146 replies to this topic

[Myles]

Render, on 26 February 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

Incorrect.
Russia for example has already begun programs to stimulate more births because the fear of population decrease is starting to show its effects on the economy.

That is only one country.    There are dozens to offset that.

[Myles]

Frank Merton, on 26 February 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

The simple fact is that the more people a country has, the greater its power will be.  At the present time and for quite a while in the future productivity trumps this, but those days are passing.

There is also a temporary problem of a bulge in the population when a country manages to get population growth under control -- you pass through a period where the elderly more and more outnumber younger more productive people.  This is the problem in Japan and much of Europe now, and would be in the US if it didn't have all the young illegal immigrants (kinda ironic).  This is the problem the Russians are worried about, and China is fast headed that way.

Didn't China see this a few years ago?   There were not enough children to care for the elderly parents.

[Frank Merton]

Wouldn't surprise me, but it doesn't seem to be hitting productivity growth yet.

[redhen]

Render, on 26 February 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

People will carry on getting older and and more educated, population rise will stagnate. People will also postpone having children, a trend already seen in the past couple of years or even decades.

Yes, population replacement rates have been falling in Western countries.

Quote

New technologies are found to anwser to the need of more energy. Food distribution can be altered, there is no shortage in sight, Not by a long shot. Distribution and indulgence is the problem.

What exactly do you mean by food distribution? Do you mean a nations internal transportation system, or do you mean developed countries giving food to developing countries?

Quote

Actually indulgence isn't even a problem, if humans wish to live that way more power to them. Food can be obtained in the lab already without the need to kill animals or reserve space to breed them for slaughter. => less animal suffering, more space, less polution and most likely higher quality food that will be altered accordingly.

Namaste. Sounds wonderful. Stephen Hawkings also thinks that we will overcome the Earth's limitations by colonizing space. I think he's dreaming.

Quote

Possibly food can be altered to your dna and your specific needs in the future, eliminating need for supplements etc. But Im getting ahead of myself.

Ok, sounds intriguing though.

Quote

Point is, humanity will evolve with the future. Stop thinking in terms of today if you wanna make predictions about the future.

All this happy talk is great, I especially like the idea of pain-free meat grown in a lab or out of your Meat-Jet 1000 at home. But I think it's all techno pie in the sky and wishful thinking. It's not just an issue of food distribution or adequate supplies of food. There are finitudes on this planet Earth.

This has been recognized by the Union of Concerned Scientists which consists of "Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences".

"The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth's limits"

The only people who do not recognize these limits seem to be politicians, economists (excluding Jeremy Rifkin) and land developers.

[Frank Merton]

That the earth and its carrying capacity are finite are obvious, and has been said over and over for several hundred years.  One day the wolf-criers will have to be right.  Wolves do exist.

What I see for the near future is continued progress similar to the last century in improving people's lives all over the world, some countries doing better at it than others -- generally for internal cultural reasons.

At some point population will be stable and resource usage will become indefinitely sustainable.  We are fast headed that way, and we won't even have to go into space to do it (although that would be a nice bonus).

Now all we have to do is keep the world's political leadership reasonably sane for a few more decades.

[Render]

Myles, on 26 February 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

That is only one country. There are dozens to offset that.

Well no, it's a trend being set in many different parts of the world also. I was merely giving an example because there are more concrete reports of it to be found.
I think your thoughts are wishful doom thinking.

[Render]

redhen, on 26 February 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

What exactly do you mean by food distribution? Do you mean a nations internal transportation system, or do you mean developed countries giving food to developing countries?

Global and local distribution, exploitation.
Developed countries don't have to give food to developing countries, that doesn't help them in the end. They are fully capable of creating their own systen, if they are only given the chance. But that's a different topic.
There is more than enough food, and more than enough new ways coming up to create an unending supply of nutrients for everyone.

redhen, on 26 February 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

Namaste. Sounds wonderful. Stephen Hawkings also thinks that we will overcome the Earth's limitations by colonizing space. I think he's dreaming.

I didn't mention colonizing space. Eventually it will happen. Don't see why not, and don't know why ppl see that as dreaming. Evolution of humans wont suddenly stop, we wont go "oh we've been to mars and we have the technology to live in a space station but whatever .. lets not go there: . Now THAT is dreaming.

redhen, on 26 February 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

All this happy talk is great, I especially like the idea of pain-free meat grown in a lab or out of your Meat-Jet 1000 at home. But I think it's all techno pie in the sky and wishful thinking. It's not just an issue of food distribution or adequate supplies of food. There are finitudes on this planet Earth.

