• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

I have been guided to create inventions to better this world. How to safeguard until

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

godamongmen

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ohio

I have produced a plant growth hormone/fertilizer that produces yields yet to be seen among plant growth products. It has been tested and the results were as expected by us, phenomenal! This is only one of our inventions that have been designed to better the world. The other invention will save thousands of gallons of oil daily. Both inventions are set up to help the welfare of people. Think about it, food and gasoline are a source of power. When there is a substantially larger amount of food being produced and gasoline being preserved, the cost goes down, better's living situation for peoples all across the globe, and empowers the people and not corporate entities. I need some advice on how to go about creating a patent without someone stealing our ideas. We will appreciate any advice. gods bless!
 


TheGeekess

Keeper of the Kraken
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ohio

I have produced a plant growth hormone/fertilizer that produces yields yet to be seen among plant growth products. It has been tested and the results were as expected by us, phenomenal! This is only one of our inventions that have been designed to better the world. The other invention will save thousands of gallons of oil daily. Both inventions are set up to help the welfare of people. Think about it, food and gasoline are a source of power. When there is a substantially larger amount of food being produced and gasoline being preserved, the cost goes down, better's living situation for peoples all across the globe, and empowers the people and not corporate entities. I need some advice on how to go about creating a patent without someone stealing our ideas. We will appreciate any advice. gods bless!
Contact a patent attorney. :cool:
 

FlyingRon

Senior Member
Do not disclose the invention until you have at least a provisional patent in place. If you do so you lose the novelty requirement of patentability.
Seek out a patent attorney to see if your invention is patentable, and then to make the filings.
If it doesn't meet the patentability he will be able to advise you of other methods (trade secret, etc...) that you may avail yourself of.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
well, maybe. Since both items are on the commodity market, as with commodities in general, a supply and demand force tends to control the price and when the price drops below a profitable level, producers stop producing which causes a false shortage but none the less, it causes the prices to increase. Inventions that increase food growth will cause a reduction in acreage committed to any given crop your fertilizer may benefit. A savings in oil consumption will result in a drop in oil production.

the price will not change.


oh, and thousands of gallons of oil a day are nothing in the current use of oil. We are talking nearly 20 MILLION of BARRELS per day. That is 630,000 gallons and that is the US alone. Worldwide consumption adds over 50 MILLION BARRELS per day. A couple thousand gallons per day won't affect a thing.

but if you want to continue with this:

I need some advice on how to go about creating a patent without someone stealing our ideas.
hire a patent attorney
 

quincy

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ohio

I have produced a plant growth hormone/fertilizer that produces yields yet to be seen among plant growth products. It has been tested and the results were as expected by us, phenomenal! This is only one of our inventions that have been designed to better the world. The other invention will save thousands of gallons of oil daily. Both inventions are set up to help the welfare of people. Think about it, food and gasoline are a source of power. When there is a substantially larger amount of food being produced and gasoline being preserved, the cost goes down, better's living situation for peoples all across the globe, and empowers the people and not corporate entities. I need some advice on how to go about creating a patent without someone stealing our ideas. We will appreciate any advice. gods bless!
You apparently have been working on your inventions with another or others so your invention idea (what it is, how it is made, how it works, what it does) should be or should have been protected by nondisclosure/confidentiality agreements already. When you are not working with others in creating an invention, the best way to protect an idea/invention prior to acquiring a patent is to keep it a secret. Otherwise you need to ensure your co-workers/inventors will not disclose your idea/invention to others and confidentiality/nondisclosure agreements are generally the best way to do this.

If your group was able to keep the invention a secret from others who might move to build and patent it themselves, you can file a patent application to protect your invention further now.

It is the first to file a patent who will be considered owner so, if your idea has been constructed/built/created and tested already (reduced to practice), you could file either a Provisional Patent Application to lock in a filing date, or you could file a regular patent application. Filing will work to protect your invention from ownership claims by others who come along later.

As mentioned earlier, if others assisted you in the creation of the invention, these individuals are your co-inventors and must be identified as co-inventors on your patent application, or your patent could be found invalid if it is later challenged.

