First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Overpopulation
867 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / ihlok
Offline
Posted 2/25/16

runec wrote:


veritatis_cupitor wrote:
The OP explicitly mentions China. The use of immigration, ISIS etc is used in 2nd post to show the problem has more effects than only those limited to China. And I mentioned Asia and Africa. Don't know why some people are thing about global scale overpopulation. Effects on global scale, sure. But not overpopulation itself.


Yes, he does mention China. But we've also been discussing global wars and interplanetary colonization. I think its fairly clear what sort of overpopulation the conversation has been focused on. Hence I made a distinction between overpopulation and overcrowding.



Well, wars do decrease population but obviously I don't think that's a good way. I prefer development to do that. And I think humans will go in space, not because population forces it to but because we'll be able to do it in future. And it can increase scope of humans to a large degree.
16702 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
IN HIS EMBRACE
Offline
Posted 2/26/16
too deep for a discussion on this site.
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 2/26/16

cottonpiece wrote:
too deep for a discussion on this site.
You don't wanna go deep?
Go low bby!

Posted 2/26/16


my comment on overpopulation
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 2/26/16

ck1west wrote:
my comment on overpopulation
not strong enough.. need something safer
or we could be rubber people running around in latex.

kennk5 
60056 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
66 / M / Milwaukee, Wiscon...
Offline
Posted 2/26/16

runec wrote:


kennk5 wrote:
the land masses that can support human life in large numbers is really rather small when you factor in clean fresh water

and food production, When food production can't keep up with the number of people eating what happens - WAR over food and resources.


We don't have any issues with either of these things on a global scale though. What we have is an issue with distribution and access. We could solve world hunger tomorrow if we as a species collectively wanted too. But we don't and so it hasn't been. We have the food, water and technology but we can't get it to everyone that needs it because there are other people who don't want them to have it.

And its unlikely this attitude will change until we are forced too, kicking and screaming, by something like climate change.


My guess is you live in the land of milk and honey.
Where everything rosy and there is a huge rainbow in the sky all day.
Where no matter where you toss seeds everything grows, even out of dry rocks.
and everybody eats well without paying for it.


HELL, I WANT TO LIVE THERE!

But that isn't based on reality. Change what you can and accept what you can't.
82916 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 2/27/16
Overpopulation has always been a liberal myth; demographic trends indicate a future of under population!
801 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / CA, USA
Offline
Posted 2/27/16
geography major here. its not really an issue. as people move from rural to urban areas they start to have less children. this is a trend which will continue for quite some time. we produce more calories than necessary to end world hunger it is just distributed inefficiently aka for the purpose of making money rather than to feed people this isn't to say its bad thing for farmers to do, just to say that we could feed everyone. also replacement is i think 2.11 (maybe 2.44) kids per adult female. developed countries usually are below this and make up for it via immigration (germany) or they don't make up for it via immigration (japan). all this to say overpopulation is not really an issue.
52305 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/27/16
What overpopulation? There is no general overpopulation at all. In fact most rich countries face more of a "too few young people"-problem.
VeggyZ 
2624 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 2/27/16 , edited 2/27/16
I think overpopulation severely impacts quality of life, where it's effects are apparent anyway. I grew up in a place with few people in comparison to most, and with the onset of the oil boom here in North Dakota, quality of life has changed drastically due to the great influx of people, and it's STILL more sparsely populated than most places. It's effects are very obvious in a place like this.. There's the obvious reasons that it decreases quality of life, like traffic, and lines, but in general the more people there are in an area, the trashier that place becomes because the majority don't give give a crap about whether they're being considerate to others or not. It might be the biggest threat we as humans have against us, and as population increases it all snowballs. With the earths' current population (like 8 or 9 billion?) there are a lot more babies being born every day than there were 50 years ago, and that number increases exponentially. (that's the story anyway, more on that in a sec though)

This problem is going to come to a head in our lifetimes, there's no way that it can't. Many would say it already has, depending on where one lives.

