March 26, 2014

"Zero Population Growth."



A building in Boulder that I photographed because it was so crushingly sad looking. I don't know why it says "Zero Population Growth," but if the intention is to promote the concept, it's doing the opposite of working.

41 comments:

mccullough said...

Looks like a good place to open a pot shop. Just get rid of the pent roof and the white on the facade.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

I'm sort of impressed at the varied sizes of stencils that the graffiteers had at the ready.

traditionalguy said...

Zero growth is a much to be desired goal in places like Russia, Ukraine and Iran. They are all dying from a failure to attain a level zero growth; they have entered a death spiral of negative population die off.



That is the truth behind Putin's aggression is to reclaim Russians sent abroad during the USSR days. Russia needs population to work on its natural resources.Putin's answer is pro baby policies and a return to a national faith from the Russian Orthodox Church tradition.

Dan Karipides said...

Ann...I think the comment is a reference to the Boulder County policy (for many decades now) to not allow any new construction. County funds have bought up all available land and turned it into greenspace.

The only way you move into Boulder County is if some other family moves out. There are limited exceptions to this via grandfathered properties.

The greenspace is spectacular but the policy has driven up house prices in Boulder to Bay Area CA levels. Obviously not all agree with it.

EMD said...

Typical black life.

(Just trying to appropriate Crack's gig, since I'm white. That's what we do.)

Smilin' Jack said...

I don't know why it says "Zero Population Growth," but if the intention is to promote the concept, it's doing the opposite of working.

Absolutely. That building should have at least twenty people living in it. Get out there and breed, people!

Nonapod said...

The only way you move into Boulder County is if some other family moves out. There are limited exceptions to this via grandfathered properties.

The greenspace is spectacular but the policy has driven up house prices in Boulder to Bay Area CA levels. Obviously not all agree with it.


So they've made their own, elite, mostly white, gated community? But I guess its ok cuz they're liberal.

alan markus said...

I see that in 1971 there was a Boulder chapter of "Zero Population Growth". Looking at the picture conjures up an image of young "hug-a-tree Earth Day" type hippie chicks (or guys for that matter) being lured into the "basement office" never to be seen again. Of course, if done often enough, there could be some "zero population growth".

Maybe forensics should take a good look at the place.

Love this type of picture - gets the imagination going.

alan markus said...

Trying to make out the letters above the sign that appear to be painted over. GS SOLAR or?

tim in vermont said...

We have to reduce our population on the off chance that something bad will happen in the future and reduce our population, even though most population scientist expect the planet's population to begin a decline after about 2050 anyway.

Just like we have to stop using oil because we are running out of it, even though, if we are running out of it, we will be forced to reduce our use of it.

What a blessing that liberals were born onto this planet to tell the rest of us how to live!

Cliff Elam said...

Looks like the house in the first Lethal Weapon movie.

You need to see the Directors cut to really get that scene.

_XC

Quaestor said...

It may be my pareidolia, but there seems to be a word or words above "zero population growth" done in white paint that's nearly obliterated. It almost reads "gasoline" if I squint.

n.n said...

Survival of the fittest. I am not sure if this message is advisory or affirming. I do know that many people will and have voluntarily complied, especially in the most advanced civilizations.

Sure, why not. You only live once. Perhaps through some form of coercion, an acceptable state can be formed and maintained. With technological advancement, there is no longer an imperative to reproduce in order to hold your ground. Besides, other people exhibit the unwelcome behavior of infringing on your backyard.

I wonder what is the optimal number of humans required in order to keep this life interesting, to produce goods and services, to dominate (i.e. narcissistic fulfillment), to mitigate genetic convergence, and to generally create a sense of purpose.

Ralph Hyatt said...

"most population scientist expect the planet's population to begin a decline after about 2050 anyway."

Believe it or not, I have many friends on the left side of the political spectrum.

A few weeks ago I was hanging out with some of them and one of them mentioned over population as a problem.

One of the others informed him of what you said, that the worlds population was going to peak around 2050 and then start to decline.

The first guy got what I can only describe as a gob-smacked expression. He had never heard this and it ran totally contrary to his conception of reality.

Todd said...

Ralph Hyatt said...
The first guy got what I can only describe as a gob-smacked expression. He had never heard this and it ran totally contrary to his conception of reality.
3/26/14, 3:47 PM


So, when a leftist hears contrary things from two other leftists, does a) his head explode, b) the most recent leftist is expected to be "more right", or c) he believes both things simultaneously?

DS said...

n.n. -- surely that number is tiny. That's not the right way to think about it, because if you think in terms of "the number required to make life interesting, provide opportunities, genetic robustness, etc etc", surely it would number only in the millions.
But thinking in those terms assigns a value of 0 to billions of other individuals, which has to offend any sort of palatable morality.

Saint Croix said...

In the 1970's, the environmental movement was obsessed with overpopulation. Too many people, not enough food, not enough water. Imagine global warming today. That's what overpopulation was in the 1970's.

Zero Population Growth was one of the inspirations for Roe v. Wade. At least, according to Justice Ginsburg, they were an inspiration.

Ginsburg talks about the Supreme Court using abortion as population control in her New York Times interview.

EMD said...

It may be my pareidolia, but there seems to be a word or words above "zero population growth" done in white paint that's nearly obliterated. It almost reads "gasoline" if I squint.

Or the opposite. It reads GO SOLAR.

Todd said...

n.n said...
I wonder what is the optimal number of humans required in order to keep this life interesting, to produce goods and services, to dominate (i.e. narcissistic fulfillment), to mitigate genetic convergence, and to generally create a sense of purpose.

