User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 1:29:16 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: “Every mammal on this planet instictively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area." Agent Smith was right about that. Homo Sapiens has advanced to Homo Economicus. The old feedback loops don’t work. They make us sick….addictive. Our super power now is self delusion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 1:35:20 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nobody that thinks depopulation is a good thing thinks them or their families will be the ones depopulated. It's always the "undesirables".   Bill Burr: Hundir cruceros (sinking cruise ships) - Subtitulado |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:06:15 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Population drives scientific, technological, and economic growth. A reduced population will necessarily improve in those areas at a slower rate. That's maybe true, more people equals more "one in a million" minds that show up every now and then and really get shit done. On the other hand though, education seems to be directly linked to lower populations, so you'll likely have a higher percentage of intelligent people in a lower population region. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:10:11 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This retarded logic is why we have negative population growth in western and pan Asian ethnicities. It’s basic math to know that those numbers don’t even sustain a population. It takes at least 4 children per fertile couple to just maintain population numbers. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Models show that around 11 billion is the max, after that we won't be able to breed fast enough to replace people, so it should hover right around there. But....that's a shit load of people. Everyone complains about the population, but then pops out like 4 kids anyway. Want to do your part. Have enough children to replace you and your spouse and then call it a day. This retarded logic is why we have negative population growth in western and pan Asian ethnicities. It’s basic math to know that those numbers don’t even sustain a population. It takes at least 4 children per fertile couple to just maintain population numbers. It's 2.1 children per fertile female for maintenance. So two per female, with 3 for every 10th one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:17:21 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We're doomed! The "population bomb" was talked about in the early 1970s from what I remember. Late 60s and early 70s. My 25-years ago there wasn't enough food, medicine, and consumer goods so millions of Americans died according to the predictions. Some of the older members can help me here but it was "DDT", then "the population bomb", "industrial pollution", and then "global climate cooling"? Paul Ehrlich wrote "the population bomb" after reading the same papers that inspired Norman Borlaug to develop dwarf wheat, the "green revolution". Ehrlich's scenarios warned of possible famine in India, Africa, and China, but the immediate problem was in India. If it wasn't for Borlaug India would have had a nasty famine in the 70's. There was "Silent Spring" that warned of dire consequences due to pesticides, like the decline of pollinators and pest-predators, which are real things but more resilient than the author believed. "Global Cooling" is actually an interesting subject, parts of the media picked the idea up and ran with it even though the scientific community was saying exactly the opposite at the time. There were six times as many papers published about the threat of global warming in the 70's as there were about cooling, and there's a 1977 presidential brief on global warming from the national science advisor that reads pretty much just like the early IPCC summaries from the 90s. Far as population goes, if we agree that my right to swing my arms ends at your nose, then my freedom to act is inversely proportional to the number of noses in the room. Hitler was a lunatic and gave eugenics a bad name. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:21:12 PM EST
[#6]
Needs to be an IQ-weighted or literacy-weighted metric to see the dystopian future. Egalitarians are going to get their great-grand kids’ lunches taken.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:25:12 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's 2.1 children per fertile female for maintenance. So two per female, with 3 for every 10th one. That would be right if the population was relatively stable. Because the population has nearly quadrupled in one human lifetime, even if the fertility rate is below 2 the population can continue to grow for several decades because the generations that are dying are smaller than the ones that are having children. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:31:58 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That would be right if the population was relatively stable. Because the population has nearly quadrupled in one human lifetime, even if the fertility rate is below 2 the population can continue to grow for several decades because the generations that are dying are smaller than the ones that are having children. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It's 2.1 children per fertile female for maintenance. So two per female, with 3 for every 10th one. That would be right if the population was relatively stable. Because the population has nearly quadrupled in one human lifetime, even if the fertility rate is below 2 the population can continue to grow for several decades because the generations that are dying are smaller than the ones that are having children. Except that's not the case. The generations dying and getting older are MUCH larger than the ones having children. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:32:08 PM EST
[#9]
Depopulation isn't the crisis.
