Over-Population: What do you think about it?
I highly recommend everyone read this very recent article: What a population of 7 billion people means for the planet. A very good read.
“The 21st century is not yet a dozen years old, and there are already 1 billion more people than in October 1999 — with the outlook for future energy and food supplies looking bleaker than it has for decades. It took humanity until the early 19th century to gain its first billion people; then another 1.5 billion followed over the next century and a half. In just the last 60 years the world’s population has gained yet another 4.5 billion. Never before have so many animals of one species anything like our size inhabited the planet.”
What are your thoughts?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
13 Answers
I think this person is not a demographer. We need to worry about population crashing, not overpopulation. The crash will happen some time in this century. As soon as the third world catches up economically, the birth rates will crash. We already have a serious problem in the US and Japan and most of Europe. If it weren’t for immigration, the US would have a declining population.
Sure, the rise in population looks like an exponential curve, but that does not mean the curve will continue. It can’t. Not because of the planet’s limits, but because of our species limits. I’m not worried about overpopulation.
Population of any critter is self limiting depending on food, water, spread of disease, predators and all of those other annoying hurdles that Mother Nature sets up. It will take care of itself. Do your best.
What nature doesn’t take care of, man will.
I think it’s a liberal conspiracy!
hmm… I dunno. Wake me when there’s Soylent Green.
we just need more Malthusian checks. A new disease, war, or disaster always helps in culling the population!
The growth of population in California over the last 40 years has been bleak. Where there were large stretches of farmland and open space in the 100 miles between San Francisco and Auburn on the way to Lake Tahoe; now it is almost all developed. Traffic is bad everywhere, and there is no room to ease it. And even in heavy rain years such as this one, there is not enough water for everyone:central valley farmers are still held to 70% of their allotment.
Plenty of resources if shared. Unfortunately the present system of tribalism, owning your country, precludes that. The resultant suffering will continue till a new system based on sharing, conserving, cooperating, compassion, and rejection of nationalism creates a “social network”, pardon the anomaly, that will generate a new world. A bunch of new wars, revolutions, oil crises, financial crises, will ensue till the thick headed masses finally have the light turned on to the futility of present societal systems. It may take 100 years at least.
Solution: A Modest Proposal by Johnathan Swift
@King_Pariah I don’t think the Irish are the problem in this case, but the reference makes me happy.
We have to begin reducing the world’s population sooner rather than later if we are to maintain a decent quality of life for humanity. We have no control over the quantity or the accessibility of the world’s natural resources but we can control our own numbers. Yes, a baby is an adorable delightful thing, but a billion babies are a nightmare.
Response moderated (Spam)
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