There's simply not enough resource to go around, unless of course the people with great excess voluntarily give it up to feed those who don't have anything, but that's the least likely scenario I can imagine. It would only prompt them to come back for more and eventually take by force when it's no longer provided. The privatization of things like water would have to stop as well, because I think we all know how business' operate. No money = no water = death, even if you lived right on the lake that you drank out of since you were a child - it becomes the property of a corporation and you aren't allowed to access it without lining pockets. There aren't many corporations that give hand-outs.

Something needed to be done to control the populations a long time ago, before it got this out of hand, but people don't like to be told whether they can breed or not. Maybe if worldwide measures were taken back when I first started learning about overpopulation in school... we'd still be overpopulated :p

On the flip side, overpopulation is also the result of greatly increased life expectancy in the past hundred years, and not actually increased birthrates. All those people still need to eat and need shelter, though. Honestly, even if we can support all the people on the planet right now at this second, with as many as there are, it won't be that long before it's impossible. It kinda complicates the overpopulation issue and it becomes a lot less clear... It still counts as overpopulation I suppose, but with so much fewer young people it's hard to think of it the same way. It may not even be a bad thing, a little population decline once the current generation moves on.

Oh I don't know, but I like my peace and quiet..! A lot.
runec 
28280 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/27/16

kennk5 wrote:
My guess is you live in the land of milk and honey.
Where everything rosy and there is a huge rainbow in the sky all day.
Where no matter where you toss seeds everything grows, even out of dry rocks.
and everybody eats well without paying for it.

HELL, I WANT TO LIVE THERE!

But that isn't based on reality. Change what you can and accept what you can't.


.....What? -.-
runec 
28280 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/27/16

VeggyZ wrote:
There's simply not enough resource to go around, unless of course the people with great excess voluntarily give it up to feed those who don't have anything, but that's the least likely scenario I can imagine.


Thats kind of the thing though. Like I was saying we have the resources, we just don't have the collective will, security and distribution. We produce far more food than we need ( and western countries in particular waste an alarming amount of it ). Overall growth though has been on the decline for decades and will continue to decline. We're heading for equilibrium one way or another just on our current path.

If we change literally nothing the population will catch up with our food production by about 2056 but the population growth will also drop to 0.5% per year at that point. And that is if we change nothing at all do not expand agriculture in any way anywhere in the world. Plus thats also from a purely mathematical standpoint. Obviously we aren't bothering to feed everyone to begin with so the people eating now will still be eating and the people starving now will still be starving. There won't be any sort of crisis tipping point. Just the same ol' shit.



VeggyZ wrote:Something needed to be done to control the populations a long time ago, before it got this out of hand, but people don't like to be told whether they can breed or not. Maybe if worldwide measures were taken back when I first started learning about overpopulation in school... we'd still be overpopulated :p


Well, we're not overpopulated to begin with ( see earlier thread points ). But luckily this is a problem that can be indirectly addressed. You don't need to impose direct population control you just need to improve quality of life. Birth rates naturally decline as a nation develops and increases quality of life. The two biggest problems on the planet are China and India because they're both in their awkward teenage years between dirt farming and post industrial. If they develop further their birth rates will decline, if they back slide their death rates will increase.

Though religion, yes, is an irritatingly persistent barrier to solving many of humanities problems. -.-

82916 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 2/27/16 , edited 2/27/16
Christianity certainly is not one of those barriers ...it was the Christian worldview that gave birth to science in the first place; since it slaughtered over 100 million people in less than a hundred years, neither is atheistic communism. Dwindling resources is another myth that has always proven false - copper was replaced by fiber optics, wood by oil (which also replaced whale oil), which is more plentiful now than ever due to technological developments. Free market capitalism is the only economic system that can bring about the most abundance for the most people ...so adopt I'd already world!
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 2/27/16

dougeprofile wrote:
...it was the Christian worldview that gave birth to science in the first place.
lol...

52866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M
Offline
Posted 2/28/16
I heard that there isn't enough Chinese Woman for every Man in China.. So that the government have decided that if you have boy baby, you can have another baby (Female).. But this was while back.. Is this true?

If it is true, what happen if the another Baby is male? do the government kill it?

I know they have one child rule, but they made it exception for those who have one male child. -shrugs-

Also they have trillion of people in China.. And they are starving! Lot of them are getting killed everyday due to flooding and other problems.

I also heard that China have massive internal Debt problem.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.