Slashdot Mirror


Coastal Megacity Karachi Is Running Out of Water (earther.com)

The Pakistani megacity of Karachi, home to more than 20 million people, is among the most water-stressed cities in the world, only able to meet half of its daily water demand. From a report: Karachi requires 1,100 million of gallons per day (mgd), but only receives 550 mgd, according to the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KWSB). Karachi's water is sourced from the Indus River via Keenjhar Lake, which sits more than 90 miles away from the city. The water shortage in Karachi is linked to myriad factors including climate change, mismanagement of water resources, and corruption. Most of all, however, a rising population increasing at a rate of 4.5 percent a year creates a strain on the finite water supply. Pakistan ranks in the top ten of countries worst affected by climate change, and water shortages are likely to deepen in both intensity and frequency in the coming decade.

286 comments

  1. That's nothing by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm running out of beer and the Grocery Outlet is closed and I'm too buzzed to drive. And I'm supposed to be upset because Karachi's running out of water just because there are 20 million people there? You SJWs really suck, you know that? Who's going to stand up for me, huh? Nobody, that's who. Wait, I think I just heard my neighbor come home. I bet he's got some beer. Never mind.

    Happy Memorial Day everybody!

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:That's nothing by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I just can't believe that a bunch of dune coons and sand níggers who reproduce like rats (as Allah commands!) might just have a water shortage. No fucking way! Damn who ever saw that shit coming amirite?! We just need our SJW types to tell those water molecules how terribly racist they are. Equal outcome must be guaranteed no matter what!

      I know it shouldn't, but whenever I can make an Anonymous Coward really melt down like this, it just makes me feel like I have not lived my life in vain.

      Now everybody have a safe and peaceful Memorial Day, and for those of you who are concerned about me running out of beer, yes, my neighbor had a fridge in his garage with enough Firestone-Walker 805 Pale Ale to get me through until I'm done watching the last episode of Evil Genius on Netflix. All is well.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re: That's nothing by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Are you gasping for air, as you flip around in the bottom of that boat? You shouldn't have struck on that fishing plug. Anybody could have told you there was a hook. Granted, you've been hooked by a master, so you didn't really stand a chance.

    3. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "All those old rich white people are dying out! We'll never lose another election again!"
      -- 'Tolerant' Liberals, 2015

    4. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody care what you think, you will be dead soon. So easily triggered, sad.

    5. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pakistan doesn't have that much sand compared to, say, Saudi Arabia. It would have been more appropriate to refer to the Muslims as towelheads or ragheads. When discussing Arabs, then it's more valid to use terms like sand níggers, dune coons, and camel jockeys.

      As for PopeRatzo, the Klingons would simply refer to him as a petaQ.

    6. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was only pretending to be retarded! HAha! Got you! - PopeRatzo

    7. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, triggered.

    8. Re:That's nothing by nnet · · Score: 2

      Knowing it was a holiday weekend, how could you permit yourself to even potentially run out of beer?

    9. Re:That's nothing by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      Knowing it was a holiday weekend, how could you permit yourself to even potentially run out of beer?

      it's a long story, but a thirsty friend dropped by unannounced earlier to watch the Eastern Conference Finals and the next thing you know my strategic reserves were running low. But I'm one of those loaves and fishes kind of Episcopalians who will give you the shirt of his back and the beer out his fridge, so I unselfishly and without regard for my own well-being shared what I had. Because I'm like that.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You as well, comrade.

    11. Re: That's nothing by Barsteward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At least he has a nickname to which we can attribute posts to. Moaning about a "troll" as an AC doesn't quite work.

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    12. Re:That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      call uber and tell them you need beer delivered or else you'll get lyft to do it.

    13. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Muslims don't wear turbans, Sheikh do. They had a war between them to the point it is why Sheikhs also carry a dagger at all times, so getting the two confused is like getting Japanese and Chinese confused (ie: It REALLY pisses them off).

    14. Re:That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an AC, Sir, I salute you and join in wishing a safe and peaceful Memorial Day to all. Fortunately, I live in a mmj state so I will be enjoying some big buddha cheese while eating a chimichanga with family. All is well.

    15. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is Sikh not Sheikh.

    16. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You shouldn't be dissing I.T. closet cleaners. They often volunteer to do jobs that everyone else spent years avoiding. For example, creimer cleared out a 600-sqft storage closet that no one had seen the floor in eight years. He did that in between tickets over a six week period. He also finished deploying 750 PCs and 1,500 monitors ahead of schedule, ending his 12-month contract after nine months.

    17. Re:That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      For the record I'd like to say that I hate all moslems. I hope to see the government exterminate all moslems during the course of my lifetime--every man, woman, and child.

    18. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He also finished deploying 750 PCs and 1,500 monitors ahead of schedule, ending his 12-month contract after nine months.

      You delusional piece of lard!

      I had to redeploy those 750 PCs by myself after paying you to do it. That's why I let you go early so you wouldn't be in the way!

      I redeployed everything in 3 months and met the deadline but the money we gave you is a total lost.

      You also threw away a bunch of valuable spare parts in your genius closet cleaning and we had to buy new ones, further adding to the bill. You are a disaster.

      Fuck you!

    19. Re: That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also threw away a bunch of valuable spare parts in your genius closet cleaning and we had to buy new ones, further adding to the bill. You are a disaster.

      CROFLOL! He most probably ate those spare parts and farted as he was going...

    20. Re:That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh DopeFatzo, you so crazy! And witty, and funny...

  2. Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Venona2018 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Pakistan has gone from 40 million people in 1955 to 200 million in 2018. That is a 5 times increase in less than 65 years. Is there anyone who thinks that is sustainable? http://www.worldometers.info/w...

    1. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by thesupraman · · Score: 0

      And not to mention that 'climate change' is apparently going to increase rain.
      Also notice that they dont claim any reduction in water supply, they just want something to point at that it does not magically increase as they take more and more.

      Perhaps they need to look up the work 'sustainable' and apply it a little?

    2. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're saying the solution is more H1B visas?

    3. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google, Amazon and MSFT are strongly supportive of this idea.

      Old White Men are to blame if the brownies create a hellhole for themselves by overbreeding.

      A truth any real Marxist/Maoist knows from HER heart!

      Import Calcutta to relieve their population problems for two weeks, until they have re-bred the delta!

    4. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      How about you look at the per capita consumption of water in that city and compare it to the per capita consumption of water in any American city before firing off your mouth.

      Go on look it up I'll wait right here.

    5. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Hallo, this is John from Microsoft Support..." maybe let them dry out a bit, eh?

    6. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Each of Berlin's residents uses an average of 110 litres of water per day. (Or for the americans, about 29.3 gallons).
      In Portland for example, residents use 50 gallons per day. But honeslty there is no comparison - there is NO water shortage in Portland, in fact they have more water than they know what to do with.

      As do the majority of US cities.

      Phoenix/Las Vegas will soon suffer the same fate as Karachi. The Colorado river is drying up and being used more as there are more people and swimming pools and less water to go around.

    7. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We have so much groundwater here that we pump it into rivers to keep our basements dry. We still use only about as much water for personal use as Karachi currently uses per person. Granted, with industrial and agricultural use, we use more than 40 times as much, but is that really comparable? We have more water than we know what to do with, so there's not really a point in conserving it, but I guarantee that our waste water is cleaner than Karachi's. We have a separate drain system for rain, so that waste water doesn't get into the rivers uncleaned when heavy rains would otherwise overload wastewater treatment plants.

      Karachi has more people than the Netherlands. The Dutch built wind-"mills" to drain an entire country and reclaim land from the North Sea. I'm not sure that Pakistan's population growth is unsustainable (yet), but the people of Karachi definitely need to step up their game and work on solving their problems. There's no use in complaining that the river doesn't have more water. And don't you dare blame it on climate change. Climate change is real, but Karachi's problem are not caused by it.

    8. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Religion is unsustainable for sure. When the population has an uncontrollable growth, when it reach the threshold called carrying capacity, there are naturally occurring regulating mechanisms to correct, none is pleasant (Most already exists when everything is fine but they are amplify under pressure: food/water/space shortage): sickness, high child mortality, civil unrest, conflicts, wars, ...

    9. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Harsh as it sounds, that is exactly the core problem: If you bred like crazy in a resource-starved situation, you will eventually run into mass die-off that normalizes your population numbers to something far lower. Of course, this also comes with a civilization collapse when it happens to a human population. In theory, a human population can avoid this catastrophe by restricting its own breeding to what is sustainable, but apparently this one here cannot.

      Or in other words, they are going towards a horrible catastrophe, all of their own making.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    10. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there anyone who thinks that is sustainable? http://www.worldometers.info/w...

      There is a whole planet full of people who are not thinking this way. Otherwise why would we fill up the earth like this?

    11. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      HEER DERR RELIGION. MAKE MORE BABAAAAAAIES. FTA: This is due to corruption, mismanagement, and unsustainable practices. Let them figure it out the hard way.

    12. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about you cite references and prove your own point instead of demanding that other people do it for you.