Because patent laws can be complicated and you want to protect and preserve all your rights in your invention, having a patent attorney guide you right now is smart and is strongly advised (as others have clearly pointed out). Patent law is generally not an area of the law that lends itself well to do-it-yourselfers. ;)

Good luck.
 

godamongmen

Junior Member
oh, and thousands of gallons of oil a day are nothing in the current use of oil. We are talking nearly 20 MILLION of BARRELS per day. That is 630,000 gallons and that is the US alone. Worldwide consumption adds over 50 MILLION BARRELS per day. A couple thousand gallons per day won't affect a thing.
Brother we have to start somewhere. If one can save 1,000 gallons a day by our idea, that may give someone else the inspiration and idea to come up with another invention that may help some higher ups to come to assist them with an invention that could save a million gallons a day. I am not looking at none of this from a perspective involving profits for myself. Lets say you are right and no matter how much more food there is available or how much oil is not being ripped from the earth, the price is not going to be effected. Is it not better for mother earth? If peoples of poor countries could be provided with seeds and basic growing knowledge along with a fertilizer that maximizes food yield, would that not make the world a better place?
 

quincy

Senior Member
Brother we have to start somewhere. If one can save 1,000 gallons a day by our idea, that may give someone else the inspiration and idea to come up with another invention that may help some higher ups to come to assist them with an invention that could save a million gallons a day. I am not looking at none of this from a perspective involving profits for myself. Lets say you are right and no matter how much more food there is available or how much oil is not being ripped from the earth, the price is not going to be effected. Is it not better for mother earth? If peoples of poor countries could be provided with seeds and basic growing knowledge along with a fertilizer that maximizes food yield, would that not make the world a better place?
Every little bit helps.

You and your co-inventors should sit down with a patent attorney if you wish to protect your invention before someone else comes along with the same idea and decides to patent it first. If you WANT others to take your idea and improve upon it, however, for the good of the Earth and its people, and you do not have a profit motive, then a patent is probably not something you need to consider.

Make sure all of your co-inventors are on the same page with the "no profit" aspect of the idea, though.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Brother we have to start somewhere. If one can save 1,000 gallons a day by our idea, that may give someone else the inspiration and idea to come up with another invention that may help some higher ups to come to assist them with an invention that could save a million gallons a day. I am not looking at none of this from a perspective involving profits for myself. Lets say you are right and no matter how much more food there is available or how much oil is not being ripped from the earth, the price is not going to be effected. Is it not better for mother earth? If peoples of poor countries could be provided with seeds and basic growing knowledge along with a fertilizer that maximizes food yield, would that not make the world a better place?
there is an old old movie that I suggest people watch when they get on the "conserve the oil" bandwagon.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080754/

If it isn't oil, it will be something else.

and there is the means to feed every person on Earth with current technology yet we still have people starving, even in the countries that are growing the bulk of the food stuffs.

from worldhunger.org:

The world produces enough food to feed everyone. World agriculture produces 17 percent more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago, despite a 70 percent population increase. This is enough to provide everyone in the world with at least 2,720 kilocalories (kcal) per person per day according to the most recent estimate that we could find (FAO 2002, p.9). The principal problem is that many people in the world do not have sufficient land to grow, or income to purchase, enough food.
actually, the best way to inspire new technology would be to rid the world of oil. Only when faced with a true need will technology be stirred such that a replacement is found.

So, you want a solution to the fear of the end of oil as we know it? let it be used up. Only then will an alternate to oil be properly designed but more importantly, accepted by the world.


as to the food issue; kind of the same thing. Starve the masses of countries that have enough population to effect the world when they stir and you will cause a revolt that will change society as we know it, one way or another.

so, if you feed the masses, you placate them and all you end up with more people in an already well populated world. . What you cause there sir is an escalation of population which will require an escalation of production of food that will continue as long as you feed it. Where does it end? so many people on the Earth that it literally cannot sustain them. Remember, we are a wasteful world. The waste products produced in the world are poorly dealt with. More people, more productivity, more everything, including waste and so far, about all we are really doing with it is burying it in vaults where it is preserved (yes, all the garbage we bury is not degrading) or toss it into the ocean and causing problems we have only begun to see.
 