Well, it is disconcerting when you refer to it as happy talk since it's very realistic. I'd say it's limited thinking to just dismiss the countless scientific developments that have been made to get to that point. Developments wont suddenly stop. The human imagination is the limit, surely the past couple of thousand years has proven this.

redhen, on 26 February 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

This has been recognized by the Union of Concerned Scientists which consists of "Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences".

"The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth's limits"

The only people who do not recognize these limits seem to be politicians, economists (excluding Jeremy Rifkin) and land developers.

I think Frank Merton answered to this very well in the above post.

The earth is finite fine, but human developments and scientific developments are not. Think out of the box, it's what got us this far....

[Myles]

Humans are a greedy species.   As the population continues to grow and water becomes more scarce, we will face more challenges.
Of course we will survive, but at what cost?   What cost constitutes overpopulated?  How much human suffering does it take?  How do you rate the average quality of life?
I think with many animals facing extinction and seas being nearly fished out in places, we are over populated now.   That's where the opinion part comes into play.   There is not a black and white answer to this.  It's almost entirely an opinion question.

Humans will survive.


Just wanted to add:
What is the ideal population of the world?

Edited by Myles, 26 February 2013 - 10:40 PM.

[mysticwerewolf]

http://www.worldomet...rld-population/

i look at africa and see thousands dying every day from no food or from desease, I look at central america where children scavenge in garbage dumps for everything they need to survive. I look at china where they have a one child per family law and yet their population is rising as fast as anywhere else save african , I look at my secret high school crush who after high school had 14 children in 12 years, I look at octomom who can't take care of what she has and still wants you and me to pay so she can have more. I look at the local streets and see the homeless population growing almost as fast as the total city population ( or so it seems ) I look at churches and religeons that say go forth and be fruitful simply so that their deity has a bigger population in whatever afterlife is out there.
my personal opinion is that YES we are WAY over populated, we are a virus on this planet. I personally believe that there should not be more than a billion humans world wide ( maybe much less) . I decided this 30 years ago back when we only had 4 billion or so instead of the Over 7 billion we have now. Although i dearly wanted them when young, I do not have children, never have and never will. It hurt my parents when i told them not to expect grand children. which was my mothers most desired wish.
Most everyone wants to give a part of themselves to the future, most everyone wants to be remembered, to have someone to pass on their possessions and beliefs to, Myself included. But unless we can either get to other planets or find a way to "Slide" into paralelle worlds It cannot continue.

the only reason i am not for total extinction of the human race is because to many other creatures now depend on humanity for their lives,  the domesticated animals,  the animals bred for food ,  none of these would even be around if not for us.  if we vanished tomorrow they would starve in just a few weeks or a couple months.

Edited by mysticwerewolf, 26 February 2013 - 10:50 PM.

[Myles]

mysticwerewolf, on 26 February 2013 - 10:43 PM, said:

http://www.worldomet...rld-population/

i look at africa and see thousands dying every day from no food or from desease, I look at central america where children scavenge in garbage dumps for everything they need to survive. I look at china where they have a one child per family law and yet their population is rising as fast as anywhere else save african , I look at my secret high school crush who after high school had 14 children in 12 years, I look at octomom who can't take care of what she has and still wants you and me to pay so she can have more. I look at the local streets and see the homeless population growing almost as fast as the total city population ( or so it seems ) I look at churches and religeons that say go forth and be fruitful simply so that their deity has a bigger population in whatever afterlife is out there.
my personal opinion is that YES we are WAY over populated, we are a virus on this planet. I personally believe that there should not be more than a billion humans world wide ( maybe much less) . I decided this 30 years ago back when we only had 4 billion or so instead of the Over 7 billion we have now. Although i dearly wanted them when young, I do not have children, never have and never will. It hurt my parents when i told them not to expect grand children. which was my mothers most desired wish.
Most everyone wants to give a part of themselves to the future, most everyone wants to be remembered, to have someone to pass on their possessions and beliefs to, Myself included. But unless we can either get to other planets or find a way to "Slide" into paralelle worlds It cannot continue.