      I'll do the same amount of research you did on the question of whether your mom should have swallowed. Oh look... absolutely nothing I found contradicts my point, so I must be right.

    13. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Zorpheus · · Score: 4, Informative

      And let's make clear the relation to the numbers in the summary: Karachi still has about as much water per resident as Berlin is consuming. They don't have a lack of water, they have bad management of it and are wasting it.

    14. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, in fairness people will need more water in a really hot climate.
      Also these statistics may or may not include industry, so should not be trusted without review.

    15. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by sycodon · · Score: 2

      Especially Ellicott City this weekend.

      And the CO river is not drying up. It's being sucked up.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    16. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We all know that the reason for this problem are "climate change, mismanagement of water resources, and corruption", in that order. Trump coal mines are to blame first and foremost.

    17. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by v1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You bring up an interesting point. Every controlling structure has some resource that is key to maintaining or increasing its influence. In most governments, this is in arms or mining or even food production. But for religion, the most important resource is population. One common theme in any religion is they strongly oppose anything that affects population growth. They're against abortion, and very against birth control. All of them. They desperately want their followers to breed like rabbits, because that's how they increase their power and influence.

      Even if this origin has been lost to modern times, the roots are still firmly planted in the sacred books and the words of the prophets, and so it goes on, even if it's now destroying the foundations of their countries. They can't just step in and say "Hey, this is actually turning out to be BAD for us now, please stop!" They're kinda stuck with it. It takes generations to ease a religious body through a major change, and unfortunately this whole "climate change" thing and "global population booms" has come up a faster than these religious groups can change course to match.

      So for now, yes, all the priests and pontiffs and clerics are going to continue shouting "KEEP MAKING MORE BABIES!!" because it's all they or their followers know to do. Normally crusades, invasions, or other wars would keep this in check, but now that job is getting handed over to famine, disease, and civil unrest. What an improvement!

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    18. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Increases rain ... somewhere.
      Bit not where you need/want it.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    19. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Climate change is real, but Karachi's problem are not caused by it.
      It is not the main cause, but less rain and less slow and less glaciers in the Himalaya are not really helpful.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    20. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      The population growth of a city (4.5% in this case) is completely unrelated to the population growth of the country. Cities grow because people move there.
      Parkistans population growth is 2% ... which is quite ok.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    21. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      One common theme in any religion is they strongly oppose anything that affects population growth. That is nonsense.
      They're against abortion, and very against birth control. All of them.
      That is double nonsense.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    22. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a Muslim. I am married. I'm damn happy with birth control.

      Your drivel might sound nice and intellectual, but it suffers from the minor issue of being wrong about just about everything.

    23. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cities grow because people move there.

      People in cities don't fuck and bear children? I pity your life experience.

    24. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans are a virus. Duh.

    25. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They will all move to London. Become the mayor.

    26. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by green1 · · Score: 1

      How helpful.... You could potentially have cited an example rather than simply state that it's "double nonsense".

    27. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Viruses aren't living creatures, Agent Smith.

    28. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. The children will spill out into surrounding countries. Some more liberal western democracies will welcome them in. What is not sustainable is the United States with out declining birthrate.

      In the USA, puritanicalsm and modern feminism have created an unholy alliance whereby procreation has become a societal taboo. E.g If you show skin you are corrupting the youth. If you say hello to a female, you are raping them with your mind.

      So old ads white people will have to import these Pakistanini to take care of them in their old age.

    29. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the rest of the world could take in their overpopulation. That way, when the collapse happens, it'll be global instead of local.

    30. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phoenix is well on their way to subsisting on recycled urine (treat effluent, then pump it deep into a dry river bed, and pump it back out ten miles downstream treat to drinking water standards and reuse), while LV seems intent on draining Lake Mead

      Karachi doesn't even have a working sewer system

    31. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GGP was talking about religion in general. With simple observation, this particular statement "They're against abortion, and very against birth control. All of them." can be easily proven as false statement. It's an example of absolute quantification, you only need one sample to disprove it.

    32. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by green1 · · Score: 2

      And yet, you continue to fail to provide such an example. If it's easy to disprove it, simply do so. Most of us are quite familiar with several major religions that follow the poster's claim, however we're not necessarily aware of any that do not.

      I'm not actually picking a side here, I'm just saying that your comment doesn't add anything to the discussion unless you include the example that proves the poster wrong.

    33. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by green1 · · Score: 1

      I don't think the statement was about any particular person who is a member of any particular faith, it was about the teachings of the faith itself. Whether or not you follow those teachings does not disprove the poster's statement.

    34. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They can't just step in and say "Hey, this is actually turning out to be BAD for us now, please stop!" They're kinda stuck with it. It takes generations to ease a religious body through a major change, and unfortunately this whole "climate change" thing and "global population booms" has come up a faster than these religious groups can change course to match.

      I can only speak for Norway but... 105 years since women got the vote. 57 years since the first female priest. 46 years since homosexuality was decriminalized. 40 years since legalized abortion. 25 years ago since the first female bishop and gay partnership law. 9 years ago since gay marriage. That's all (barely) in living memory. The church has shown an amazing ability to morph into a quasi-spiritual organization for all people who believe in souls and an afterlife as their worldly teachings have been stripped away and the fire and brimstone parts tucked away as not very PC.

      The truth is that it's not their teachings on condoms and birth control that makes the most difference, it's their position on women. If you look at all the shittiest countries the men work, the women are at home popping out 5-6-7 children and raising them to adulthood. They don't have jobs, they don't have education, many of them aren't even literate... but they can breed and no matter how dirt poor people are today we don't let kids starve to death. Once women start having their own career, birth rates drop like a rock. Working mom with three kids is doable, six kids is almost impossible.

      And all religions are quite capable of adjusting their teachings to accommodate that. Take an Islamic theocracy like Iran, nearly 70% of university graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) are women. They got a birth rate of about 1.7, same as many western countries. If they can do it, any country can. Take a look at Rosling's "peak child" statistics video to see how much some countries really did change in 50 years, both Christian nations, Islamic nations and Eastern religion nations.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    35. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      The Shakers are a religious group who require celibacy.

      That's one example. There are less extreme examples too.

    36. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      United States had an population of 3.9 million in 1790 and a population of 23 million in 1860. Now they are already at 327 million and counting. That is almost a 6 times increase in less than 60 years. Is there anyone who thinks that is sustainable?

    37. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is NOT what I'm talking about. You're right, and the damming hasn't helped. This is what I'm talking about:

      Climate change will likely decrease the river’s flow by 5 to 20 percent in the next 40 years, says geoscientist Brad Udall, director of the University of Colorado Western Water Assessment. Less precipitation in the Rocky Mountains will yield less water to begin with. Droughts will last longer. Higher overall air temperatures will mean more water lost to evaporation. “You’re going to see earlier runoff and lower flows later in the year,” so water will be more scarce during the growing season, says Udall.

    38. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Buddhist, Hinduists, Christians, Shinto, non is preaching unreasonable population increase.
      And I doubt Moslems or Jews do. In the old testament God told mankind to spread out. But since the planet is full with humanns no one is really preaching more growth (because it actually never was part of the religion anyways)

      Why should anyone care to prove a poster wrong who is a racist and an idiot?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    39. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 1

      They're ... very against birth control. All of them.

      When Martin Luther nailed his protest up to the church door in fifteen- seventeen, he may not have realized the full significance of what he was doing, but four hundred years later, thanks to him, my dear, I can wear whatever I want on my John Thomas. And Protestantism doesn't stop at the simple condom! Oh, no! I can wear French Ticklers if I want.

    40. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 1

      The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (the largest single non-Catholic denomination in the US) allows for the use of Birth Control, as does The United Methodist Church, The Presbyterian Church, and the Anglican/Episcopalian church.

    41. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point of order: Americans are not complaining that Pakistan is running out of water. We are complaining that someone is going to want us to do something about it, when clearly their overpopulation is NOT our fault.

      Sure we could ship over tanker loads of fresh water until it hurts us, but that wont encourage them to embrace the idea of birth control. In fact it will only encourage them to continue with the status quo.

    42. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's mighty white of them.

    43. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can't just step in and say "Hey, this is actually turning out to be BAD for us now, please stop!" They're kinda stuck with it. It takes generations to ease a religious body through a major change, and unfortunately this whole "climate change" thing and "global population booms" has come up a faster than these religious groups can change course to match.

      I can only speak for Norway but... 105 years since women got the vote. 57 years since the first female priest. 46 years since homosexuality was decriminalized. 40 years since legalized abortion. 25 years ago since the first female bishop and gay partnership law. 9 years ago since gay marriage. That's all (barely) in living memory. The church has shown an amazing ability to morph into a quasi-spiritual organization for all people who believe in souls and an afterlife as their worldly teachings have been stripped away and the fire and brimstone parts tucked away as not very PC.

      A generation is roughly 25.5 years, so 105 years is multiple generations, so the plural of "generation" is in fact appropriate.

      Hence, OP is correct, it takes generations.

      Given the amount of fanaticism in Islam, we probably are talking at least 60-70 years for the last Islamic nation to join the 20th century (yes, I know it's no longer the 20th century).