Depopulation of the most productive demographic groups is the crisis. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:33:43 PM EST
[#10]
One way is to push for same sex couples.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:37:10 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That would be right if the population was relatively stable. Because the population has nearly quadrupled in one human lifetime, even if the fertility rate is below 2 the population can continue to grow for several decades because the generations that are dying are smaller than the ones that are having children. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It's 2.1 children per fertile female for maintenance. So two per female, with 3 for every 10th one. That would be right if the population was relatively stable. Because the population has nearly quadrupled in one human lifetime, even if the fertility rate is below 2 the population can continue to grow for several decades because the generations that are dying are smaller than the ones that are having children. That's the number to stabilize a population. You can't look at a single generational swing. Start it right now, and once the number stabilizes it should stay at about that number until a major die off event (like disease or famine). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:38:38 PM EST
[#12]
The problem with increasing population is the unproductive have/are out populating the productive (not only in the US but Worldwide).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:40:17 PM EST
[#13]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:40:48 PM EST
[#14]
Chicago is way ahead of OP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:42:01 PM EST
[#15]
Who’s gonna change your diapers?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:48:57 PM EST
[#16]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 2:57:00 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryWhen you see something really stupid and your reaction is:  People who believe melanin content and the way your hair and face look say anything about you other than ... what your melanin content is, and how your face and hair look. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:03:09 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because the left and "elites" are trying to do it by force. The elite see overpopulation as a terrible thing where the ends justify the means in combating it. They would seek out a final solution. If depopulation happens naturally through gradually declining birth rates then, yes OP, it's a good thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:03:10 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Except that's not the case. The generations dying and getting older are MUCH larger than the ones having children. In some places. The US is tipping because of the boomers for instance, and because our growth rate has been much lower than the global average for a long time. Overall it is the case, it has to be, and unfortunately, the places with young populations tend to be in the tropics where it's more difficult to feed them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:05:39 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Also, you need to take into consideration which populations are experiencing growth, and which ones are going to be experience shrinking. That's a big one. Uneducated, third world, backwards uncivilized populations in places with out infrastructure are growing rapidly. Meanwhile places that are modern industries nations are shrinking. The globalist answer is to assume all cultures are equal and force migration to the developed countries. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:08:59 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In some places. The US is tipping because of the boomers for instance, and because our growth rate has been much lower than the global average for a long time. Overall it is the case, it has to be, and unfortunately, the places with young populations tend to be in the tropics where it's more difficult to feed them. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Except that's not the case. The generations dying and getting older are MUCH larger than the ones having children. In some places. The US is tipping because of the boomers for instance, and because our growth rate has been much lower than the global average for a long time. Overall it is the case, it has to be, and unfortunately, the places with young populations tend to be in the tropics where it's more difficult to feed them. In every single developed country, the aging demographic is MUCH larger than the ones having children. The only places where it's not are basically Third-World nations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:12:22 PM EST
[#22]
go listen to jordan petersons take on it.
basically the more people the better off we all are and the more resources actually produced. We are likely to face some hard times with the coming population crash. Also depopulation is good is about this >< far away from throw x race in the ovens. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:40:45 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because it's a defeatist attitude for our species. Instead we should be colonizing the Moon, space stations, Mars, asteroids, moons of Jupiter, etc. I mean sure we should but there isn't really any reason too for a long time as far as needing the space. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:43:13 PM EST
[#24]