Last edited:

quincy

Senior Member
there is an old old movie that I suggest people watch when they get on the "conserve the oil" bandwagon.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080754/

If it isn't oil, it will be something else.

and there is the means to feed every person on Earth with current technology yet we still have people starving, even in the countries that are growing the bulk of the food stuffs.

from worldhunger.org:



actually, the best way to inspire new technology would be to rid the world of oil. Only when faced with a true need will technology be stirred such that a replacement is found.

So, you want a solution to the fear of the end of oil as we know it? let it be used up. Only then will an alternate to oil be properly designed but more importantly, accepted by the world.


as to the food issue; kind of the same thing. Starve the masses of countries that have enough population to effect the world when they stir and you will cause a revolt that will change society as we know it, one way or another.

so, if you feed the masses, you placate them and all you end up with more people in an already well populated world. . What you cause there sir is an escalation of population which will require an escalation of production of food that will continue as long as you feed it. Where does it end? so many people on the Earth that it literally cannot sustain them. Remember, we are a wasteful world. The waste products produced in the world are poorly dealt with. More people, more productivity, more everything, including waste and so far, about all we are really doing with it is burying it in vaults where it is preserved (yes, all the garbage we bury is not degrading) or toss it into the ocean and causing problems we have only begun to see.
Do you really believe this, justalayman?

I disagree with the World Hunger Organization that the principle problem is land and income. I think the major problem is getting what is needed to the people who actually need it. Governments can control distribution and some governments are more interested in profit than in aid.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
quincy;3297197]Do you really believe this, justalayman?
yes and not just because I am a fringe lunatic. Proof has been provided over the existence of humanity.

I disagree with the World Hunger Organization that the principle problem is land and income. I think the major problem is getting what is needed to the people who actually need it.
Nothing money can't solve, right? OK, who pays for it? Oh heck, that is arguing it is a money problem. :eek:




Governments can control distribution and some governments are more interested in profit than in aid.
and that supports my argument. The food is there. It is simply due to political issues or a lack of funding that prevents every person in the world of receiving adequate nutritional provisions.
 

godamongmen

Junior Member
I do not disagree with you. I offer short term solutions as it seems to be just what they want. In the long run the earth will return to her natural state before mankind raped her for all of her resources. These are just short term solutions that I am sharing. Tell me one solution that will not eventually cause problems from another aspect. I actually believe that we as citizens of the world should be focusing on alternative energy sources, but if there is money to be made best believe their going to make it. They are going to stifle the truth on inventions that could cost the people a small fraction of the cost that they spend on oil.All because they are going to drill baby drill until there is nothing left to drill. I am not going to say to much about my idea, just know that it has nothing to do with preserving oil b/c I think we should spread it out and limit our use. The invention would be for all the wasted oil I witness with my own two eyes. As far as my concern for oil, do away with oil as a whole. Let the powers that be reveal to us the real inventions that will cost us pennies per mile to drive our car, a few dollars to provide our homes with electricity, to heat or cool our homes. We the people sit back and say nothing about how we are being duped by a government who is suppose to be for the people and not for 1% of the world's population. Here comes the craziness lol. I believe that we, human beings have the potential to do anything imaginable. I hate to bring religion or personal beliefs into this forum but I just want everyone to get an idea of my mind set. Too many people are waiting or praying for Gods help instead of realizing the god in them that can achieve the unbelievable. Now I hate more to do this lol but I'm going to do it anyway. John 10:33 The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." 34 Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I SAID, YOU ARE GODS '? 35"If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came and the Scripture cannot be broken,…what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?....All through out the NT we are called sons of God. People pray to Jesus but it is written that we are heirs of God and joint heirs with christ. That places us equal to Jesus. People have twisted Christianity. Not one time does jesus say, I am God, worship me. Jesus was an enlightened being that knew he had God inside him giving him divinity. We are all divine beings. When he said I and the father are one, he was not saying he is God, he was saying what he said before, God is in him as he is in God. A cow does not give life to a dear. A cow gives life to a baby cow that will grow and learn how to be like his mother or father. God made us in their image. Meaning their is more than one God. When Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit we became like the gods. Through science we will learn immortality, through science we have achieved many things and we will continue to do things that people of ancient times would only explain as things created by gods. Romans 8:16-21. 16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God;
17 and if children, then heirs — heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if so it be that we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together.
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

Galatians 4:7
7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.

Revelation 21:7
7 The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son.

