Comments on: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD! https://thecrawfordfamily.net/blog/?p=115 My personal/Catholic blog Sat, 08 Oct 2011 01:31:23 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Ken's Brother https://thecrawfordfamily.net/blog/?p=115#comment-143 Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:36:51 +0000 http://thecrawfordfamily.net/blog/?p=115#comment-143 Ya know, when I first saw this article I thought to myself … “how many blood vessels will still be present on Ken’s forhead at the Big Game after he reads this article”
LOL right now the Vegas under is 5…

]]> By: Michael https://thecrawfordfamily.net/blog/?p=115#comment-142 Thu, 17 Nov 2005 03:36:06 +0000 http://thecrawfordfamily.net/blog/?p=115#comment-142 On kind of a side note, I am happy to see that the pop will not coninue to grow exponentially into the future. It wouldn’t be a very fun world if we had to share it with 100 billion other people. I remember in college we read a lot of books in Demography that predicted doom and gloom due to populations in the future.

While I can’t say I’m all gung-ho about having children (80% of Californians can’t afford to buy a house, and I am one of them, so I don’t think the cost of raising a child is one I want to shoulder any time soon) I do agree that these guys are crazy nutjobs. I guess my stand is one of steady-state. That is, each parental unit should have a number of children that keeps the population stable (let’s say two, but the actual number is something like 2.1345 etc..). That way, we don’t go extinct, but we also do not overpopulate the earth and have to go to war for resources.

]]>