Quoted: Depopulation is spoken of with horror by governments and people around the world. Basically the bulk of the population is getting older and there will not be enough births to replace the deaths. There are a wide range of figures, one I read was that the world population will decline 0.3% or so each year by 2050, maybe more. In 1900 the world population was 1.7 billion, today it is around 8 billion people. In 120 years it increased more that 4x, far faster and higher then any other time in history. For population numbers sake: There were 5 billion people in 1987. There were 4 billion people in 1974. There were 3 billion people in 1960. There can not be infinite growth in a finite area. There are benefits to depopulation: more resources available per person, economic shuffling will show more employment available, less spending on welfare programs by the government, and others. Why is depopulation viewed as "bad"? Would you rather live with 8-12 billion people on the planet or 4 billion?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2gVxrQENQUOP, his friends, and family should depopulate today, since it's so great. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:45:00 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When you see something really stupid and your reaction is: https://images.axios.com/hQ99Xrl4wBXgv-kIathadG62jdA=/8x850:2923x2489/1920x1080/2019/03/20/1553098882656.jpg People who believe melanin content and the way your hair and face look say anything about you other than ... what your melanin content is, and how your face and hair look. Quote HistoryQuoted: When you see something really stupid and your reaction is: https://images.axios.com/hQ99Xrl4wBXgv-kIathadG62jdA=/8x850:2923x2489/1920x1080/2019/03/20/1553098882656.jpg People who believe melanin content and the way your hair and face look say anything about you other than ... what your melanin content is, and how your face and hair look. You got all that just from the picture? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 3:45:36 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In every single developed country, the aging demographic is MUCH larger than the ones having children. The only places where it's not are basically Third-World nations. The fact remains the global population has tripled in the last 70 years and quadrupled in the last 95. It's just math, unless mortality goes way up the global population will continue to grow even at fertility rates below 2. Of course if fertility rates drop far enough that effect would be negated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2022 5:58:16 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The fact remains the global population has tripled in the last 70 years and quadrupled in the last 95. It's just math, unless mortality goes way up the global population will continue to grow even at fertility rates below 2. Of course if fertility rates drop far enough that effect would be negated. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: In every single developed country, the aging demographic is MUCH larger than the ones having children. The only places where it's not are basically Third-World nations. The fact remains the global population has tripled in the last 70 years and quadrupled in the last 95. It's just math, unless mortality goes way up the global population will continue to grow even at fertility rates below 2. Of course if fertility rates drop far enough that effect would be negated. Yeah no. The world population will not continue to grow. You keep saying that, but that's not how the math on this works. The people dying will be greater than the people being born by no later than 2050, probably sooner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 12:55:01 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Paul Ehrlich wrote "the population bomb" after reading the same papers that inspired Norman Borlaug to develop dwarf wheat, the "green revolution". Ehrlich's scenarios warned of possible famine in India, Africa, and China, but the immediate problem was in India. If it wasn't for Borlaug India would have had a nasty famine in the 70's. There was "Silent Spring" that warned of dire consequences due to pesticides, like the decline of pollinators and pest-predators, which are real things but more resilient than the author believed. "Global Cooling" is actually an interesting subject, parts of the media picked the idea up and ran with it even though the scientific community was saying exactly the opposite at the time. There were six times as many papers published about the threat of global warming in the 70's as there were about cooling, and there's a 1977 presidential brief on global warming from the national science advisor that reads pretty much just like the early IPCC summaries from the 90s. Far as population goes, if we agree that my right to swing my arms ends at your nose, then my freedom to act is inversely proportional to the number of noses in the room. Hitler was a lunatic and gave eugenics a bad name. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: We're doomed! The "population bomb" was talked about in the early 1970s from what I remember. Late 60s and early 70s. My 25-years ago there wasn't enough food, medicine, and consumer goods so millions of Americans died according to the predictions. Some of the older members can help me here but it was "DDT", then "the population bomb", "industrial pollution", and then "global climate cooling"? Paul Ehrlich wrote "the population bomb" after reading the same papers that inspired Norman Borlaug to develop dwarf wheat, the "green revolution". Ehrlich's scenarios warned of possible famine in India, Africa, and China, but the immediate problem was in India. If it wasn't for Borlaug India would have had a nasty famine in the 70's. There was "Silent Spring" that warned of dire consequences due to pesticides, like the decline of pollinators and pest-predators, which are real things but more resilient than the author believed. "Global Cooling" is actually an interesting subject, parts of the media picked the idea up and ran with it even though the scientific community was saying exactly the opposite at the time. There were six times as many papers published about the threat of global warming in the 70's as there were about cooling, and there's a 1977 presidential brief on global warming from the national science advisor that reads pretty much just like the early IPCC summaries from the 90s. Far as population goes, if we agree that my right to swing my arms ends at your nose, then my freedom to act is inversely proportional to the number of noses in the room. Hitler was a lunatic and gave eugenics a bad name. All those theories have done nothing but prompt government to implement more technological means of control and enslavement. They want us dead or enslaved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 1:18:29 AM EST
[#29]
 Bad Religion-Ten In 2010 Lyrics ETA yeah I know, they're a bunch of commies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 1:24:36 AM EST
[#30]
I might listen to this point of view if those that espouse it immediately commit suicide. Strips away the hypocracy, taking one fot Team Earth.