If we are given the same name "son of God" as Jesus claimed to be and we are placed as equals (joint heirs) as Jesus, then we all have something inside of us just as Jesus did that can make all things possible as you seen through the miracles Jesus performed. So so blasphemous, right? Sorry just quoting the good book. Sorry If I offended any atheist, Muslims, Jews, Christians etc...I know this seems to be way off topic but I wrote it
 

justalayman

Senior Member
I do not disagree with you. I offer short term solutions as it seems to be just what they want. In the long run the earth will return to her natural state before mankind raped her for all of her resources. These are just short term solutions that I am sharing. Tell me one solution that will not eventually cause problems from another aspect. I actually believe that we as citizens of the world should be focusing on alternative energy sources, but if there is money to be made best believe their going to make it. They are going to stifle the truth on inventions that could cost the people a small fraction of the cost that they spend on oil.All because they are going to drill baby drill until there is nothing left
You call them short term solutions. I call them delays of the inevitable, if there is not a paradigm shift in humanity (which isn't going to happen)




If you want to solve a problem, figure out what to do with all of the garbage/trash we are putting in underground vaults for storage. Yes, I said storage as the stuff we bury is in sealed storage facilities where water nor oxygen are allowed in. I happened to be around when a company I worked for (that was built on a landfill) had to dig a hole to install an oil storage tank. The landfill is so close to the surface they dug into it. An item I saw was a phone book that had been in the ground for at least 15 years (as the building was at least that old). It was dry. It was readable. It looked like it was plucked from somebody's end table and tossed onto the ground.

no water and no oxygen means no degradation. We bury thousands, (but probably millions) of tons of garbage per year. It will be there tomorrow, it will be there next year, next decade and next century. It will be there until somebody digs it up and does something with it.
 

quincy

Senior Member
yes and not just because I am a fringe lunatic. ...
So you are saying you are a fringe lunatic? ;)

Nothing money can't solve, right? OK, who pays for it? Oh heck, that is arguing it is a money problem. :eek:
It is definitely a money issue. The areas of the world that need the most help are often unable to get it, because of greedy/corrupt/fill-in-the-blank governments. Food and water can be made available at no cost to those who need it (not as a hand-out but in teaching ways to grow the food and get the water where it needs to be). Health care can be made available because the world as a whole is comprised of generous people who not only want to help, but who have the education and/or the means to help. Hospitals and schools can be built and staffed.

You can have self-sustaining communities in almost any area of the world, if what is required to create these communities can be provided. Attempts to provide what is necessary, however, are often thwarted by the governments in control of these areas.

and that supports my argument. The food is there. It is simply due to political issues or a lack of funding that prevents every person in the world of receiving adequate nutritional provisions.
Political issues, yes. Lack of funding, not nearly so much.

Waiting for those in need to die, though, so there is more (oil, food, water, whatever) for everyone else hardly seems a solution that is acceptable. Nor is using up the available resources (like oil) in an effort to spur the creation of newer technologies or the acceptance of existing technologies (like wind power or solar energy) a solution that seems to make much sense to me.

In other words, I applaud those who are working to improve life for those whose lives need the most improving, even if these improvements work to increase the world's population. :)
 

justalayman

Senior Member
quincy;3297222]So you are saying you are a fringe lunatic? ;)
it sounds so much more hip than eccentric. Being eccentric makes me sound old.





Waiting for those in need to die, though, so there is more (oil, food, water, whatever) for everyone else hardly seems a solution that is acceptable.
now that's not what I said. I said cause them to revolt. You aren't going to do it by feeding them. You aren't going to do it by providing the basic needs. People that are provided for have no reason to change things.

Nor is using up the available resources (like oil) in an effort to spur the creation of newer technologies or the acceptance of existing technologies (like wind power or solar energy) a solution that seems to make much sense to me.
really? Ever consider why we have the alternative sources we now have? The "we're running out of oil" scare. If somebody didn't yell that once in awhile nobody would have even started on those alternative sources. Humanity is a lazy lazy group in general. We want everything handed to us and life made as easy as possible. Conservation is nothing more than a delay of the inevitable and it stifles innovation in alternate sources of energy. Use that crap up. Then you will find alternatives, I guarantee it.

