Over-Population

[Clowns8me]

Do you think that the quickly-rising population (in all of the world, not in one particular area) will effect the global economy? Or do you think that the rising population will bring more people that can solve, and therefore negate, all population-related problems. Or do you just think that the rising population will not bring any problems at all?
This is just some proof for the less-than informed:

[Neader]

Ever heard of carrying capacity?

[Lofty The Metroid]

Personally, I'd be in favor of some sort of modest proposal...

[MalikHalo]

Personally, I'd be in favor of some sort of modest proposal...

Tasty.

More people means more workers, but we'll have to wait for them to get old enough to actually work. And, specifically in the US, with the economy in its worsening state and the growing deficit, the last thing we need is more mouths to feed.

If the world can make it until 2050 when the population actually starts to level off, I think it'll be fine.

[Golbez]

I think I'll be dead before it actually affects me one way or the other.

[Mave]

I remember my Biology teacher once telling me that if every single person stood shoulder to shoulder, they could fit within the county limits of where I live (which is in South Western Virginia) so when you think of it that way, the world isn't that crowded.

I don't think it's much of a problem right now. More people means more idiots, sure, but it also means more great ideas and more geniuses. So, I guess you get some good and you get some bad.

[Golbez]

We just need to round up the dummies and redistribute them to low-population areas such as Wyoming, North Dakota and Antarctica. Problem solved.

[Nintend()\/\/|\|312]

Well, although we are gradually learning how to use our resources more efficiently, I don't think these practices are increasing the amount of food and fuel available as fast as the increasing population is consuming them. I know recently we've been having problems with food shortages around the world. Hopefully the lower price of oil will help this problem out a bit but in the long term I cannot see things getting much better before getting much worse.

BTW, if you are looking for a slightly closer look at the graph in the original post, check out the spoiler section below.

Spoiler:

Keep in mind that with the graph in the original post, in the past the rate at which the population is increasing is increasing over time. This is how our population has changed for millennia. This is because the rate at which this occurs is equal to how many people are being born minus how many people are dying, which has always been a positive number. This starts to change quite soon, where the rate at which the population increases stops changing, then starts to decrease. This occurs when the amount of people dying is equal to how many people are being born and when more people are dying than being born, respectively. However, in many places where successful incentives for birth control (one-child policy in China) are not present and contraceptive use is not gaining in popularity, the rate at which babies are being born will not change. So, the only way the birth rate can equal and be dwarfed by the death rate is if the death rate increases. Since the point where the rate at which the population increases will stop changing is quickly approaching, we are going to start seeing the death rate in these places increase past the birth rate and beyond quite soon. So although the major change in the graph looks like it will happen in a few decades, this is actually just the result of a much bigger change happening in the near future if not right now.

[Reed]

hey, the Black Death helped over population in Europe!

[gusto5]

I remember my Biology teacher once telling me that if every single person stood shoulder to shoulder, they could fit within the county limits of where I live (which is in South Western Virginia) so when you think of it that way, the world isn't that crowded.

I don't think it's much of a problem right now. More people means more idiots, sure, but it also means more great ideas and more geniuses. So, I guess you get some good and you get some bad.

That's only because there is a lot of water that we (currently) cannot inhabit for a permanent amount of time and there is a lot of unhabitable terrain (deserts probably couldn't support the same population like that of say, New York.

On the note of carrying capacity, going over can result in leveling off, or a chaotic dip in population.

[Zidane]

I remember my Biology teacher once telling me that if every single person stood shoulder to shoulder, they could fit within the county limits of where I live (which is in South Western Virginia) so when you think of it that way, the world isn't that crowded.

I don't think it's much of a problem right now. More people means more idiots, sure, but it also means more great ideas and more geniuses. So, I guess you get some good and you get some bad.

That's only because there is a lot of water that we (currently) cannot inhabit for a permanent amount of time and there is a lot of unhabitable terrain (deserts probably couldn't support the same population like that of say, New York.

On the note of carrying capacity, going over can result in leveling off, or a chaotic dip in population.

LA is basically in the desert. With a few changes it became somewhere nice to live.

[Mako]

I think that we can still make enough food and get enough jobs, etc for a lot more people, but that does put stress on the Earth, we need to teach people in developing countries not to have so many kids, that will solve the problem.

[LuigiGBA]

I think that we can still make enough food and get enough jobs, etc for a lot more people, but that does put stress on the Earth, we need to teach people in developing countries not to have so many kids, that will solve the problem.

Not to be rude or anything, but it isn't like people in developing countries can afford to not have kids, as people grow older and their government has no support for them, they need a decent amount of kids to help get food and take care of them, that's THEIR social security. Although helping developing undeveloped countries WOULD certainly help this issue.

