Overpopulation...
 

In my mind, overpopulation is the root of every problem facing humankind today and the biggest problem facing us. What to do about it? I'd love your concrete suggestions along with the usual hot air from those who just know science will bail us out and we'll all fly around in nuclear cars eating computer generated food...

Personally I find it interesting that the wealthy western world is experiencing a fair bit of underpopulation. The countries with the biggest population increases seem to be third world countries.

This raises the question: what cultural elements are causing this? Is it democracy, widespread literacy, technology based economies and wealth that cause population decline. Or something else?

If it is, do you tackle overpopulation by getting the third world societies up to the level of first world western societies? Maybe, but remember that population decline can be a bad thing too, a kind of social and economic stagnation. They'll have to embrace some elements and not others. Stability is the key.

So if you have some countries with too many people and some countries with too few people, one answer is going to be immigration. But if the west isn't receptive to the necessity for SENSIBLE immigration programs, you'll get inevitable instability in both the first and third world.

If immigration is to be any help at all it has to be about integration and education; not about creating a resented and resentful underclass.

This is just a way of managing the issue though, not a total solution.

Nobody is going to solve the problem of overpopulation.

Scientists have yet to put me in a flying car and send me to the moon so I have little faith that they can find the end all in overpopulation. :)

All other "solutions" are too distasteful. Forcing humans to breeding limits? We are appalled at the thought. Collectively killing off sects of the population? I really don't think that's even an option. Overpopulation requires hard answers to hard questions and that's not possible in this soft society. Everyone has the right to breed, no matter how many of us may disagree. :D

Eventually disease, pestilence, famine and so forth are going to have to regulate the population. Of course, the question is how many folks is too many folks?

What overpopulation? The world is not overpopulated. Its just that certain areas have a higher concentration of people that cannot be fully supported. The main problem is that we have more than enough to comfortably feed and house every person on the planet. Although we can do this, the people are just in the wrong place.

Math time -

According to Encyclopedia Britannica, Texas is 266807 square miles in size. Thats 7,438,152,268,746 square feet, give or take a few inches.

Now lets take a small estimate. According to census.gov, there are roughly 6.3 billion people in the world. If we form all 6.3 billion people in to families of 4, then we get 1,575,000,000 family units.

Here's the fun part. We'll give all 1.575 billion units a 2,000 square foot house, and an additional 2,000 square feet of yard space surrounding their 2,000 square foot house. Thats 4,000 square feet of space, per family unit.

so 1,575,000,000 units, each with 4,000 square feet is equal to 6,300,000,000,000 square feet. From what we had earlier, Texas is 7,438,152,268,746 square feet.

7,438,152,268,746 - 6,300,000,000,000 = 1,138,152,268,746 square feet left over in the state of Texas.

With all that space left over, plus all the rest of the world which can be used for farming, there really isn't a thing as over population. It is all in your head.

For all the critics, I'll let you expand everyones location from each other to compensate for streets, buildings, schools, loan offices, govermental buildings, shrines to me, stores, parks, lakes and other things. This was only an example.

Heres the bottom line: by rule of numbers and how humans reproduce it will happen at some point; theres no escaping that.

I see space exploration as being the only hope. I see folding space as the only hope for space travel.

BIRTH CONTROL!

in my state in india, they are handing out FREE birth control pills and they are encouraging abortions.

the result?

1 child family's are increasing.

thats a lot of math... I'll agree for the 'center square block' ;)
There is no over population - its all alarmist BS

We are not over populated now but look at the growth in the last 100 years. Now start doubling it. There, now you see the problem.

The biggest problem with most people is that they don't care about the future. The "I wont be around so it is not my problem!" mentality.


I don't think it will ever be too much of a problem. Whenever you pack a bunch of people in a location (China) and a disease pops up (SARS) it weeds out the weak (5,300 deaths in a few weeks). The earth has a way of curing its disease on its own. So we may have a population problem for a while but either we will find a way to deal with it, or she will. :)

http://www.prb.org/Content/Navigatio...ion_Growth.htm


This is a good read. Basicly what I got out of it is that they really don't know what will happen.
One idea.

or

or

That's good but they fucked themselves out of a place to sleep a long time ago. Kinda' like your 17th child buying you a book on birthcontrol for Father's Day. Too late to help much.

Let's start eating babies!

(read 'A Modest Proposal' before freaking out about my suggestion ;))

it's cuz of better healthcare.

people are living longer than ever, so the pop is going to rise until it evens out

I think instead of spreading Democracy throughout the world, we should spread third world style dictatorships. The United Nations could then rotate the Human Rights Committee around these despots and they could look the other way while their cronies in other countries commit genocide. Hell, they could even divert the worlds attenton to their game by saying the United states is the largest offender of basic human rights.. oh wait- thats not working now, is it.