Only when the resources currently used as our main source of power, food, water, and anything else are near to actually being used up will society in general take a replacement seriously. You must realize that electric cars were here before gas powered cars, right? by about 50 years even.

so, answer me this: can we run out of electricity? Can we run out of gasoline? why did we end up with gasoline? There are myriad ways to produce electricity. There is one way to procure oil.

so why did we end up with gas powered cars instead of electric? If as much effort was put into electric cars as there has been into gas engines over the last 130 years (roughly the time gas powered cars have been around), can you imagine where they might be today? Hell, Nik Tesla was tossing out theory that is still not understood today, and sadly to say he died in poverty due to a political battle with a man who is held so high in society one would think he was Jesus' brother yet if you know the truth behind the man, there is a bit of smell of rot. ($50,000 worth of rot)

Oh, why we ended up with gas cars instead of electric:

money. Not the money of the masses but the money one man envisioned, for himself. Upon the discovery of oil there was a cheap source of energy available, Mr Rockefeller saw what the future held though so he cornered the market and became the third wealthiest man ever to live and everybody involved with oil has been in it for the buck since then. It is one of the dirtiest sources of energy available. It is the source of pollution exceeding probably any other single source of pollution yet here we are, praying to the mighty oil well that it give us just a little bit more of it's precious fluid.



when the oil runs out, those with the influence, power, money will decide what our next source of energy is. We will not make that determination.

In other words, I applaud those who are working to improve life for those whose lives need the most improving, even if these improvements work to increase the world's population. :)
an increase in population will lead to a increase on a demand for all resources which will result in a reduction available to any one. That is why we fight wars. I guess that gets me back to the same result since that too will result in a population adjustment although I loathe war so it is not the way I would prefer to see it go.

while it may sound crude but answer me this;

can we turn the Sahara into a lush green source of food? Not without massive amounts of money so tell me; why do we provide sustenance that allows the inhabitants to continue to live in an area that will never sustain them beyond a life of near starvation? How about we airlift all of them and drop them into the middle of the USA? Oh, nobody wants to do that? Why?

we love to look like we are saving the world but in reality, at best we are delaying the inevitable death of the people we claim to be saving. In fact, we may be making it worse. Ever wonder why it is typical to have a huge number of children in that area of the world? How about because the mortality rate is so high, if the family wishes to continue, they must account for that. So, what happens when you reduce the mortality rate? You have more people. More people mean it takes more resources to maintain them. Then as the population increases, so does the annual birthrate. How long can anybody sustain providing for them? All it takes is a political shift in any country that is providing support to cause the support of those peoples to end. Now, rather what do you do? You have a higher rate of starvation than you ever did.


My brother often made the comment;

why do we help them live where the lifestyle we are creating is not sustainable without outside resources? Remember the dust bowl in our country? What happened to the people affected by that? They moved to where they could live. Maybe that might be considered for all those we are attempting to provide food and water for in areas that simply cannot be self sustaining.

we want to feel good thinking we are helping but in the long run, I think it is making it worse for those people.

the funny thing about the world, and life in general; it imposes limits. If there isn't enough food, population growth slows or even declines. If there isn't water; same thing. Providing food and water for those in areas that will never be self sustaining is not providing a net benefit to anybody. All it does is give the current benefactors a big case of the warm fuzzies.

and that website is down the hall to your right.

that might be enough ramblings from me tonight.
 

quincy

Senior Member
it sounds so much more hip than eccentric. Being eccentric makes me sound old.
I think eccentric is better than lunatic. You are making sense (as you usually do) and the lunatics I know usually don't. :)

now that's not what I said. I said cause them to revolt. You aren't going to do it by feeding them. You aren't going to do it by providing the basic needs. People that are provided for have no reason to change things.
People who have no food or water or health care are not going to be in any condition to revolt. People who are provided for have reasons to change if what is provided is not a handout but rather some help and some education on how to provide for themselves.

really? Ever consider why we have the alternative sources we now have? The "we're running out of oil" scare. If somebody didn't yell that once in awhile nobody would have even started on those alternative sources. Humanity is a lazy lazy group in general. We want everything handed to us and life made as easy as possible. Conservation is nothing more than a delay of the inevitable and it stifles innovation in alternate sources of energy. Use that crap up. Then you will find alternatives, I guarantee it.
I think that some of those who populate the US may be lazy, but I would not characterize humanity as lazy. In fact, I would say that those in the areas of the world that are most removed from us are the opposite of lazy. They must work hard just to survive.