    44. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by green1 · · Score: 1

      I don't know about all of those ones, but I can right of the bat prove that you have no clue what your talking about because every sect of christianity that I've ever heard of is outspoken against birth control, and abortion. If the rest of your examples are as flawed you're not doing a very good job of getting the original poster.

    45. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      So protestants are not christians then?
      What has abortion to do with "breed until the planet is full" anyway?
      The catholic church stood back from their stance to birth control over 20 years ago.
      You must be living under a rock.

      The only places where still anti birth control christians are living are backyard countries like the USA.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  3. Obvious free market solution by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Obvious solution: Raise the price of water.

    Higher prices will incentivize consumers to conserve, producers to produce, and distributers to fix the leaks in their pipes.

    1. Re:Obvious free market solution by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ah, sadly not. People either pay nothing for water (they steal it) or they already pay a fortune to the "tanker mafia".

      http://www.circleofblue.org/20...

    2. Re:Obvious free market solution by gweihir · · Score: 2

      In other words, the situation is completely screwed up and getting worse. Well, looks like we will get to watch a historic event live here.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    3. Re:Obvious free market solution by misnohmer · · Score: 1

      It must either be really easy to steal or all those people moving in must have plenty of money. The article mentions 4.5% population increase. If water was not affordable (or easy to steel for free) then there would be no incentives for new people to move in, and there should be people looking for a way out.

    4. Re:Obvious free market solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Brilliant, and we can solve starvation by raising the price of food.

      Pull your head out of your ass

      Homelessness problem? Raise the the price of housing,

      If bread is too costly, let them eat cake.

    5. Re:Obvious free market solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The people "moving in" are coming out of wombs, they don't tend to have a lot of money.

      A way out? You must be a dumb ass who thinks poor people in Karachi should just move to someplace else in Pakistan where, somehow, things will be better. They move to Karachi because things are WORSE elsewhere.

    6. Re:Obvious free market solution by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The silly argument again.
      How high do you want to rise the prices?
      How are you dealing with the riots?

      The only way is rationing. And then education. And in the end price changes.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    7. Re: Obvious free market solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because corruption and ineptitude would never cause water issues in the USA.

      Cough Flint Cough.

    8. Re:Obvious free market solution by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      Rationing will deal with current shortages.
      And its the only way to deal with the long term psychological problems that causes shortages: Because otherwise you could end up with a social class that will ignore the shortages because they can pay for the embargoed mafiapriced water. In some cases it can be the entire of society.

      But only policy changes to infrastructure, and what happens around the waterways will impact future shortages.
      Desalination, what is happening around the rivers that supply the water, groundwater, etc.

    9. Re: Obvious free market solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So there is less water elsewhere in Pakistan? Why is the article singling out the place in Pakistan with the most water and suggesting it doesn't?

      Something doesn't add up here, and I don't think it is the article.

    10. Re:Obvious free market solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you bring a child into this world it means you will have less water for yourself. In a sense his logic still stands. And its not necessarily the case that it isn't better from a wanter perspective elsewhere. The problem is it isn't sufficiently bad yet from a water perspective to cause people to move out. And as someone else pointed out this is an artificial problem created by mismanagement rather than an insufficient water supply. With changes in management the problem can be solved.

    11. Re: Obvious free market solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Impure water, and not enough water are two different balls of wax.

      Not to mention I am willing to bet they have a lack of supply, and a lack of cleaning of that water in pakistan, whilst flint is not far from some of the worlds largest fresh water reserves.

  4. Leave or deal with it by mveloso · · Score: 2

    In the end, they can leave or deal with water scarcity. It sounds like things aren't bad enough for people to leave and improvements are impossible, so deal with it they will.

    1. Re: Leave or deal with it by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Or build desalinization plants. There is no shortage of water, it's a problem of infrastructure.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re: Leave or deal with it by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Or build desalinization plants.

      Patching leaky pipes is WAY more cost effective than building energy-hungry desalination plants.

    3. Re: Leave or deal with it by sheramil · · Score: 1

      Or build desalinization plants.

      I've occasionally wondered, what do they do with all the salt they recover? Sodium bullets and chlorine gas?

    4. Re: Leave or deal with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It goes back into the ocean as brine (increasing salinity in the area around the pipe outflow).

    5. Re: Leave or deal with it by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Informative

      It goes back into the ocean, and is (rather quickly) diluted so that there is no observable difference. Near the output 'vent' there is higher salt content in the water, which can affect the environment right around the output area, but that can be mitigated through various techniques.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:Leave or deal with it by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      In the end, they can leave or deal with water scarcity. It sounds like things aren't bad enough for people to leave and improvements are impossible, so deal with it they will.

      I know. Life can be tough in the country. I suggest they all move to a big city where they have these luxuries ... WCPGW

    7. Re:Leave or deal with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You a fucking neoliberal, ain't you?

      "Just deal with it or die, I mean, survival of the fittest" or something.

      I hope draught reaches your within your life span.

    8. Re:Leave or deal with it by gweihir · · Score: 1

      The only real chance they have is to stop population growth. But it looks like they are incapable of even thinking that.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    9. Re: Leave or deal with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sprinkle it on food to harden the arteries and reduce the overpopulation that lead to the need for desalination in the first place.

    10. Re:Leave or deal with it by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I suggest they all move to a big city

      I think they took your advice and chose Manchester.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re: Leave or deal with it by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Or build desalinization plants.

      Patching leaky pipes is WAY more cost effective than building energy-hungry desalination plants.

      In all likelihood if their population is growing at 4.5% every year; they need to do both!

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    12. Re: Leave or deal with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The solution to pollution is dilution!

    13. Re: Leave or deal with it by swb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They've been relining the water mains here to limit leaks and pipe failures. It's been going on across the city for several years now, and this is a really well managed, self-funded (ie, water fees pay for the water system) water system that's mostly newer than 120 years (good chunks maybe less than 75 years old), run by a more or less functional city government.

      Can you imagine what Karachi's water plant is like? I'll bet just creating documentation as to where the pipes are would be a decade-long odyssey and it probably wouldn't uncover miles of unauthorized extensions and tapping into the system.

      Fixing the leaks is a good idea, but I'd bet in Karachi building a desal plant is probably actually more cost effective compared to detangling the mess they have.

    14. Re: Leave or deal with it by green1 · · Score: 1

      Of course in other parts of the world they do the opposite, and extract the salt and throw the fresh water back into the ocean. Salt is still a valuable commodity as well.

      What seems far less common is a plant that does both desalination, and salt production, which you would think would be a natural fit.

    15. Re: Leave or deal with it by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      How much do you have to lose?

      Doesn't sound like you have much of a clue. The worse the pipes, the _lower_ the cost will be for initial improvements. Granting, the finding the later, smaller leaks will suck.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    16. Re: Leave or deal with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They sell it as 'sea salt' or just dump it back in the ocean.

    17. Re: Leave or deal with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really, since the feed water is dosed with chemicals in the pre-treatment stage to remove particles and prevent fouling of the plant.

      Reverse osmosis plants are ideally co-located with a thermal power station so that they can use the warmed outflow for their feed as warmer water has a lower osmotic pressure, meaning less energy is required for desalination on top of reduced transmission losses.

      Salt pans require lots of land as well as being located in an area with high evaporation rates. I don't know what the Karachi area is like, but it might not be as good as say Dampier in north-western Australia, which has the largest sea salt harvesting operation in the world.

  5. Climate Change? by DatbeDank · · Score: 3, Informative

    Pretty sure the order of causes are corruption and water mismanagement followed by climate change being the crack that drained their fresh water supply.

    1. Re:Climate Change? by gravewax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      corruption, water mismanagement AND a massive population explosion over the last half century. climate change on top of all that I doubt has even a measurable effect by comparison.

    2. Re:Climate Change? by Pascal+Sartoretti · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure the order of causes are corruption and water mismanagement followed by climate change being the crack that drained their fresh water supply.

      As often, a climate change denier fails to justify why he is sure of something. And what about overpopulation, by the way ?

    3. Re: Climate Change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing to do with the quintupling of their population in the past 65 years?

      The water supply would be quite adequate if they'd maintained their previous population levels.

    4. Re:Climate Change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have to put it in there; every opportunity to cite climate change must be exploited, even when it is obviously tangential, as is the case here. And you're not supposed to question it either; your wrong think is showing.

    5. Re:Climate Change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and a fanatical devotion to the Pope?

    6. Re:Climate Change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That actually might improve the situation. The Islamic world never created the equivalency of a global church witch controls theology and with witch you can negotiate on ecumenical matters. They only speak of Caliphates, but that is the same as we would speak of Stalins, Hitlers and Mussolinis that will save us and convert the world.

    7. Re:Climate Change? by gravewax · · Score: 1

      yeah just what they need, yet another fanatical religious sect that denounces population control like the pope does. they have double the population that is supportable by the water supply EVEN if their was no corruption and mismanagement. being in yet another church based dictators is not going to improve matters.