3/26/14, 3:41 PM


So, given the average number of bad genes in people, 160 is about the right number to give a good chance for survival. We'll have to build a pretty good-sized space ship to colonize another planet!


Genetically, looks like you could get by with as few as (the right) 80 men and 80 women. Any add-ons is for your more esoteric needs (keep this life interesting, to produce goods and services, to dominate). Some of these could be served with the same size population. Also depends on what type of "life" you hope to live. Simple "old west" type of community could do quite nicely with those numbers.

Saint Croix said...

"Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong."

Ginsburg was criticized by right-wingers for her comment. Was it racist? Elitist? Who are the populations that "we" don't want to have too many of?

She walked back the eugenics aspect of her comment in her follow-up interview. But she's still arguing that Roe is all about population control by the state. It's a surprisingly negative view of the opinion, by somebody who thinks the Constitution requires this.

Ralph Hyatt said...

"So, when a leftist hears contrary things from two other leftists, does a) his head explode, b) the most recent leftist is expected to be "more right", or c) he believes both things simultaneously?"

With this guy, who is a very nice guy, he just doesn't process it.

For instance, I have told him numerous times that bourbon is not like champagne. It doesn't have to come from Bourbon County Kentucky to be considered bourbon. Yet he keeps telling people that bourbon has to come from Bourbon County Kentucky.

SineWaveII said...

The sign on top says
"GO Solar!"

jimbino said...


í imagine the ZPG sign on display in a shantytown in Nigeria. Or maybe a sign that says "Positive Population Growth."

What we need, of course, is negative population growth, which would both relieve the USSA tax burden of mis-educating Amerikan kids and at the same time accommodate the already potty-trained and literate, ready-to-work Mexicans to our south.







i i

Tyrone Slothrop said...

So then Jack Daniels is Moore Whiskey?

Tyrone Slothrop said...

I've always enjoyed having moore whiskey.

Smilin' Jack said...

...most population scientist expect the planet's population to begin a decline after about 2050 anyway.

Hmmm...I wonder which of the Four Horsemen will be responsible for that. Through most of human history Famine and Pestilence have led the pack, but now I see War gaining on the inside. Fun times ahead....

gadfly said...

U.S population growth is barely staying above zero - last shown to be 0.7%. So the Baby Boomer deaths, plus lower fertility through abortion, effective birth control, and the morning-after pill must be keeping ahead of fertile illegals from Mexico. The Boulder Zeta Pi Gamma house pictured above indicates that demand for housing for illegals is down due to the lack of jobs here.

Impressive analysis, don't you think? ... even if it is all BS.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

Maker's Mark is Marion whiskey.

Jim Beam is Bullitt whiskey.

Wild Turkey is Anderson whiskey.

Somebody stop me.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

I just drove by the Coyote Outback.

425K seems a little high to me.

There isn't really much there beyond what you have pictured. In fact, I used to live off of Ranch Elsie and forgot all about the Coyote Outback it is so diminutive.

Peter said...

"So, given the average number of bad genes in people, 160 is about the right number to give a good chance for survival. We'll have to build a pretty good-sized space ship to colonize another planet!

Yes, but would such a small number be capable of sustaining a culture- any culture?

Consider the pre-European history of Tasmania, and the apparent inability of its small indigenous population to sustain technologies such as boat-building, fishing, etc.

The Crack Emcee said...

EMD said...
Typical black life.

(Just trying to appropriate Crack's gig, since I'm white. That's what we do.)


Actually, I imagined Klem and Tucker up there, with a couple of rifles and some brewskis.

You know, smart guys,...

Quaestor said...

EMD wrote:
It reads GO SOLAR.

Yeah, you're right. How boring and typical... Too bad it isn't GASOLINE, that would be so meta.

Rob said...

In the 60's and 70's ZPG was as uncontroversial an issue as one could find among the intelligentsia, not unlike support for the ERA. The air went out of ZPG when so many of its adherents decided to have their third child. The personal is political indeed.

cf said...

Gee I took it pretty straight: aim for Zero Population Growth or Else everyone will have to live as sadly as this and worse.

...but on the subject of hurtling colonies into space 160 at a time, I think China is the perfect SpacePodCity - makers of the future. I dream of space pancakes that house a community of 50 or 60,000 at a time.

Fresher air.

traditionalguy said...

For the record Zero population growth requires 2.1 live babies per woman.

A religion that gives a hope for the future is a necessity for couples to have any babies. But that is nearly illegal in Progressive Land of the Atheists.

So zero is what the Brave New World Order will get...plus high grade marijuana highs and sexual license to go with the traditional Roman Empire's bread and circuses.

Nick Carter M. said...

For some reason, I just want to spraypaint The Riddler's question marks all over this building.

Bob Ellison said...

Leftists hate humans.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

http://themetapicture.com/woman-embarks-on-spiritual-journey-to-find-herself/

David said...

Someone tell the Ethiopians.

Jon said...

Zero growth is a much to be desired goal in places like Russia, Ukraine and Iran. They are all dying from a failure to attain a level zero growth; they have entered a death spiral of negative population die off.

Putin's answer is pro baby policies and a return to a national faith from the Russian Orthodox Church tradition.


And it's working: Russia's fertility rate has been rising and is now higher than the EU and Canada. If trends continue it will soon be higher than whites in the USA. Russia has actually had positive population growth for several years now, and last year it had the first natural increase (more births than deaths) since 1991.

LYNNDH said...

You people are all wrong. This is just Student Housing for the university.