[Sigtaro]

We can wait for colonizing in space, but it would only continue to get worse.

I can't say much for other countries other than the US, but maybe some sort of a campaign like they do with anti-drugs and losing weight where they encourage people to adopt more often every time they want more children. I'm not against having your own child with your own blood, but this pride that a child has to be biologically yours is ridiculous.

[thresholdXCI]

We can wait for colonizing in space, but it would only continue to get worse.

I can't say much for other countries other than the US, but maybe some sort of a campaign like they do with anti-drugs and losing weight where they encourage people to adopt more often every time they want more children. I'm not against having your own child with your own blood, but this pride that a child has to be biologically yours is ridiculous.

I think there's a natural instinct within everybody though that pushes them to want kids of their own. Personally I'm all for raising the awareness about how to go about adopting etc but I doubt people, on the whole, are going to see that as more attractive than having children of their own.

[LuigiGBA]

We can wait for colonizing in space, but it would only continue to get worse.

I can't say much for other countries other than the US, but maybe some sort of a campaign like they do with anti-drugs and losing weight where they encourage people to adopt more often every time they want more children. I'm not against having your own child with your own blood, but this pride that a child has to be biologically yours is ridiculous.

I think there's a natural instinct within everybody though that pushes them to want kids of their own. Personally I'm all for raising the awareness about how to go about adopting etc but I doubt people, on the whole, are going to see that as more attractive than having children of their own.

I agree wholeheartedly with both of you, but I think adoption awareness in countries like the USA or the UK could go a long way, some people can't look past the biological stuff (we watched a ridiculous video in Biology "If it wasn't my own child, she wouldn't really be a part of my family history.") But I think you could reach a lot more people if we internationalized adoption standards and all the more advanced countries made a push for it.

EDIT: I've been saying advanced, what I really should say is economically stable countries with low population, India, for example, is certainly advanced, but it doesn't really make sense for them to adopt on a large scale.

[Clowns8me]

I am all for adoption, seeing as I have two adopted sisters, and that video that LuigiGBA watched in Biology sounds unfortunate and awful. And yes, if people were more aware of adoption in countries with strong economies that had many people who could support more children, it would be only a part of the solution. But the real problem is the not-so-economically stable countries were, as LuigiGBA said, kids are the social security, and there is an almost feudal reliance on children by their parents. Those countries, (India, pretty much all the nations in Africa) are the ones with the an almost unnecessary abundance in children, (who also manage to be the countries with an abundance of children in orphanages).

[Mako]

I think that we can still make enough food and get enough jobs, etc for a lot more people, but that does put stress on the Earth, we need to teach people in developing countries not to have so many kids, that will solve the problem.

Not to be rude or anything, but it isn't like people in developing countries can afford to not have kids, as people grow older and their government has no support for them, they need a decent amount of kids to help get food and take care of them, that's THEIR social security. Although helping developing undeveloped countries WOULD certainly help this issue.

Well, then we should help out the countries instead of wasting money on war.....

[LuigiGBA]

I think that we can still make enough food and get enough jobs, etc for a lot more people, but that does put stress on the Earth, we need to teach people in developing countries not to have so many kids, that will solve the problem.

Not to be rude or anything, but it isn't like people in developing countries can afford to not have kids, as people grow older and their government has no support for them, they need a decent amount of kids to help get food and take care of them, that's THEIR social security. Although helping developing undeveloped countries WOULD certainly help this issue.

Well, then we should help out the countries instead of wasting money on war.....

It's more complicated than that, when you send food to Africa, it puts the regional farmers out of business, and now they always need food, we don't need a third world full of dependants. Something like kiva is a step in the right direction, intelligent aid is what is required. Although i do agree that most of our violent foreign intervening is pointless and wasteful, both capital-wise and in regard to the honorable human lives whom have been given over into the US governments care.

[Mako]

It's more complicated than that, when you send food to Africa, it puts the regional farmers out of business, and now they always need food, we don't need a third world full of dependants. Something like kiva is a step in the right direction, intelligent aid is what is required. Although i do agree that most of our violent foreign intervening is pointless and wasteful, both capital-wise and in regard to the honorable human lives whom have been given over into the US governments care.

Well then we should give those farmers better equipment, resources, etc. to make more food. The US government is stupid, thy just care about making money, nothing else.

[stevetamis]

Over-population is the big matter of concern to the each and every living organism in the world. Global warming is the indirect effect of the increasing population so each one of us has to think carefully over it and make steps to control it. In short, we have to think for our survival.

[The_Hangman]

...

I think we need another World War.