Only when the resources currently used as our main source of power, food, water, and anything else are near to actually being used up will society in general take a replacement seriously. You must realize that electric cars were here before gas powered cars, right? by about 50 years even.

so, answer me this: can we run out of electricity? Can we run out of gasoline? why did we end up with gasoline? There are myriad ways to produce electricity. There is one way to procure oil.

so why did we end up with gas powered cars instead of electric? If as much effort was put into electric cars as there has been into gas engines over the last 130 years (roughly the time gas powered cars have been around), can you imagine where they might be today? Hell, Nik Tesla was tossing out theory that is still not understood today, and sadly to say he died in poverty due to a political battle with a man who is held so high in society one would think he was Jesus' brother yet if you know the truth behind the man, there is a bit of smell of rot. ($50,000 worth of rot)

Oh, why we ended up with gas cars instead of electric:

money. Not the money of the masses but the money one man envisioned, for himself. Upon the discovery of oil there was a cheap source of energy available, Mr Rockefeller saw what the future held though so he cornered the market and became the third wealthiest man ever to live and everybody involved with oil has been in it for the buck since then. It is one of the dirtiest sources of energy available. It is the source of pollution exceeding probably any other single source of pollution yet here we are, praying to the mighty oil well that it give us just a little bit more of it's precious fluid.



when the oil runs out, those with the influence, power, money will decide what our next source of energy is. We will not make that determination.
I don't doubt that much of what you say is true for the US. But it is not true around the world. Money is a motivator for many but not for all.

an increase in population will lead to a increase on a demand for all resources which will result in a reduction available to any one. That is why we fight wars. I guess that gets me back to the same result since that too will result in a population adjustment although I loathe war so it is not the way I would prefer to see it go.
I see war as a need of governments, as a way to assert their power and control over other governments and over their own people.

while it may sound crude but answer me this;

can we turn the Sahara into a lush green source of food? Not without massive amounts of money so tell me; why do we provide sustenance that allows the inhabitants to continue to live in an area that will never sustain them beyond a life of near starvation? How about we airlift all of them and drop them into the middle of the USA? Oh, nobody wants to do that? Why?
Ask me the same question this winter. I will probably gladly be airlifted into the Sahara. ;)

we love to look like we are saving the world but in reality, at best we are delaying the inevitable death of the people we claim to be saving. In fact, we may be making it worse. Ever wonder why it is typical to have a huge number of children in that area of the world? How about because the mortality rate is so high, if the family wishes to continue, they must account for that. So, what happens when you reduce the mortality rate? You have more people. More people mean it takes more resources to maintain them. Then as the population increases, so does the annual birthrate. How long can anybody sustain providing for them? All it takes is a political shift in any country that is providing support to cause the support of those peoples to end. Now, rather what do you do? You have a higher rate of starvation than you ever did.
Governments have tried to control birth rates. Some would rather sterilize women or punish families who have more than one child than provide for a growing population. It is not impossible to provide the means for everyone to create for themselves the food and water and health care necessary for everyone to live and even thrive in whatever area of the world they happen to reside.

My brother often made the comment;

why do we help them live where the lifestyle we are creating is not sustainable without outside resources? Remember the dust bowl in our country? What happened to the people affected by that? They moved to where they could live. Maybe that might be considered for all those we are attempting to provide food and water for in areas that simply cannot be self sustaining.
Again, it depends on what is provided. If there are only occasional handouts of food and water and medicine, I agree this does nothing except delay the inevitable - and these handouts often do not get handed out to the people who need them anyway.

we want to feel good thinking we are helping but in the long run, I think it is making it worse for those people.

the funny thing about the world, and life in general; it imposes limits. If there isn't enough food, population growth slows or even declines. If there isn't water; same thing. Providing food and water for those in areas that will never be self sustaining is not providing a net benefit to anybody. All it does is give the current benefactors a big case of the warm fuzzies.

and that website is down the hall to your right.

that might be enough ramblings from me tonight.
I like your ramblings and I understand the arguments you are making, even though I see things differently. What we need are a few Red Dwarfs to have a decent debate, though. :)
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top