    8. Re:Climate Change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, who in their right mind could ever think a piece of straw could be harmful in ANY way. /s

    9. Re:Climate Change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then again, if the Catholic Church changes its mind on the issue, the local ministries can't refuse the new dogma. The chaos is lessened. Not that it would have prevented the corruption the least as the Italians here can testify.

    10. Re:Climate Change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most likely all it would have done is magnified the corruption, combined with all the other negatives it would be like strapping a boat anchor to a drowning man. Why anyone would think religion would help this situation is mind boggling.

  6. Take a cue from India - POOP on the beach! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine the water saving from not flushing! Wha? No toilets in Pakistan? Never mind.

  7. Rain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It never rains in Karachi?

    1. Re: Rain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes they fixed that now.
      www.geo.tv/amp/196937

  8. Re: Allah be praised! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you talking about the innate goodness and wisdom that would lead someone like you to post a comment like this?

  9. Re: Allah be praised! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All white old men must now feel guilty for the pakis growing their population at 4,5 percent per year!

    Marxists are convinced!

  10. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Except that isn't happening, and fresh water in America has jack shit to do with fresh water in Pakistan.

    Fuck off, Ahmed.

  11. Re: Allah be praised! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well if you read pakistan news today it say on first page they are "holding special prayers for rain" so they clearly fixed it now... right next to "two police officers martyred"

  12. Climate change is always the prime candidate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Climate change is of course front and centre as the main cause but I don't buy that. Australia is affected by climate change and growing population but still manages to keep the water flowing. It's done by resource management, infrastructure improvements [desalination etc] and educating people that water is a finite resource at least on land.
     
    .

    Fix the problems in Karachi of infrastructure, corruption, water use and population growth first.

  13. Plenty of water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This city sits right at the coast - just desalinize the seawater and they'll never run out. Humankind has known about desalinization for thousands of years so why are they forgetting now?

  14. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Right, because they get their water from the same place.
    You fucking idiots will do anything to try and blame shit on the US.

  15. Because it is expensive by thesjaakspoiler · · Score: 2

    water from rivers is free. But agreed, who needs fresh drinking water to flush the toilet? Maybe they should have thought about a greywater system in the 65 years it took them to go from 50 to 200 milion people?

  16. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well I found this and the family in the picture puts America's Duggars (only 18 kids) to shame with 36 kids https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-population-muslim-birth-rate-census-disaster-poverty-million-a7938816.html

  17. My non-PC thought: by blind+biker · · Score: 0

    Fuck 'em.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:My non-PC thought: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't go as far as to call that a 'thought'.

    2. Re:My non-PC thought: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A thought? Being an average American, you are definitely over-estimating your mental capacity.

    3. Re:My non-PC thought: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, but then I have another non-PC thought for you as well: USAians voting for Dumbass J. Trump and refusing to do something about the NRA infestation is evolution in action. It will solve itself eventually, possibly with a significant reduction in population, which can only be healthy for the planet.

    4. Re: My non-PC thought: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I would call it more of a thoughtful conclusion

  18. First of all, is that US or UK gallons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    3.79 liters per gallon or 4.55 liters per gallon? Get with the fucking times, hicks. Then, are you trying to tell me that they really NEED more than 200 liters per person per day? Surely that includes industrial uses, because that's a lot for personal use in an arid country. And surely industrial use can pay for desalination, you know, with the city being on the coast, i.e. right next to practically unlimited amounts of water.

    1. Re:First of all, is that US or UK gallons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, works out to around 200L/person/day... that's ridiculous amount for such a highly urbanised city. There must be an incredible amount being lost to leaks.

      Australian cities budget 150L/person/day for suburban homes with gardens. Inner-city apartment and townhouse dwellers without gardens use less. Some cities have separate reticulation networks for non-potable recycled water, which is used for irrigating parks and gardens and flushing toilets while others pump treated sewage water into their main reservoirs.

      What is Karachi's situation with regards to sewage treatment and reuse? It's a lot cheaper to treat sewage to potable standards than it is to desalinate sea water. With sewage recycling they should to able to reduce primary water demand by 25-50%. Las Vegas treats its sewage and pumps it back into Lake Mead.

  19. tell them to have fewer kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you instantly get called racist, even though in the west that is exactly what people keep saying.

  20. Who cares about Pakistan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, raise your hands.
    GIve me a second to count hands.
    OK. Done. No hands raised. Well nobody here gives a shit about Pakistan.

  21. A far better story: by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 5, Informative

    A far better story: Parched for a price: Karachi's water crisis

    Quotes:

    Perween Rehman: "It is not the poor who steal the water. It is stolen by a group of people who have the full support of the government agencies, the local councillors, mayors and the police; all are involved."

    "Shortly before her murder, Rehman spoke to a documentary crew, who were making a film about her work."

    More:

    "The scale of the theft is staggering. ... stealing water in Karachi is an industry worth more than half a billion dollars." (each year)

    "Ali Asghar, 75, says he still has to pay bills to the utility company for water that never comes in the pipes."

    Another problem:
    Family size.

    "... Farzana Bibi, 40, ... manages a household of 5 people on an income of roughly $190 a month.

    "... his entire household of 17 people is dependent on water bought from tankers."

    Al Jazeera is generally a good place for such news. However, this story has no date. It was apparently written in 2017.

    So, the parent comment is exactly correct.

    1. Re: A far better story: by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Al jazerra gave .5 B to Al Gore? Go ahead. Show us the link. Personally, I have found Al jazerra to be more credible than sources like faux news, Breitbart, daily stormer, Pravda, xinhua, etc.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  22. Exceeded carrying capacity by sickre · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cut off all emigration from Pakistan and let them deal with their own problems. Overpopulation has its consequences. China knew it and implemented the One Child Policy to great success. Europe (and colonies) and East Asia have dealt with their population problems and now have stable or declining rates. If South/West Asia, the Mid East and Africa can't figure it out themselves, we're not going to bail them out by taking millions of their excess people.

    1. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we're not going to bail them out by taking millions of their excess people.

      Unfortunately the EU Commission, and most national leaders, have other ideas. In fact, the number of countries refusing migrants from African and Muslim nations is extremely low. There's Hungry, Poland and the Czech Republic, with Italy starting to see sense (far too late) and that's about it. We can expect millions more migrants in the years to come.

    2. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For some reason the EU leadership sees that as a problem and is saying we need to import people from africa to make sure we don't have population decline.
      Fuck them.

    3. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Harsh as it sounds, getting population growth under control and eventually down to zero is a critical step for survival of a nation today. Looks like Pakistan will be one of those that do not make it. Even if they can fix the water issue this time, if they continue to grow like crazy, the problem will just return far worse in the near future until it cannot be fixed anymore.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Hungary

    5. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EU leadership is saying no such thing, but it seems you're going for the Trump approach to lies: the bigger the better.

    6. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 2

      2018 folks, the year casual fascism was no longer met with instant derision.

      [ Note: Not the emigration bit, that's something for each country to legitimately decide for themselves who and how many people immigrate. I was referring to the praise for a clearly fascist intrusion on a core element of personal freedom by an obviously fascist government. A "great success"! ]

    7. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, pretty sure they are thirsty...

    8. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny since the government was very much Communist at the time.

    9. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

      If South/West Asia, the Mid East and Africa can't figure it out themselves, we're not going to bail them out by taking millions of their excess people.

      Except that we literally are. And anyone who objects "is" a fascist, racist, etc. ...

    10. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, China had great success in *implementing* its One Child policy, but judging by the effects that have been, are currently, and will continue to be felt for decades, the policy itself was a colossal mistake.

    11. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by nyet · · Score: 1

      Capitalist economies require exponential growth to be sustainable. No economics types seem to want to compare this to the effect of exponential growth on biosystems.

    12. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Yeah, funny that. Sure, the growth rates seem low, like 2% or 5% or so, but exponential is exponential and reliably kills a biological population in the end.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    13. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The right has been into fascism since before it was cool. What you are noticing is that in the past 10 or so years the left has fully embraced fascism as a reasonable means to get things done. How else are they going to help women and brown people?

    14. Re: Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they can rename Pakistan to Thirasty.
      It could help because Hungary is not hungry.

    15. Re: Exceeded carrying capacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking at the State China is in, it has been a colossal success. Prosperity has grown beyond the wildest expectations. Compare to India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, three overpopulated hellholes.

    16. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      Pakistan's population is also stabilizing. The fertility rate is currently 2.62 and replacement is probably about 2.4.

      In fact, the only places with exploding fertility these days are sub-Saharan Africa, and a handful of other countries like Afghanistan and Yemen. You should check the fertility statistics, a lot has changed since 20 years ago.

  23. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those arseholes of Americans did not build a 12000km long water pipeline. Bastards. But Allah is great, Islamic Sciences will solve the problem by throwing enough rocks to woman or mutilating them.

  24. Population growth is just momentum, actually by Moritz+Moeller+-+Her · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The number of children per woman in Pakistan has decreased rapidly in the last decades to now around 3 children per woman (2.3 is required for population to just be static in the long run). The only reason the population still grows is many children growing up and having (on average 2-3) kids of their own. There is no statistic link between religion and population growth.