Strange how it is always others that need to die. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 1:27:00 AM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah no. The world population will not continue to grow. You keep saying that, but that's not how the math on this works. The people dying will be greater than the people being born by no later than 2050, probably sooner. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: In every single developed country, the aging demographic is MUCH larger than the ones having children. The only places where it's not are basically Third-World nations. The fact remains the global population has tripled in the last 70 years and quadrupled in the last 95. It's just math, unless mortality goes way up the global population will continue to grow even at fertility rates below 2. Of course if fertility rates drop far enough that effect would be negated. Yeah no. The world population will not continue to grow. You keep saying that, but that's not how the math on this works. The people dying will be greater than the people being born by no later than 2050, probably sooner. I didn't think it was a great secret the 3rd world is reproducing at far greater numbers than the west. The EU average is 1.5 which is near the very bottom of the list. North America is only slightly higher at 1.6 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN?most_recent_value_desc=true  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 1:28:15 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because fractional reserve banking systems fail without an increasing population and economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking TPNI The world is a pyramid scheme. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 1:35:14 AM EST
[#33]
It's seen as bad because it's proponents are not nice people, who are willing to employ some of the most disturbing tactics the world has ever seen to further their goals.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 2:30:17 AM EST
[#34]
One day Gen X is going to leave the workforce and everyone will be fucked.
Already gettin real sick of holding this shit together. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 3:22:32 AM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One day Gen X is going to leave the workforce and everyone will be fucked. Already gettin real sick of holding this shit together. Don't hurt your arm patting yourself on the back there pal. I was helping a crew yesterday, 10 guys, crew leader is 25, most of his guys are between 18-30. Only one Gen X'er, he's a good worker, but a grumpy bastard. They'll get by just fine without him when he retires. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 3:48:48 AM EST
[#36]
The US population has doubled since I was a boy.
It’s a big country, but when you live in the population centers on the East Coast it’s very evident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 5:56:51 AM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, he wasn't. The statement is ludicrous and ignorant. Mammals have no "instinctive equilibrium." Deer bereft of predators overpopulate till they eat out all the food and starve or die of disease. Predators eat out all the food and starve or die of disease or are killed by competitor predators. The populations go bust and boom in cycles of extraordinary suffering. There's no "instinctive" about it. Nonsense. Extinction is a natural outcome when a species fails to adapt to changes in the natural ecosystem. Humans artificially alter the ecosystem, oftentimes creating unexpected and unwanted effects, including population blooms and busts of other species that would have otherwise regained a natural balance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 6:03:43 AM EST
[#38]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 8:59:05 AM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nonsense. Extinction is a natural outcome when a species fails to adapt to changes in the natural ecosystem. Humans artificially alter the ecosystem, oftentimes creating unexpected and unwanted effects, including population blooms and busts of other species that would have otherwise regained a natural balance. No, it's not nonsense and what you're talking about has nothing at all to do with what we were discussing. We weren't discussing changes in the ecosystem, we were discussing whether or not animals live in natural equilibrium with their environment. They don't. They have no "instinct" about how many babies to have, they have as many as their nutrition allows for. They go through boom and bust cycles. When there's an irruption year for snowshoe hares in Denali National Park, you get more wolves and more lynx being born. Then when the irruption is over and the excess population of wolves and lynx take the snowshoe hare population down below a level where it can support the extra population of predators, the predators die off from starvation and competition and without the pressure from predators, the snowshoe hare population booms again and the whole cycle is repeated. That's how it works. No guiding hand, no wisdom, just eating until you've eaten everything and then dying so the food can grow again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 9:21:16 AM EST
[#40]
Quoted: I guess it depends on how you view humanity's future. I hope for us to expand off this planet and into the solar system and beyond. That would require more people than we have. Thus depopulation is bad. We expand into the universe, or eventually die off. There are many, many existential risks - staying on any one planet. The modern philosopher Nick Bostrom, as well as many others - have explored this deeply. The Great Reset and population control, is about tyrannical control of the planet - NOT saving humanity from itself. If we waste precious time with war and political games, we may never get off this tiny rock... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 9:23:59 AM EST
