If the world were to end....

summalovaable
summalovaable Posts: 287 Member
edited October 5 in Social Groups
I'm not even sure if this even that debatable of a topic but... if the world were to end, who should be left to live?

As the population has surpassed 7 billion, I think were slowly starting to realize how great we are at destroying what is natural on this planet. So if a disease (or anything) were to come and kill off most of the planet, who should be left to live?

Should it be the intelligent, the rich, those used to living in poorer conditions, or those all ready used to living without technology. If we had to rebuild the human population on only a few type of people, who would you think is best left? and why?

Replies

  • juleseybaby
    juleseybaby Posts: 712 Member
    I know this is not helpful and is not really answering the question... BUT...

    The movie Idiocracy just came to mind as I read this. :laugh:

    I believe - as in nature - it would be survival of the fittest... considering physical and mental strengths.
  • VeganInTraining
    VeganInTraining Posts: 1,319 Member
    I was gonna say the same with Jules, survival of the fittest
  • Grimmerick
    Grimmerick Posts: 3,342 Member
    for me it doesn't matter what background they have my stipulations would be

    Tolerance (people tolerant of others no matter what their background)
    Common Sense (this is a big one for me)
    Contributions (people that contribute and don't expect to be taken care of or feel entitled to things they didnt' earn)
    Accountable (people that are accountable for their own actions)
  • TheRoadDog
    TheRoadDog Posts: 11,788 Member
    My family and friends. Then, people with the skills to keep the world going again. Then, busty women that find me irresistible.

    Then, a world class plastic surgeon for the small busted women that find me irresistible.
  • adrian_indy
    adrian_indy Posts: 1,444 Member
    How did the world end? How many people are left alive? Are those people in a unified group in one location, or spread out across the planet? These are all things I need to know before I make such a colossal judgement.
  • Regmama
    Regmama Posts: 399 Member
    for me it doesn't matter what background they have my stipulations would be

    Tolerance (people tolerant of others no matter what their background)
    Common Sense (this is a big one for me)
    Contributions (people that contribute and don't expect to be taken care of or feel entitled to things they didnt' earn)
    Accountable (people that are accountable for their own actions)
    Hahaha, you totally are making a hypocrite of yourself in your own list. Obviously you don't believe in #1 based on the rest of your list...
  • poisongirl6485
    poisongirl6485 Posts: 1,487 Member
    I don't think it should come down to who should be 'left' to live. If people live, great. If some die, tough *kitten*. I don't think it should be a 'decision' to decide who dies and who doesn't.
  • Grimmerick
    Grimmerick Posts: 3,342 Member
    for me it doesn't matter what background they have my stipulations would be

    Tolerance (people tolerant of others no matter what their background)
    Common Sense (this is a big one for me)
    Contributions (people that contribute and don't expect to be taken care of or feel entitled to things they didnt' earn)
    Accountable (people that are accountable for their own actions)
    Hahaha, you totally are making a hypocrite of yourself in your own list. Obviously you don't believe in #1 based on the rest of your list...

    yep I still do mean it, A lot of different meanings can fall under tolerance. But let me lay it out for you just in case you wouldn't be here because of lacking number two on the list. By tolerance I mean it doesn't matter what color, religion, or race, which would be why I stated background in the parenthesis.
  • Regmama
    Regmama Posts: 399 Member
    for me it doesn't matter what background they have my stipulations would be

    Tolerance (people tolerant of others no matter what their background)
    Common Sense (this is a big one for me)
    Contributions (people that contribute and don't expect to be taken care of or feel entitled to things they didnt' earn)
    Accountable (people that are accountable for their own actions)
    Hahaha, you totally are making a hypocrite of yourself in your own list. Obviously you don't believe in #1 based on the rest of your list...