    See here: https://www.google.com/publicd...

    Or if you do only trust the US, check the CIA:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/pu...

    --
    Moritz
    1. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wrong interpretation! World population growth is heavily influenced by the growth of Muslim population. One should rather compare the rate of population growth of Muslims vs that of non-Muslims.

    2. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was skeptical, but the Pew center corroborates your claim for the period from 2010-2015.

    3. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by cnaumann · · Score: 1

      Wouldn’t that be 2 children per women for stable population? I have never understood the 2.3 or any number higher than 2 except to account for more males being norn.

      Even if you don’t count female children as “women”, that would imply a huge childhood mortality rate if 11% of children do not make it to adulthood (breeding age).

      In fact, I would think the number would actaully be less than 2 since not all females in any given population have finished having children.

    4. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet you didn't feel compelled to indicate that Christians are just a little behind the Muslims? From your own link:

      World average: 2.5
      Christians: 2.7 (8% above average)
      Muslims: 3.1 (12.4% above average)

      What does it say about Christians that they are still breeding at that rate despite most of them living in better countries with much better education than the Muslim populations?

    5. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does it say about Christians that they are still breeding at that rate despite most of them living in better countries with much better education than the Muslim populations?

      Just to answer my own question: it doesn't say a fucking thing, because it's more complicated than a single factor.

    6. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Moritz+Moeller+-+Her · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My original source is this highly recommended and entertaining Ted Talk youtube video from Hans Gosling - "Religions and Babies".

      https://www.google.com/url?sa=...

      --
      Moritz
    7. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Megane · · Score: 2

      Correlation is not causation. It's actually a third-world thing more than a religious thing. With certain exceptions (like Mormons), the western world has had low or negative population growth because of societal change, not religion. Until children stop becoming an asset and start becoming a hindrance to lifestyle, humans will reproduce more. On the other hand, there might be some indirect causation in that Muslims tend to live in the third world and hold back progress, keeping them in charge of third-world shitholes, which keeps the birth rate up.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    8. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by MaryannG · · Score: 1

      Thank you for that! That was a very interesting talk! So, we top out at 10B and will do that if we can lift some of those high birth rate countries out of poverty. Watching the charts on that video I was struck by a really obvious trend: how much more money people make compared to 60 years ago. With capitalism being the dominant, driving force (especially in China...wow), birth rates have declined and people are better off. It's not explicitly mentioned in the video but it seems pretty obvious if you look for it and watch the progression of the dots as he animates his chart. Interesting stuff.

      --
      Social Media Handywoman at Texas Boys Balloo
    9. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correlation is not causation. It's actually a third-world thing more than a religious thing.

      Forgetting the hard-evidence linked elsewhere that refutes your claim, there is another more systemic problem:

      Knowing whether excessive population growth is caused or merely correlated by a specific factor is irrelevant to the end result of overpopulation, suffering, and eventual societal collapse.

      Dying of a cold or basic infection is highly correlated with having AIDS, but those diseases are not directly caused by AIDS nor is death. The end result is the same. People with AIDS better do something extra to protect from basic diseases or die.

    10. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by green1 · · Score: 1

      The number of children per woman is more properly the number of children per woman of child-bearing age. Therefore a number higher than 2 is to account for children who do not reach the age to have more children.

      If you were to define it instead as children per female born, then yes, 2 would be the magic number (plus or minus the number required to adjust for different birth rates between the genders)

      Additional adjustments may be needed to account for immigration/emigration if you are talking stable population in a specific area as opposed to on the global scale.

    11. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without adjusting for things like socioeconomic status, it is impossible to know if this just means that poor people have higher fertility and a larger fraction of muslims are poor.

    12. Re: Population growth is just momentum, actually by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Muslim, Catholic, Mormon, Hindu, judiasm, evangelism, etc ALL encourage large families.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    13. Re: Population growth is just momentum, actually by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Actually, due to lifetime being extended, the global average would be 2.1 for stable population ( early deaths, sterility, genetic issues, etc require the .1 ). Something like 30-50 years ago, it was 2.3 for stability.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    14. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having 2-3 kids is stable. It can't be the reason for the growth you mentioned.

    15. Re: Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing to do with lifetime being extended. Extending womans ages from 60 to 80 won't be having more kids, they're a little old already. Women being healthier and living to the end of their fertile period would the reason.
      American's are living shorter lives now anyway and it's not all school shootings either...American healthcare just sucks...

    16. Re: Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So religion was the problem all along. Education seems to solve the too many kids problems in every country its been tried in. Guess the religion problem was just an education problem in disguise.

    17. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by nyet · · Score: 1

      Religions arise from third world conditions and terribad education. It reflects the requirements to keep third world economics running - unbridled population expansion (a happy side effect being the self perpetuation of the religion that esposes it), and continued large scale ignorance.

    18. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong interpretation again! Let us take the case of India. The Ted Talk paints the whole of India as a land of "Eastern Religion" and hence draws an incorrect conclusion. I suggest that you take a look at this instead:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_India

      In the past 70 years, Muslim population in India has grown at least 5 fold, whereas the population of the others has gone up about 3 times.

      The other correlation in the Ted Talk - that well-to-do people procreate less seems mostly correct. I hope that cycle continues. This beautiful spaceship is already overloaded.

    19. Re: Population growth is just momentum, actually by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      Not lifestyle being extended as such, that extra few months at the end when you're 80 isn't going to produce many more kids.
      But it's more women surviving to have those 2 and a bit kids in the first place.

    20. Re: Population growth is just momentum, actually by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Hinduism and Buddhism both have multiple interpretations - but largely both do not prohibit contraception. Large families are not encouraged directly by religious texts, or "experts" - seers, Gurus, monks.

      If religious types in India and Nepal are starting to encourage large families for Hindus - it is largely due to their Muslim phobia. To avoid having a larger proportion of Muslims, and hence Muslim voters, Hindus are urged to have larger families. They say so explicitly, very nearly always when encouraging large families for Hindus. Even they don't believe that Hinduism in itself has any role in encouraging large families.

      Poor Muslim couples having 10 kids is a narrative that has many takers. Middle class Muslim couples having 2 kids are ignored.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    21. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      Actually, the highest birthrates nowadays are in sub-Saharan countries, which are mostly Christian not Muslim. In most Muslim countries, birthrates are relatively low. In 2 of the 3 largest Muslim countries (Indonesia and Bangladesh), they are already below replacement.

    22. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American accounting, abortions count as 1/3 of a person, or slaves or something.

  25. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by aliquis · · Score: 1

    But Americans still have water.

  26. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

    And why not present figures in metric values so that people in the rest of the world would be able to understand how big the issue is?

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  27. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainab by aliquis · · Score: 1

    For globalist it does

  28. Earth to Karachi! Earth to Karachi! by reboot246 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Quit fucking. You're producing too many people. I can't continue supporting you. Try oral sex or jerk off, just quit fucking!!

    1. Re:Earth to Karachi! Earth to Karachi! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical liberal response. Maybe send them to the gas chambers as well just for being human beings? At least the Right embraces life and cherishes it. A real human being would figure out a solution to the problem to help these poor souls get access to water. Its not a unsolvable problem.

  29. Nothing a pandemic can't solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Breeders are always needers

  30. Re:Just a few facts.....so keep those downvotes aw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/01/world/saudi-arabia-awakes-to-the-perils-of-inbreeding.html

  31. Self correcting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As the World fills up with Muslims, they'll all start killing one another because the all the other Muslims practice Islam the wrong way.

    What we in the West need to do is just stay out of the way. As soon as we step foot in one of those countries, we become the infidel invaders and they band together and forget their imaginary differences.

    For example, we should just let ISIS do its thing and save our money - we'll need it for Medicare and Social Security.

    1. Re:Self correcting by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      We need to maintain the stalemate. The bad outcome of that war is either side winning.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Self correcting by fish_sauce · · Score: 1

      In other words a preemptive strike would sound like a reasonable solution right now. The Muslim population is a threat to humans surviving on this planet. Lets wipe them all out in that war torn area. Those savages only know one thing: War.
      Nuke them and put them out of their misery. Think only the unreasonable emo snowflakes would care if they are wiped out.

      So why not nuke them already? Iran and Iraq and all round those areas. If you are going to do something, do it right the first time. A work well done is art.
      Do it before the violence spills over even more to our countries. I really thought Trump would nuke them, that was a vote wasted. Disappointing cowards.

      Then to make it fun, make it open season on those that are dirtying up our countries. Should not take long at all. I have always wanted to torture a pedophile or its supporter to death. It is said to be quite therapeutic. Then play a game of how long I can keep them alive and in the worst pain my twisted little mind can think of (This is why biology and history books exist).

    3. Re:Self correcting by fish_sauce · · Score: 1

      Why keep the stalemate? We can nuke them both. Win-Win. Was just whining about Trump being too much of a coward to do it.

    4. Re:Self correcting by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      WTF? Do you even Machiavelli?

      No. As it is, it has them buying weapons from us (and the Ruskies), while the war draws their most militant people into a blender.

