• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Our Planet Is Becoming More And More "Man Made"

rhinefire

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
10,275
Reaction score
2,961
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Today we see little side stories of animals moving in to residential areas (because we are invading their living spaces). Last night I watch a series called "Epic Engineering". It is a very revealing series but it shows what man is doing and that is exploding in population numbers and erecting buildings to house them. Not only does it look at the building but the things that go along with the problems of exploding populations light sewage and food and water. It gave me the feeling that man is learning how to accommodate huge numbers of populace. There is a monster project for sewage in Mexico City, an enormous pipeline in China to move much needed water from south to north and it will be completed in 2030 top give you an idea of its enormity. Hong Kong is shoulder to shoulder in population and in building living facilities and it truly reminds you of sardines in a can. The majority of the world people now live in cities and that has never before been the case. It seems to me that man is given the power to solve issues as it was pointed out these incredible projects would not have been possible ten years ago. So, rather than painting ourselves in to a corner we manage to survive. The question is, is this survival mode only our future? Take America, how much open territory is not owned by someone. Are you less free to roam about without looking for signs of KEEP OUT or PRIVATE PROPERTY? How many people do you know personally that live in the country or the mountains away from city or urban life?
 
Almost everyone I know lives far removed from urban life (I live 30 miles from the closest grocery store). Nothing but farms and woodland here in this area of Virginia.

Tangent: This is not philosophy.
 
Almost everyone I know lives far removed from urban life (I live 30 miles from the closest grocery store). Nothing but farms and woodland here in this area of Virginia.

Tangent: This is not philosophy.

Statistically most of us in the OECD do live inin urban areas, you know.
 
Statistically most of us in the OECD do live inin urban areas, you know.

You know, Virginia is not in the E part of the OECD.
 
In most around where we live, the animals were there in the first place and never left.

As my Wife says...pave the planet

Sad indeed
 
Urban life is pretty great. I wouldn't trade it for the alternative at all.
 
Urban life is pretty great. I wouldn't trade it for the alternative at all.

I could do semi-rural. Still with running water and electricity, but a large amount of open land and able to see the stars at night.
 
Urban life is pretty great. I wouldn't trade it for the alternative at all.

i'm not trying to bash NYC when i say this, having never been there, but every time there's some ranking or survey done about quality of life, small to mid sized cities dominate the top 30. It seems to me that everything from grocery shopping to traffic jams to pollution to lack of privacy are a major nuisance in metro areas, and the only thing a resident of city of say 100k has to go there for is some entertainment (concerts, pro sports) and air travel.

But i would still take living in every huge city except detroit over rural areas any day.
 
i'm not trying to bash NYC when i say this, having never been there, but every time there's some ranking or survey done about quality of life, small to mid sized cities dominate the top 30. It seems to me that everything from grocery shopping to traffic jams to pollution to lack of privacy are a major nuisance in metro areas, and the only thing a resident of city of say 100k has to go there for is some entertainment (concerts, pro sports) and air travel.

But i would still take living in every huge city except detroit over rural areas any day.

The pollution does suck, but it's way better here than in, say, Shanghai. I have plenty of privacy, and I like being surrounded by lots of people while out and about. And, yikes, what kind of crazy person would drive in this? For the first time in my life, I don't need a car at all. I love not having a car. The only thing about New York specifically is that everybody is busy all the time. It makes it hard to schedule social things.
 
City life harms the environment less that suburban life because the human damage is concentrated and there is less long distance commuting.
 
And, yikes, what kind of crazy person would drive in this? For the first time in my life, I don't need a car at all. I love not having a car. The only thing about New York specifically is that everybody is busy all the time. It makes it hard to schedule social things.

Those are both fair points but they apply equally to say, a college town, which dominate the list of happiest cities. There's no need for a car and people are highly active

Then i see the rent in lower manhattan is like 7x the cost here and think, that is pure madness
 
City life harms the environment less that suburban life because the human damage is concentrated and there is less long distance commuting.

In terms of pollution, possibly sure, but there is also far more plant and animal life outside huge cities
 
Those are both fair points but they apply equally to say, a college town, which dominate the list of happiest cities. There's no need for a car and people are highly active

Then i see the rent in lower manhattan is like 7x the cost here and think, that is pure madness

Screw that, I live in Queens.
 
In terms of pollution, possibly sure, but there is also far more plant and animal life outside huge cities

But in the suburbs it is mostly lawns which waste water and people use more space, causing more deforestation and loss of agricultural land.
 
Green Acres is the place to be, farm livin is just right for me. New York is where I want to stay, I get allergic smelling in hay. You are my wife. Good bye city life.
 
Today we see little side stories of animals moving in to residential areas (because we are invading their living spaces). Last night I watch a series called "Epic Engineering". It is a very revealing series but it shows what man is doing and that is exploding in population numbers and erecting buildings to house them. Not only does it look at the building but the things that go along with the problems of exploding populations light sewage and food and water. It gave me the feeling that man is learning how to accommodate huge numbers of populace. There is a monster project for sewage in Mexico City, an enormous pipeline in China to move much needed water from south to north and it will be completed in 2030 top give you an idea of its enormity. Hong Kong is shoulder to shoulder in population and in building living facilities and it truly reminds you of sardines in a can. The majority of the world people now live in cities and that has never before been the case. It seems to me that man is given the power to solve issues as it was pointed out these incredible projects would not have been possible ten years ago. So, rather than painting ourselves in to a corner we manage to survive. The question is, is this survival mode only our future? Take America, how much open territory is not owned by someone. Are you less free to roam about without looking for signs of KEEP OUT or PRIVATE PROPERTY? How many people do you know personally that live in the country or the mountains away from city or urban life?

Well, some tribes live far away from cities and infrastructure in little villages. if you were to observe that they settle there for the resources, then you will admit that they don't need infrastructure as much as you do, as, they are not suckling the tit of the establishment, are they?

If they were to move to a city and get used to it, they will stop going to wells and hunting for food or whatever. then, they will be wiser in the ways of the world and 'sciences' of life by bumping their heads on topics or people, and then they will become civilized. it is hard to go either way. there are many dangers in the city, and there is too much work in the villages.
 
Back
Top Bottom