    yep I still do mean it, and I think with some of number two you can figure out the rest yourself. A lot of different meanings can fall under tolerance. But let me lay it out for you just in case you wouldn't be here because of lacking number two on the list. By tolerance I mean it doesn't matter what color, religion, or race, ie why I stated background in the quotations.
    Nope,. sorry, but you said "no matter what their background" even if their background is of being lazy and wanting other to take care of them. I wouldn't use the word tolerant based on your criteria. Tolerant is: Inclined to tolerate the beliefs, practices, or traits of others; forbearing. Last I checked, laziness is a trait.
  • Grimmerick
    Grimmerick Posts: 3,342 Member
    for me it doesn't matter what background they have my stipulations would be

    Tolerance (people tolerant of others no matter what their background)
    Common Sense (this is a big one for me)
    Contributions (people that contribute and don't expect to be taken care of or feel entitled to things they didnt' earn)
    Accountable (people that are accountable for their own actions)
    Hahaha, you totally are making a hypocrite of yourself in your own list. Obviously you don't believe in #1 based on the rest of your list...

    yep I still do mean it, and I think with some of number two you can figure out the rest yourself. A lot of different meanings can fall under tolerance. But let me lay it out for you just in case you wouldn't be here because of lacking number two on the list. By tolerance I mean it doesn't matter what color, religion, or race, ie why I stated background in the quotations.
    Nope,. sorry, but you said "no matter what their background" even if their background is of being lazy and wanting other to take care of them. I wouldn't use the word tolerant based on your criteria. Tolerant is: Inclined to tolerate the beliefs, practices, or traits of others; forbearing. Last I checked, laziness is a trait.

    I won't argue or debate the semantics of this because it's pointless. I know what I meant and now you do too.
    haha I hope you didn't actually go and look up the dictionary definition so you could nitpick on the use of a word and what you feel it's meaning should encompass.
  • mikajoanow
    mikajoanow Posts: 584 Member
    Not nearly enough info to answer this question.
  • BrettPGH
    BrettPGH Posts: 4,716 Member
    Ok we can still answer this if we keep it vague. Just imagine you're preparing for all possibilities.

    First and foremost you have to choose "survivors". People who are going to be able to live through whatever this is. That has a lot of different meanings depending on just what goes down. But you'll want to have people who can live in their own environment with little outside help. Focus on farmers, they're key. People with a working knowledge of land. Hunters. Your first concern is always food and water so you need people who know how to provide that. Butchers, cooks, bakers.. people who literally put food on the table.

    Next you get different specialties. You'll need engineers, doctors and scientists. If we're starting things from scratch you want people with knowledge about history. An aquaduct may be primitive today but you'll kill for one if you don't have a source of clean water. You need people who not only have this knowledge but can teach it to others.

    Now it goes without saying that women are included in all professions I've listed. But regardless you need to make sure you have a population "balanced" enough for procreation. I'm sure we all get what I'm saying there.

    You'll even need a few "artists". People who can provide entertainment. Human beings can not live on survival alone. We need some distraction from our daily routine.

    Add to that a percentage of the population that can be considered "general labor". Builders, carpenters... the guys and gals who do all the actual work. Somebody has to remove the trash in every society.

    Throw in one leader who is charismatic, strong, wise, smart, fair and well liked with as much of a "security force" as is required and there you have it! One bare bones society.

    I'm sure it sounds like a lot but really if we're talking anything less than a few thousand people we're not going to make it anyway.
  • If anyone can find one of those things online that say something to this effect, we should so do one on here:

    Such and such natural disaster is occuring and only a small amount of people can be chosen to start a new colony. Out of this list of 12 people, which 6 should be chosen for the colony?

    Those are always fun to do. But I've only done them many years ago, when I was in college, and I haven't found many online.
  • killerqueen17
    killerqueen17 Posts: 536 Member
    If anyone can find one of those things online that say something to this effect, we should so do one on here:

    Such and such natural disaster is occuring and only a small amount of people can be chosen to start a new colony. Out of this list of 12 people, which 6 should be chosen for the colony?

    Those are always fun to do. But I've only done them many years ago, when I was in college, and I haven't found many online.

    You think those are fun?? More power to you...!!

    I had to do one with a group for some team building exercise (or something), and I found it VERY stressful, emotionally draining, and depressing!! I think I mentally connected with my imaginary 12 people a bit too realistically... haha!
This discussion has been closed.