      Remember Iran/Iraq? That was the prototype. When two of you enemies fight each other, that's good. Especially when one of them is pretending to be your friend (Saudi).

      About the only thing we can do to make it 'even better', is make sure they are misequipped, so they learn bad tactics. If we could only get them fighting in infantry blocks, Waterloo style, that would be perfect!

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  32. Shortage of resources... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....when that happens, perhaps population should be controlled instead of letting it continuing to grow at will.

  33. It must be true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's on a website called "Earther" and written by a Pakistani journalist. No agenda there at all! Must be absolutely the Truth.

    1. Re:It must be true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to a post on Slashdot that's one sentence long, has no citations or evidence, yet for some reason is modded as (Score:5, Informative).

      No agenda there at all! Must be absolutely the Truth.

  34. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by religionofpeas · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want to understand how big the issue is, then "they only get half the water the need" is a good description.

    1.1 billion gallons, or 4.2 million cubic meter are equally useless for proper visualization.

  35. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm also struggling to understand how many swimming pools is in 550 mgd, or should I be thinking about stacks of one dollar bills on a football field?

  36. same with Cape Town South Africa by FudRucker · · Score: 1, Insightful

    they had a water shortage too, all these coastal cities have no excuse sitting next to HUGE bodies of water, they need to build desalination plants and turn sea water in to potable drinking water

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:same with Cape Town South Africa by green1 · · Score: 1

      And they all have one thing in common. Political sources of the problem.

      Any time you have a massive increase in population, and no increase in water source, you're going to have a shortage. This is simple economics, not climate science.

    2. Re: same with Cape Town South Africa by WindBourne · · Score: 2

      We need to be doing more of that in America. We are going to see shortages sooner, rather than later.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re: same with Cape Town South Africa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't try to conserve water, pump out more CO2 instead !!
      Try for 3x the EU level, you can do it if you all work together.

    4. Re: same with Cape Town South Africa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should America try to beat China on this?
      As it is, China is already 1/3 of all CO2, and with only 1/6 of the world population, and growing fast.

    5. Re: same with Cape Town South Africa by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      You must certainly be trolling. Per person America is over twice China's level. Everyone knows this.

    6. Re: same with Cape Town South Africa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the benefit of all the WindBournes https://www.economicshelp.org/... China is less than 1/2 America Canada and Australia.

  37. Nobody is going to "run out of water" by Kevin108 · · Score: 1

    Some will just have to pay more for it.

    --

    It's a perfect time for being wasted.
    A perfect time to watch the stars.
    - Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
    1. Re:Nobody is going to "run out of water" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And if they can't afford it, they die of thirst. Perfect market efficiency.

  38. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by azcoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You got it! Karachi is home to more than 20 megapersons and is only able to meet about 5 decidemands of water per day.

    --
    Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
  39. NUCLEAR Desalinization plants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NUCLEAR Desalinization plants. That's the key. Of course then there's all that hot super-salty water that goes back into the ocean, but what harm could that do?

  40. Re:Just a few facts.....so keep those downvotes aw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why was this down modded ?

    I think this post is on the money.

    Perhaps you can refute the claims ?

  41. Desalination! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    They need to use Desalination

    1. Re:Desalination! by fish_sauce · · Score: 2

      As far as I know, desalination have never been a viable option. It is too slow and use too much energy compared to the result output.

      "The energy requirements are so high that the cost for a lot of countries is too much.That’s why it’s mainly used in regions lacking freshwater, ships, and military vessels.

      There are environmental concerns too. Desalination plants take in salt water straight from the ocean and can kill or harm fish and other small ocean life as water travels from the source to the plant."

  42. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The problem is in units of people. 10 million too many. Good luck trying to save the planet by banning plastic grocery bags while the third world is breeding like locust.

  43. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes but is it half the water they need in gallons? We Americans don't understand metric fractions.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  44. Re: Allah be praised! by hey! · · Score: 1

    Although it's just as hard to generalize about Muslims as it is Christians, you are projecting a kind of thinking onto Islam that would be regarded as heterodox,

    Most if not all orthodox schools of Muslim thought don't believe good or bad luck have anything to do with reward and punishment. In fact they view such beliefs as superstitious. Actual reward and punishment are only meted out on the Day of Judgment.

    Orthodox Muslims believe God wills good or bad things to people as a test of character. If Karachi is running out of water, that must be something that people there are capable of handling, if only they do the right thing.

    I understand you're trying to be snarky, but it doesn't work if you are obviously ignorant about the people you're mocking. It actually tells us more about you and the religious traditions you are personally familiar with.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  45. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Americans still have water.

    America has plenty of water issues, and they sure as shit didn't quintuple their population over the last half-century. If they had, then America would probably be more fucked than Pakistan right now with regards to water.

  46. Re:Allah be praised! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not attribute to God that which the stupidity of man has created.

  47. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by rojash · · Score: 1

    very well put

  48. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can't do a simple conversion, or type it into Google, then you're not capable of comprehending it anyhow.

  49. Re: Allah be praised! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ah, the no true muslim fallacy.. Irrational belief is wrong unless of course it's the one decreed in the book. I've already heard this one from the christian bible thumpers here in the US.

    I'll pass.

  50. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many football fields is that?

  51. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

    Acre-feet for the win.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  52. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    This is /.- it needs to be in the standard units of Olympic sized pools or Libraries of Congress. And there needs to be an automotive analogy as well...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  53. yet another appeal to comic inflation by epine · · Score: 1

    That is a 5 times increase in less than 65 years. Is there anyone who thinks that is sustainable?

    You mean another five-fold growth over the next 65 years? Funny thing about exponential curves: another 45 years of Moore's law would require re-inventing the atom.

    Exponential growth is not sustainable. That's what "exponential" actually means. There's two kinds of inflation in this world: comic inflation, and cosmic inflation. Only cosmic inflation never runs out of elbow room. News for Nerds, now in high middle age (with burgeoning male pattern baldness), and we're still overrun by bald appeals to comic inflation.

    Or did you mean to ask whether Pakistan's current population of 200 million is sustainable, at that number, with no further growth, and no immediate shrinkage.

    Washington Post: A disaster in the making — 9 September 2017

    "The exploding population bomb has put the entire country's future in jeopardy," columnist Zahid Hussain wrote in the Dawn newspaper recently. With 60 percent of the population younger than 30, nearly a third of Pakistanis living in poverty and only 58 percent literate, he added, "this is a disaster in the making."

    The chief causes of the continuing surge, according to population experts, include religious taboos, political timidity and public ignorance, especially in rural areas. Only a third of married Pakistani women use any form of birth control, and the only family-planning method sanctioned by most Islamic clerics is spacing births by breast-feeding newborns for two years.

    It seems to be that the function of Catholic clerics is to deny our population of effective birth control; whereas the function of Islamic clerics is to deny their population of effective birth control. The poverty/sin cycle is good for business. (Especially if your baptismal basin has priority claim on the fresh water supply.)

    We seem to forget, however, that birth control (BC) is a relatively modern human invention. Before the BC epoch, clerics everywhere did a tidy little business in tiny tombstones.

    Evolution always has a solid backup plan, even if we don't.

    1. Re:yet another appeal to comic inflation by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      Pakistan no longer has "exponential" growth. It has 2.62 kids per mother, in a country where the replacement rate is probably about 2.4. That's barely above replacement fertility.

      "Before the BC epoch, clerics everywhere did a tidy little business in tiny tombstones." - that was due to lack of antibiotics and clean water, not lack of birth control.

  54. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The reason I don't have a job is because of the recession! Yes, I know, I quit my last job because I was bored (gave the boss the finger on the way out) and was fired from my last two jobs for a mix of showing up 2 hours late and drunk, but seriously, it's not me, it's the economy, stupid!"

    Karachi needs to take some responsibility for themselves. They're a coastal city, build desalination plants. Fix the problem yourself instead of taking the easy way out!

  55. Zero Fucking Excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There is zero fucking excuse for any coastal town or city to have water shortages.

    D E S A L I N I Z A T I O N

    I too live in a a coastal city and have to endure preemptive water rationing"to preserve resource availability". It's utter bullshit. Build additional desalinization plants to meet demand and charge accordingly. Fuck shortages and restrictions.

  56. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no easy way out. Complaining about climate change wouldn't solve anything if that were the cause of Karachi's problems, and certainly not otherwise.

  57. Re: Allah be praised! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Build a massive nuclear powered desalination plant. That would solve the problem. As an added benefit it would really confuse the liberal greens. On one hand they really hate people and nuclear power. So they should oppose this because it would upset the fishes. On the other hand they love all disadvantaged minorities (and Pakistani Muslims fit nicely in that box)

    The liberals would not know what to do and would leave the Pakis alone, which would be a really good thing. Pakis and Muslims are smart enough to figure this out without the SjWs running in to fix things

  58. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by aliquis · · Score: 1

    Yeah. But I said they had water. Not that it wasn't without issues.

    USA could afford desalination of necessary I suppose.

    Pakistanians maybe not. Even if they use less of it.

    I never said anything about population growth of USA.