[#41]
Quoted: Also, too big of a middle class challenges the elites. A smaller population of slaves is much easier to control. As with most narratives, population control isn't about numbers of people, or limited resources, or over-crowding, or whatever other fucking stupid ass reason to support it. It's simply about control and power. The elites won't have to compete with serfs when they travel, vacation, and enjoy their lifestyles. We already have enough communist regimes who are more than capable of keeping population numbers down, and it has nothing to do with resources, space, crowding, health...blah, blah, blah. It's all about control and power. The only benefit of "depopulating" would be the absolute elimination by extreme prejudice of all socialists, Marxists, and communists. A thriving, free market world based on individual liberty and life without the constraints of tyrannical governments, world-leaders, or oligarchs could easily solve the population problem, energy challenges, or resource constraints. The growing population isn't the problem, it's the genocidal tyrants who's only solutions are war, crime, pandemics, political/opposition-elimination, euthanasian, starvation, and sterilization of the masses. ROCK6 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 9:30:34 AM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: “Every mammal on this planet instictively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area." Agent Smith was right about that. To be fair, animals work the same. If no natural predators to thin the population, the population explodes and food sources are deprecated resulting in a die off. Same thing with large numbers of animals, which is why such groups migrate, always searching for more food supplies as they quickly eat the available food in their area. Humans have largely outgrown predators, and via modern healthcare and safety nazis , created a environment where even the dumb and weak flourish. Just Removing safety requirements , immunity from lawsuits and selling lawn darts cheaply would go a long way towards shrinking the population. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 9:30:47 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't hurt your arm patting yourself on the back there pal. I was helping a crew yesterday, 10 guys, crew leader is 25, most of his guys are between 18-30. Only one Gen X'er, he's a good worker, but a grumpy bastard. They'll get by just fine without him when he retires. Guessing mileage varies but from what I see in San Francisco & New York City the big cities don’t have the same high caliber 18-30 that your AO fortunately has. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 9:32:53 AM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I didn't think it was a great secret the 3rd world is reproducing at far greater numbers than the west. The EU average is 1.5 which is near the very bottom of the list. North America is only slightly higher at 1.6 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN?most_recent_value_desc=true https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/381696/Screenshot_2022-11-04_at_2_20_28_AM_png-2586967.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/381696/Screenshot_2022-11-04_at_2_26_36_AM_png-2586968.JPG South Korea isn’t even 1 think about that its below one |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 10:26:09 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/522423/13934851-2586032.jpgThe problem is survival of the fittest by natural selection has been removed from the human equation and we are left with the least intelligent least productive humans having all of the children.  . ^this. Many White people do not want to have children. Especially White liberals. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 10:43:30 AM EST
[#46]
Mother nature creates killers to keep us in check and along comes Doctors and they throw a wrench into her plan by inventing a cures.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 10:54:37 AM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One day Gen X is going to leave the workforce and everyone will be fucked. Already gettin real sick of holding this shit together. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 11:02:46 AM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryThano's only mistake was that he didn't go far enough. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 11:05:10 AM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuEhWzum4gchttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/D8570882-1AEA-421C-B6ED-18E58D589D90_jpe-2586034.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/902C0A57-FD1A-4CCD-978C-D0FE9FAA65D7_jpe-2586035.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/C1FCC783-6893-4FCA-B7C7-F60B16E400D8_jpe-2586036.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/2404BD63-38B4-487C-B55F-20FF317D8D7A_jpe-2586037.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/F9D742DC-63F9-47DD-BEE5-57F64922DFFC_jpe-2586039.JPGAfrica's population isn't growing anywhere near that much without western support against the inevitable drought, famine and plagues that regularly visit that continent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2022 11:27:13 AM EST
[#50]
The most reliable way to improve the standard of living is bring more morally decent and intelligent people into the world. More people means more inventors, more innovators, more workers, and more shit gets done.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