I like your thoughts.   If the world had the population of 200 years ago with the tech of today, the average quality of life would be much higher.
I have 2 children.  I figure they are replacing my wife and I.  Also, they are being raised in a way that they will be a benifit for the world and not a burden.   I hope anyway.  My 15 year old is a freshman in high school and already taking college courses.   Never had anything less than an "A".  My 10 year old is a little more of a challenge, but she is doing well in school and competes on the Math Team.  I don't consider myself a hypocrite because I think it is just as important to have a younger group of quality kids.  Inner city populations (3-5 kids) continue to grow at the fastest rate.   A high % of these kids are not getting the attention they need to thrive in todays world.  They have little hope of college.   In the families where college is most likely, only 1-2 kids are being raised.
Someones going to say I'm racist, and that is not even close.

[DieChecker]

Render, on 26 February 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

Point is, humanity will evolve with the future. Stop thinking in terms of today if you wanna make predictions about the future.

Have you ever read 1984? Have you seen Back to the Future? In so many movies, books and stories, humanity imagines that in 20, 40, or 100 years, that everything will be VASTLY different and Better. Yet, that seems not the case. Whenever we try to look to the future as a shining place, when we finally get there, it is just the Now with a few more gizmos, and larger TVs.

The evolution you're talking about is not measured in decades, but in centuries. Yet, we don't have centuries, we have only decades. The world population thripled between 19050 and 2010. Lots of people in 1950 probably said that such a population could not happen and that in the year 2000 we'd all have flying cars and everyone would have everything they need, yet here we are... and war, pestilence, plague and famine still walk every single nation.

The Future is just the Now with more people. And a few more gizmos, and probably bigger TVs.

[Myles]

DieChecker, on 26 February 2013 - 11:18 PM, said:

Have you ever read 1984? Have you seen Back to the Future? In so many movies, books and stories, humanity imagines that in 20, 40, or 100 years, that everything will be VASTLY different and Better. Yet, that seems not the case. Whenever we try to look to the future as a shining place, when we finally get there, it is just the Now with a few more gizmos, and larger TVs.

The evolution you're talking about is not measured in decades, but in centuries. Yet, we don't have centuries, we have only decades. The world population thripled between 19050 and 2010. Lots of people in 1950 probably said that such a population could not happen and that in the year 2000 we'd all have flying cars and everyone would have everything they need, yet here we are... and war, pestilence, plague and famine still walk every single nation.

The Future is just the Now with more people. And a few more gizmos, and probably bigger TVs.

That's awesome.    Bigger TV's!!!!!!!

[DieChecker]

Myles, on 26 February 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

Didn't China see this a few years ago?   There were not enough children to care for the elderly parents.

That is true. It is real worry in Japan also.

Also since the citizens of China are allowed only one child, and they usually want a boy, so modern medicine has created another problem in that the number of boys is far offset from the number of girls. Making the problem that much worse.

[Myles]

DieChecker, on 26 February 2013 - 11:20 PM, said:

That is true. It is real worry in Japan also.

Also since the citizens of China are allowed only one child, and they usually want a boy, so modern medicine has created another problem in that the number of boys is far offset from the number of girls. Making the problem that much worse.

Makes me (a male) glad I don't have to compete for a female in China.

Nursing homes for elderly is not cheap, and if it is, it is not very good.   Having one kid leaves the odds of the kid dying or not caring for the parents very high.
It is our responsibility to take care of our parents.

[Sakari]

Frank Merton, on 26 February 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

That the earth and its carrying capacity are finite are obvious, and has been said over and over for several hundred years.  One day the wolf-criers will have to be right.  Wolves do exist.

What I see for the near future is continued progress similar to the last century in improving people's lives all over the world, some countries doing better at it than others -- generally for internal cultural reasons.

At some point population will be stable and resource usage will become indefinitely sustainable.  We are fast headed that way, and we won't even have to go into space to do it (although that would be a nice bonus).

Now all we have to do is keep the world's political leadership reasonably sane for a few more decades.

Oceans are being destroyed, fish are being, over fished..Many are near extinction levels. Maybe technology is growing, but the vital things we need, and things that effect the eco system ( things we have not seen the full impact of yet ) are being killed off, or destroyed.

This is what I am more on the lines with. We are all ( some more then others ) destroying the hand that feeds us....Sewage, garbage, over fishing, killing for fins and rhino horns, bees dying out, etc,etc,etc.....

Not to mention crime, economy, terrorism, wars......