  59. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is pretty easy to understand if you just divide the water amount with amount of people. Obviously the summary could have done that for us, that is what editors are for.

  60. Other nations will join. by WindBourne · · Score: 0

    America west is dependent on several streams that are shared amongst states. Problem is, these are drying up, while states like AZ, are playing games. But with our Congress solving nothing, the water issue is only going to get worse.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Other nations will join. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missspelt CONgress.

  61. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A million cubic meters is a square kilometer, one meter deep. Can you picture that? Thought so. Now try 4.2 meters deep.

  62. I didn't say Al Jazeera is perfect. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2

    There may be areas in which Al Jazeera is not helpful.

    However, if, like me, you live in the U.S. and have never been to the countries Al Jazeera covers most, the articles are often far ahead of others on the same subject.

    You said, "They covered a ceremony in my hometown and claimed eight people died. No one died."

    Could you tell us more about that?

  63. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    And why not present figures in metric values so that people in the rest of the world would be able to understand how big the issue is?

    Now I understand. A litre is .946 quart, A gallon is around 3.8 litres, and the rest of the world is supposed to be so much smarter than us, but can't do the really simple math involved. For a not very specific number like this, just multiply the gallons by 4 and you are in the ballpark. You only know 1 method, and can't use anything else at all. I can do several, and gallons to litres is among the simplest that a child can do.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  64. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Yes but is it half the water they need in gallons? We Americans don't understand metric fractions.

    No, the superiors only understand litres, and metricand once you don't use those, you are incapable of using antything else, and must resort to moaning and crying.

    And your vaunted metric system is just as arbitrary at base as anything else. Otherwise, did you know this well thopught out and flalwees metric system, th emetre is exactly 1/299792458 of the distance that light travels in a second.

    So no need to run around brandishing the big metric cock like it is the end all and be all of measurements.

    I mean, unless it is the length that light travels in a vacuum in 1/299792458 of a second - then you have bragging rights.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  65. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Fools - you pikers are not using the ultimate in superiority - the metric minute. All else is foolishness.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  66. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by raind · · Score: 1

    Yep to many people. Water will cause the next big war. Too much or too little .

    --
    Get up!
  67. Elephant in the Room, (Pardon the Pun) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No Desalination Plants for a city next to a body of water? OK, I will watch the will of the people in CNN.

  68. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except that youâ(TM)re using those feeble US quarts that are smaller than the genuine, original, accept no substitutes Imperial quarts, which weigh in at 80oz.
    Bet you didnâ(TM)t know about them.

  69. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

    The thing is 95% of the world use something better. They already know what big numbers are in that system. They have to convert it from your silly system to understand and compare it to what they already know.

    It's not like the scientists/engineers who did the calculations used your silly system anyway. It was already converted for you to understand, because you little snowflakes just have to be different. Just use the original measurements. If whiny little Americans only understand gallons or whatnot, let them convert it.

  70. You asking for a link Windy by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 0

    You asking for a link Windy to back up numbers, you are just too funny.

    You offering credibility advice, when you are the least credible person here, priceless.

    1. Re:You asking for a link Windy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:You asking for a link Windy by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      I never denied it, and don't care about it at all.
      Just laughing at how hypocritical Windy is.
      He has a habit of just making up things constantly.
      And then never replying when people ask for evidence or links.

  71. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by bluegutang · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, large cities generally use less resources per person than small cities or rural areas.

    And Pakistan has an average of 2.62 kids per family which is hardly "breeding like locusts". Replacement fertility is probably about 2.4 in Pakistan, so they are barely over replacement.

  72. still alive by nten · · Score: 2

    Actually imperial units are still in widespread usage here even within engineering groups. My company uses metric for softwaee, but physical stuff like structures or antennas gets done in foot pounds and the like. I am a proponent of switching, but they tried that 40 years ago and the only thing that stuck was liters on bottles of diabetes, er soda.

    --
    refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
  73. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Except that youâ(TM)re using those feeble US quarts that are smaller than the genuine, original, accept no substitutes Imperial quarts, which weigh in at 80oz. Bet you didnâ(TM)t know about them.

    Bah, I prefer the biblical units of measure, as they come direct from Gawd.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  74. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    The thing is 95% of the world use something better.

    And we do too. We just don't take a hissy fit if someone says something else.But it is fun to troll ya.

    Now to really piss y off, I have a socket set ....... in Whitworth. It's from back in the day I worked on vintage british motorcycles.

    They already know what big numbers are in that system. They have to convert it from your silly system to understand and compare it to what they already know.

    And? So what? We convert measurements all the. time. decimals, fractions, percentages, standard, metric, that old school whitworth.

    I have a metric Mill and lathe that has no problem to make fractional standard measurement parts on. I've even made the occasional part that is standard on one side and metric on the other.

    It's not like the scientists/engineers who did the calculations used your silly system anyway. It was already converted for you to understand, because you little snowflakes just have to be different..

    Have a seat sweetheart, and let uncle Ol explain sumpin for ya.

    A goodly few years ago, 'Murrica was drawn into one of the world's occasional attempts at exterminating itself. We were mostly content sitting in a corner and gazing at our navels, but old Tojo and then Adolph couldn't resist tickling the dragon's tail. So player three entered the game. Next thing ya know, we have to make tanks and planes and shit like that. Well, ont thing Uncle Ol knows is that those buildy machines you make your killy machines with have gotta be doggone good and precise kind of machines.

    So we built them. And we saw that they were good. They were built in the units that were in use at the time. And we saw that they remained good. I've used WW2 vintage milling machines and lathes as late as three years ago.

    So we have a lot of eally good long lasting machines that make other machines out there.

    Bot lo and behold, there are other measurement systems, should we throw away millions of metric tons (see what I did there?) of very precise machinery? Sounds like a terrible waste of a lot of good work. So we stuck with Standard.

    Then along comes Computer aided machining. So cool, much accurate very excellent. And it can take that bad old standard machine and turn it into metric, or even Whitworth or biblical measurements if ya wanna.

    So now those old machines have a new and versatile life after being retrofitted to enter the computer age. And despite the whining and moaning of the people who have a shittin hemorrhage every time a non metric unit is mentioned, we 'Murricans actually produce a lot of metric stuff. Y'all are simply repeating talking points that show your hatred of 'Murrica with no more thought than Aunt Trudy's mynah bird saying "Pretty bird, go eat a turd!"

    Just use the original measurements. If whiny little Americans only understand gallons or whatnot, let them convert it.

    Weird, but y'all are the ones doing the whining. I'm enjoying y'all's outrage and limited worldview and ability to understand how to do mental conversions. Do it metric, or do it standard, I got it. I might have to whip out the calculator if someone wants to use the Maris as a unit of volume. But at 30.3 litres, we can do a rough calculation of their water needs in Maris as well.

    But perhaps I am giving y'all more credit for 'rithmatic cypherin' than I should.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  75. Cry babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's just like California crying about their own inept attitudes.

    You are coastal, De-salinate the ocean water. You can do it with some magnifying lenses and containment vats of water, As it evaporates, you collect the condensation and big surprise, you have potable water.

    DUH!

  76. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

    Interesting, but totally irrelevant. I really couldn't give 2 shits what measurement system you use, or 5/8ths of a shit, or however you measure them. I'm sure you have your reasons.
    The point is it was originally in metric, but dumbed down for Americans to understand. If they are as wise and all knowing as you claim, why the need to change it for them?

    For said Americans to then complain about people wanting it converted back again into sensible measurement is just too funny. Maybe Americans just don't get irony either.

  77. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Interesting, but totally irrelevant. I really couldn't give 2 shits what measurement system you use, or 5/8ths of a shit, or however you measure them. I'm sure you have your reasons. The point is it was originally in metric, but dumbed down for Americans to understand.

    Oh bullshit. And quit being such a quasi-racist Euro-bigot. It is so ridiculously easy to be proficient in multiple measuring systems at the same time, you really have no right at all to claim that the article was dumbed down for the 'Murricans. Because anyone who can pull off that ridiculously minor feat of thinking isn't going to complain. The metric system is but one system that we use. We use it every day. Along with any other system we need to use. Which pretty much puts the lie to your whole premise. You might as well whine and moan about people who are proficient in multple languages. The metric system is at base, no less arbitrary than measuring in barleycorns of handbreadths. Get over yourself, Spanky.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  78. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    Yes but is it half the water they need in gallons? We Americans don't understand metric fractions.

    No, the superiors only understand litres, and metricand once you don't use those, you are incapable of using antything else, and must resort to moaning and crying.

    And your vaunted metric system is just as arbitrary at base as anything else. Otherwise, did you know this well thopught out and flalwees metric system, th emetre is exactly 1/299792458 of the distance that light travels in a second.

    So no need to run around brandishing the big metric cock like it is the end all and be all of measurements.

    I mean, unless it is the length that light travels in a vacuum in 1/299792458 of a second - then you have bragging rights.

    The Gallon is a standard for the USA and for it's territories. But if the USA wants to export products to the world, or manufacture cars, or airplanes or any critical equipment such as space ships for example, it is definitely not American measure. Neither is the weather tracked in around the World in American Standard. The world's standard applies and so America is once again not great. The non American world standard is the metric system.

