Quote:
Originally Posted by charlieo1126@gmail.com
Oh please the Buffaloes were not going to be here forever. When I first got here they were next to gas station on a not very built up 466 being fed endless amounts of junk food, then they were moved yes there were some complaints but they would have been moved for buildings anyway. The Buffalo just like cows are used to make taxes on land in urban areas cheaper as agriculture land, before they are built on . Orlando developers had a herd of cows that they moved from place to place as they bought up land for future development. I’ve heard the Buffalo are up in the prairie area near Gainesville I’m sure there much happier and healthier now that there not munching on all those snacks and not having cameras stuck in there faces
|
Everything said here is probably mostly true. And the post was informative. My post only used the buffalo as an example - a starting point for a larger conversation about the value, the pros of GROWTH, and the cons, the negatives. In general, most people believe that GROWTH and the increased population that parallels that GROWTH are inherently GOOD. I say that if you imagine a graph with Growth or GNP on the Y, vertical axis and you put population growth on the X-axis - you would see a straight line from left to right. But, at some point, the curve would start to bend over to less increase of GROWTH on the Y-axis per given X=axis increase. Like a saturation effect.
If we try it again instead with "QUALITY OF LIFE" on the Y-axis we may get a curve shaped like a mountain where some point is the maximization of Quality and then downward sloping for the increasing population. This makes certain assumptions, of course. Like square mile area of the country or of TV Land or any somewhat self-contained state or country. It also assumes that raw materials and resources are held fairly constant.
So far as I know this is just a theoretical concept. But, it could all be calculated for a city, state, or the whole US with the available, powerful computers. Portland, Or. years ago drew a line around their city to keep quality of life high by limiting high rises and other methods. The city finally relented and went away from the idea due to, I imagine, PROFIT-making interests and lobbies. I do not know if anyone ever wrote a book about that Portland, Or. attempt? Or if any summaries or conclusions were ever drawn. But, it was a HISTORIC attempt at maximizing Quality of Life - over PROFITS.