146 replies to this topic

[shrooma]

Sakari, on 24 February 2013 - 04:06 AM, said:

Land mass versus people is not the question, the resources needed to survive are.

.
funny, I thought the question 'are humans over populated' meant just that.
maybe the question-
'is the current rate of human population growth sustainable?'
would be more apropriate.

[Michelle]

Cryptid_Control, on 24 February 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

But really you can't expect everyone to abstain from sex, and even while taking all of the right precautions accidents happen. I don't know anyone that would preach about over population and yet go unprotected.

When did I ever advocate abstaining from sex? Accidents do happen, but it isn't an excuse not to take any precautions that are available to you. Until I had a hysterectomy I was on the pill and used condoms. The chances of getting pregnant were almost infinitesible. When I was 17 and moved away from home I had very little and could barely pay the bills. I didn't even have a phone. I would gladly give up something I thought I needed or wanted to buy to take care take care of business.

I do know people that preach about over population, after they have had their one or two kids, and then they are tickled to death when they have grandchildren.

[Render]

DieChecker, on 25 February 2013 - 09:41 PM, said:

Though it is true that the ability to sustain a higher population continues to increase, there is a finate amount of space and resources. There are 3 times as many people alive today as there was in 1950. Just 60 years ago. There are already overcrowded nations with people routinely starving to death. That these populations will starve down to a sustainable level is natural, and perhaps that is what you are talking about... self correction?

That's absolutely not what im saying, there's no reading between the lines in my post. It means what it means.

Quote

I think that stacking people up into taller and taller cities is not considered sustainable. I think it qualifies as a symptom of overpopulation. When people have to live closer, and closer together, it eventually will cause issues.

Also most of the growth is in nations that have lower standards of living. To be sustainable, these people will need to move/migrate into more sustainable... higher standard of lving, areas. This could happen. Witness the movement of various Muslim groups into Europe, and Mexican/South American groups  When the Have-Nots become unsustainable, they move or start wars.

Well that's the adaptation then.
There is no "overpopulation", there are only new situations to adapt to. It's not the fault of having more people on earth, it's the fault of the mindset that it's more ppl that are causing problems. It's distribution, it's the ability to think ahead...even will all the billions of ppl in the world, we still have a shortage in visionairies.

[little_dreamer]

I like my peace and quiet and privacy.   I might have to start living in a boat to get this in the future.

[DieChecker]

Render, on 25 February 2013 - 10:55 PM, said:

Well that's the adaptation then.
There is no "overpopulation", there are only new situations to adapt to. It's not the fault of having more people on earth, it's the fault of the mindset that it's more ppl that are causing problems. It's distribution, it's the ability to think ahead...even will all the billions of ppl in the world, we still have a shortage in visionairies.

Do you mean that regardless of ever reducing Standard of Living humans will continue to grow in population? Such that eventually there will be no private housing, and every 1000 sq ft apartment will house 3 or 4 families, and food will be rationed and likely there will be no internet, or electricity, or books, or public services, because eventually... centuries down the road, we'll run out of fuel, and croplands will go bad, and food will become scarce and energy will become expensive and jobs will be fewer, and pay less proportionally.

If you mean that humans will continue to grow in population regardless of poverty and starvation and inequality, then.... yeah sure, that could happen.... But to me that smells like Overpopulation.

http://en.wikipedia..../Overpopulation

Edited by DieChecker, 26 February 2013 - 02:20 AM.

[Ogbin]

Not over populated, just mismanaged.

[acute]

It all depends on where you live.
Here in the UK, we have the some of the most dense housing in the world.

[DieChecker]

Is Overpopulated and "Crowded" the same thing?

[Sakari]

DieChecker, on 26 February 2013 - 02:53 AM, said:

Is Overpopulated and "Crowded" the same thing?

Nope

[Render]

DieChecker, on 26 February 2013 - 02:20 AM, said:

Do you mean that regardless of ever reducing Standard of Living humans will continue to grow in population? Such that eventually there will be no private housing, and every 1000 sq ft apartment will house 3 or 4 families, and food will be rationed and likely there will be no internet, or electricity, or books, or public services, because eventually... centuries down the road, we'll run out of fuel, and croplands will go bad, and food will become scarce and energy will become expensive and jobs will be fewer, and pay less proportionally.

If you mean that humans will continue to grow in population regardless of poverty and starvation and inequality, then.... yeah sure, that could happen.... But to me that smells like Overpopulation.

http://en.wikipedia..../Overpopulation

No, again, there is no reading between the lines of my post. It means what it means.
Your stuck into thinking about the future as if it would be today + billions of more people.

In the future jobs will have different content for example, it will be more individualized and specialized since information is only getting added and there will be a need for people that specialize in certain parts of all this information. It will be more cognitive than labor. Labor will be mainly automatised.

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.
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. 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. 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.

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

[Myles]

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

No, again, there is no reading between the lines of my post. It means what it means.
Your stuck into thinking about the future as if it would be today + billions of more people.

In the future jobs will have different content for example, it will be more individualized and specialized since information is only getting added and there will be a need for people that specialize in certain parts of all this information. It will be more cognitive than labor. Labor will be mainly automatised.

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.
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. 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. 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.

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

Lot's of what you state is wishful thinking.  "Population rise will stagnate".   I hope so, but at this point it is still expected to grow.

[Myles]

The original question doesn't have a solid answer.   It's up to the individual and his/her interpretation.
I think there are too many humans on the planet.   I don't wish half of us were gon though.   I would like to see a few population control measures taken.   They would have to all be voluntary.  I'd like to see cities offer free vasectomies for a period of time.   I'd like to offer people serving jail sentences the option of a vasectomy in trade for a bit off their sentence.  If a person is serving 5 years for beating his wife, he could choose to have that dropped to 4 years with a vasectomy.   Of course this wouldn't be offered to everyone.   The way I see it, is that the majority of kids who would be born of these guys would grow up in a bad situation anyway.

[Render]

Myles, on 26 February 2013 - 12:25 PM, said:

Lot's of what you state is wishful thinking.  "Population rise will stagnate".   I hope so, but at this point it is still expected to grow.

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.

[shrooma]

Myles, on 26 February 2013 - 12:33 PM, said:

offer people serving jail sentences the option of a vasectomy in trade for a bit off their sentence.
the majority of kids who would be born of these guys would grow up in a bad situation anyway.

.
you could start a whole new thread with this question.....

[Frank Merton]

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.