    I understand that American congressmen and educators felt that it is too difficult to teach the metric system, or to increase the size of a football field from 100 yards to 100 meters.
    Your 2x4x8 lumber and 4x8 gyproc etc. is standard, but we use a metric equivalent for the 4x8 panels of gyproc

    Some countries use both in some cases Eg. Canada. We buy some fruit and vegetables by the pound, But USA suppliers provide the quantities in metric measure. Officially Canada is a metric country.

    Re building supplies. https://www.gypsum.org/wp-cont...

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  79. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    The Gallon is a standard for the USA and for it's territories. But if the USA wants to export products to the world, or manufacture cars, or airplanes or any critical equipment such as space ships for example, it is definitely not American measure. Neither is the weather tracked in around the World in American Standard. The world's standard applies and so America is once again not great. The non American world standard is the metric system.

    I understand that American congressmen and educators felt that it is too difficult to teach the metric system, or to increase the size of a football field from 100 yards to 100 meters.

    You have the citations that it is considered too difficult? I learned the metric system in High School in the late 60's and I lived in a town that refused to teach evolution - we were that backward.

    At my desk, I have some containers of stuff. Let's take a look.........

    Equate Hand lotion - net weight 14 Oz, then 397 grams

    Polar Seltzer Water 12 fl Oz then 355 ml

    Palmers Cocoa Butter skin cream 250 ml then8.5 fl oz

    Armor All Air Freshening plastic protectant 1 Pt (16 Fl Oz ) then 473 ml

    Friskies Cat treats weight 2.1 oz then 60 g

    90 percent Isopropyl alcohol fo rremoving flux from circuit boards 32 fl oz (1 qt) 946 ml

    Clobetasol topical solution 50 ml.

    Blaster teflon infused Multi-purpose lubricant spray - 8 oz then 227 grams

    Everything in the house is in both standard and metric, and those things that have one only are metric only. This is why the meme that 'Murrica is standard only is BS

    Your 2x4x8 lumber and 4x8 gyproc etc. is standard,

    Minor quibble, the cheeps who do lumber have been making 2x4 lumber skinnier over the years, now you have to specifiy "dimensional limber if you want actual 2x4, and good luck once you find it.

    but we use a metric equivalent for the 4x8 panels of gyproc

    Some countries use both in some cases Eg. Canada.

    Canada even uses two languages!

    We buy some fruit and vegetables by the pound, But USA suppliers provide the quantities in metric measure. Officially Canada is a metric country.

    Re building supplies. https://www.gypsum.org/wp-cont...

    And it is perfectly fine to be a one unit only country. We just have two. My major issue is the people who have the ideas that the US does not use metric, and that metric is some sort of non-arbitrary standard. Powers of ten are nice and all, but it has been revised many times, and now the official base of the metric length of measure is............ a fraction! Which is priceless - that they revert to the bad old way to define it

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  80. Why are you still whining? by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

    Explain why it was dumbed down for Americans.
    If you think it is so ridiculously easy to be proficient in both systems, why change it for them?

    Where did I say metric wasn't arbitrary? I said it was used in 95% of the world, and that means it's much more common. You do understand percentages right? You don't need them dumbed down too do you?

    1. Re:Why are you still whining? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Explain why it was dumbed down for Americans.

      How can I explain something that isn't true? I just got finished with replying to another person and went down a list of just things in my office. Everything but one had both standard and metric volume or weight on it. We work in both. Is there some sort of block you are having with this truth? My vehicle is almost totally metric - for some reason Spark plugs and wheel lug nuts are in standard. I don't know where you live, but I'd invite you over to 'Murrica to see that we indeed use both systems, and everyone but the abysmally stupid works in both. You might even see that your prejudicial attitude about us is incorrect. Whatever, its fun to toy with prejudiced people.

      If you think it is so ridiculously easy to be proficient in both systems, why change it for them?

      I have no idea what you mean - I certainly have no issue working in both. Eventually it will all be metric, but it is hard to get vewry concerned.

      Where did I say metric wasn't arbitrary?

      Where did I say you did? Or does everything in a conversation have to be pre approved? You have to admit that your unit of measure, the metre, is defined by a fraction. Couldn't make that stuff up.

      I said it was used in 95% of the world, and that means it's much more common.

      So? We use it here as well. Everything comes out in metric and standard. But since you apparently don't believe that, your argument of how many use what is specious. There is an old saying among the more rustic 'Murricans, "Eat shit, because 50 billion flies cannot be wrong." But I digress, because we simply use it here.

      You do understand percentages right? You don't need them dumbed down too do you?

      You seem to believe that America doesn't use metric, and doesn't use it every day. Serously Sparky, when you start off with a completely wrong "truth" based on a prejudiced and rather bigoted assumption, there is absolutely no way you can massage it into the truth.

      You are simply and completely and unchangeably wrong

      As to why the article was written using standard units rather than metric - I have no idea. The auther is an indie journalist living in Pakistan, so if they are metric only, she should have used Metric measurements. I'll bet it really piss you off that they also used Acre-feet as well as gallons. Hell, if they used litres, for the amount of water, the numbers would be even larger. But fear not, Sparky, we dumb ol' 'Murricans would know how much they were talking about.

      As for the problem itself, that has nothing ot do with any measurement system. It might be a good idea to get a curb on the population explosion that they are having. That 4.5 percent per year population rate will end up causing famine no matter how wrong you are about your hated 'Murricans and their two measurement systems.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:Why are you still whining? by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      Ok little boy, Since you are having such trouble understanding, hold my hand while I walk you through it step by step.

      Scientists measure the amount of water. They do this in metric in Pakistan because metric is the system they use over there. (and 95% of the world)

      Then the reporter writes a story. She doesn't go out with her gallon jug and measure the water by herself, she looks it up / asks the scientists, they tell her metric.

      When she writes her story, she decides to convert it to gallons because part of her target audience is America and Americans.
      This is known as pandering to the lowest common denominator. (I used 'dumbed down' before, because it's fun to push the buttons of easily agitated people and I knew you would bite).
      This was obvious the second you jumped in and said

      No, the superiors only understand litres, and metricand once you don't use those, you are incapable of using antything else, and must resort to moaning and crying.

      This is the part where you need to stand on your own feet.
      If you have a problem with the reporter assuming the rest of America isn't quite as smart as you claim to be, you can contact her here.

      Sabrina Toppa is a Pakistan-based journalist who has reported for The Guardian, Al Jazeera, TIME, Washington Post, and NBC News, among other outlets. Find her on Twitter @SabrinaToppa

      You might want to grab a coffee or something first, because there are more than just a few journalists who also 'simplify' things like that for your fellow Americans, it may take you a while.
      Tell them all that Americans are just as smart as everyone else, and you don't like them dumbing things down, it makes you feel inferior and hurts your feelings.
      Just search Google for "America" and "news",let them all know how you feel. That should keep you busy for a good while and out of the grownups hair.

    3. Re:Why are you still whining? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      If you have a problem with the reporter assuming the rest of America isn't quite as smart as you claim to be, you can contact her here.

      If you go through the links in her story that she uses in reference, you will see that all of the volume units are in gallons. Your specious idea that everyone involved conspired to dumb it down is cute at best, but reading your unbalanced replies, I think you might just be a bot.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    4. Re:Why are you still whining? by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      clearly flase.
      Even if you were telling the truth, it would just show all the other reporters commonly (always?) 'dumb things down for Americans' too. Exactly like I've been telling you all along. The cognitive dissonance must be very strong with you, is your ego really so weak that you can't admit the truth, even to yourself?

      What's you alternative theory for the changes if it's not exactlly like I told you? Does your denial stretch far enough to come up with another explanation?

    5. Re:Why are you still whining? by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      You're no fun, I pointed out your lies and idiocy and then you just stopped playing.

    6. Re:Why are you still whining? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      You're no fun, I pointed out your lies and idiocy and then you just stopped playing.

      Know this - you've been looking in a mirror. As for me, I'm rather bored with ya, just as bored as I am with the fake APK guy.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  81. Re:Desalination! forgot this quote by fish_sauce · · Score: 1

    "Lastly, salinity levels in oceans are predicted to rise, which would make filtering water more expensive. The more salt there is to filter out, the more energy required. That’s why plants often convert brackish water (think lightly salted potato chips vs. regular) to clean water. But brackish water is not as prevalent as ocean water."

    Guess what resource wars will fight about in the future?

  82. FTFY by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    The water shortage in Karachi is linked to a lack of birth control

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  83. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rural areas use more per capita because they are agricultural producers. Its relatively hard to grow crops and meat in the inner city. No?

  84. Time to desalinate water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some individual Pakistanis need to heat up sea water in skillets and catch the boiling steam evaporation into funnels and route that water via a tube to sealed water bottles. Unfortunately it takes a lot of heat to boil water. Personal desalinators are a partial solution to this problem. Another partial handle is to heavily tax parents who have more than one child and use that money towards mass desalinization efforts . Harsh but necessary. Doing nothing could lead to much much worse problems.