chose such a name…. Scottish I believe.

And why is this male/female ratio such a big issue? After many wars, we’ve had more imbalanced male/female ratios. Check out the Soviet Union in the 1950′s. Surely, China can endure such an imbalance once as part of a demographic transition. And those “extra” men may be very useful when China and the rest of the world actually catch on to the fact that Islam is as evil as Nazism. Soldiers will be needed.

Bikermailman, you beat me to it. Isn’t it obvious what China will do with all those “extra” males?

NebCon on May 7, 2009 at 6:42 PM

They might not start a war for any other reason than to supply food for their population. Or maybe not even for that. Maybe they’d just like to eliminate a few million of their excess men. Life is cheap. If they “lose” too many, they can always allow females to have more than one child in the future.

Remember, all those “only” male children have been pampered. So they have a huge population of high self-esteem men just waiting to do something.

Pins are sometimes inserted into Chinese babies’ heads, through the soft spot, to kill them.

And in some places, Chinese folks have reportedly made soup out of very small aborted babies, so as not to waste the protein.

Information about these kinds of horror is available from the Population Research Institute.

By the way, concerns about the Mexican flu reminded me of a man in my church who was a missionary in China when the Communists took over. The people in the village he was helping were made to line up for vaccinations against something — they weren’t told what. The “doctor” used the same needle again and again, and simply swished it in a mud puddle to “clean” it between innoculations.

The missionary died a few years ago at a ripe old age, but he always said that his health was never the same after that “vaccination,” whatever it was.

Revelatory, not because it catches Turner opining on a subject about which he knows little — I do that for a living

AP, showing some self-awareness.

trigon on May 8, 2009 at 2:57 AM

!
Ted Turner is like an alien caught out of phase between two dimensions and he reaches out to Jane Fonda to connect to reality

Meanwhile, I worry that China will begin feeding the excess people to the tilapia fish they export to our nation.

Does Ted eat tilapia? Chinese farm raised tilapia is the fish of the masses. Tilapia are a useful way to utilize sewage

One-child policy has reduced China population by 250 million, that is not a success in a grossly overpopulated country?

Have more and you pay out of your own pocket from cradle to college, the way it used to be. A firm stance on that will slash birth rates plenty as well as somewhat mollify the childfree, who are (rightly) very tired of paying for other people’s choices.

Dark-Star on May 7, 2009 at 9:02 PM

All righty then, and all tax income earned by said “extra” children go directly into the parent’s retirement coffers and not into the public funds.

Seems to me you need a few more mega families here in the U.S. to cover your aging arses.