Image links to Treehugger Article
“according to Atlantic Cities, as one of the most densely populated places in the world (7 million souls on 423 square miles), it has rents a whopping 35 percent higher than New York City. Almost half of Hong Kong’s population lives in some kind of public housing, yet there’s a critical lack of it, and coupled with the deplorable conditions of some government-subsidized dwellings in a city where home prices are approaching $1,300 per square foot — means that affordable housing is a major flashpoint issue here.”
And let’s not forget the Tokyo article from 3/8/13
Image links to Treehugger article
“Tokyo is another example of how far it can get; in an attempt to save money but still live in the heart of the city, some young people are choosing to pay hundreds of dollars per month for a tiny, box-sized room. According to Kotaku, a Japanese news program recently reported on one of Shibuya district’s “share houses” (or “geki-sema” in Japanese) where residents were paying up to ¥55,000 (US $586) to live in stacked, “coffin-like rooms” — suitable only if you use them for sleeping. Though heat and electricity are included, bathrooms are still shared and some of the units (if you can call them that) don’t even have a window.”
1. Can people still say that we’re not over populated? Now I had to look for a map. Here’s what I found: http://www.populationlabs.com/World_Population.asp
Red is the most concentrated
So why do we not spread out more? Why do we feel have have to do this? Is it, in a way, an attempt to save what nature is left on the planet? Buildings are always going taller and taller and we’re getting more and more people. Is this really the way to go? I think I’ve had my fill of tall buildings. They don’t sustain earthquakes anyway.
2. Do these people actually feel like they’re living in these places or just existing?
Image links to Treehugger Article
A new article popped up (there’s two more I know of and will post them below) about the best way to save a species is to kill them. Huh? Come again? (Exsqueeze me? Baking powder?) How does more than one person think like this? This article expounds on the idea saying that what make up the income from the hunting is the wealthy who want the rug in their living room to brag. -_- And then the journalist continues on to say “I mean, there’s not much merit in killing a lion with what is basically a sniper rifle — try knife fighting one and then you can brag”. Love this! He also bring up other ways tourism can raise money to save the wildlife. By – gasp – regular tourism! This article also brought up an interesting thought, though I doubt it was intended by the speaker. “In today’s New York Times, Alexander N. Songorwa, the director of wildlife for the Tanzanian Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, makes a plea for the African lion not to be declared an endangered species (they are currently categorized as ‘vulnerable’ on the IUCN Red List). His argument is very pragmatic, basically saying that rich American tourists who fly over there so they can shoot lions with high-powered rifles and then bring back a trophy spend a lot of money, and that money helps fund game reserves, wildlife management areas, and conservation efforts in Tanzania.” I can back up the idea of the endangered species list backfires. But, not for the reasoning Songorwa had. It might be that putting something on an endangered species list makes the species more appealing. Therefore, more hunting. Like when retailers put on their coupons “while supplies last” or when a car company produces only “a few” resulting it in being a hot commodity because it’s so rare.
Image links to BBC Article from 2/20/13
How can you say the lack of hunting ducks is bad for ducks when the only thing you can say that’s bad is the money you’re losing from the lack of hunting?
Image links to BBC Article from 2/7/13
Sweden wolf cull is good for the wolves??? They were there first and the human population can’t handle it! Crying because of a loss of money and they worry about the dogs they take hunting with them instead of adjusting their business and not taking their dogs with them. The nerve.
Okay, I’m done now.