Third world countries are over populating because of boredom,
they have nothing else to do but screw.

So I say send them all a PS2 and some games and it will decrease.

If not we can say a nuke kinda slipped.

They screw around because they dont have the proper education. You see, these people are so stupid that they dont realize that by fucking around they will end up with like four kids and that they will not be able to maintain them properly.
:hmm: Or they are SO stupid that they think that by having more kids and then sending them to work, the family will be better off... :hmm:

You know, Soylent Green is people.

The way to deal with overpopulation is to have more room for people to live. I hear real-estate on the moon and mars is pretty cheap. Now we just have to get there.

Many third world nations are overpopulated because of their religion - I don't know if one would go so far as to consider their religious belief as ignorance or not - possibly! When a nation is developing, still in an agricultural frame of mind, one can understand the desire for large families - large families = cheap and available labor. As a nation developes it soon discovers that a large population is a burden and not an asset. Asian nations historically have always been overpopulated and underfed. It would stand to reason that the solution to one of these problems is the reduction of the other. Cultures change slowly. I would imagine if the idiot in charge in N Korea could choose between the two he would take more groceries and less people - isn't 20/20 hindsight great.

This is one of my favourites, the 'Homoarmegeddon theory'. Basically, it states that homosexuality is nature's way of trying to slow down the birth rate. Eventually there will be enough gay people that the Earth will stabilize, where a certain percentage of people are straight and a certain percentage homosexual and that's just the way they are.

Of course, it's complete horseshit.

Here's some of my ideas to help curb overpopulation...

1) "Condom virginity" - Mabey popular morality needs to be revised with the novel idea that you are still a virgin as long as you use condoms: save the gloveless love for marriage and youll've virtually eliminated teen pregnancy. Unfortunately, protected sex is nothing on unprotected sex...

2)Health care hipocrasy: Western health care covers viagra and fertility treatments, but doesn't cover contraceptives or abortions or even vasectomies.

3) Popular sentiment: everyone still likes to ooh and ahh over freak mutation septuplets acquired by fertility drugs, and politicians still stump for tax breaks or welfare bonuses for the overly childed. Mabey we could see extra children (beyond the first ideally, but second would do) classified as pollution and taxed out the ying yang. I'd like to see massive tax or other incentives for sterilization before producing children. I can't possibly be the only one who starts looking around for another empty seat on the plane when a baby or toddler and their bubbly mom is seated next to or behind or infront of me.

Seems like this is seeping into religion in a big way. I mean religion is meant to be one of those things that forces people to look beyond the end of their own life to consider the state of the society in the long term. Not so much nowdays.

With the prevalence of science and technology, and an increasingly complex society, many seem to have fallen back on Christian millenarianism; a sense that all of these problems will disappear with the second coming of Christ. It's common in the Seventh Day Adventists and the Jehovah's Witnesses but there seems to be an undercurrent of it throughout many other Christian groups.

meanSpleen is right of course. Which is to say there IS over population in some parts of the world but the world as a whole is still very empty. Of course if you live in a big ass city I can talk all I want and will never convince you of this. Take a drive from Tulsa to Dallas and see if you still think the world is over populated.

WHOA. 5300 deaths in a few weeks? Where the frudge do you get your numbers? According to WHO the TOTAL death rate of sars to date is 799. That is world wide. You are probably confusing the number that has died from it with the number that has gotten it. 5326 cases in china from Nov 2002 till June 16th 2003. Only 346 deaths in china. 8460 total cases worldwide. Sorry about the off topic rant. I am just so damn tired of sensationalism crap. Oh well. Sars has had its 15 minutes. Time for the next uncurable disease that is going to wipe us all off the face of the planet... just to be cured one year later after effecting effecting 0.00000141 of the worlds population and a mear 0.000005326 of the population of its home country(Based on a world population of 6,000,000 and population of China of 1,000,000)

http://www.who.int/csr/sars/country/2003_06_16/en/

Having voted and completely skipped over reading every post, content in the knowledge someone probably touched on this earlier, I don't think the earth is overpopulated at all. The only sense that you could tag that on to us is that we tend to crowd together in large numbers in a very small spot. Ever been out in the country? There's a person every 20 miles maybe, and that's just in the U.S.

I also have an issue with the poll itself:

"Humans have to start controlling reproduction"

I'm all for this as well, out of the context of the question, obviously for different reasons. I think we should be shooting for quality of life, rather then quantity of life.

Maybe in the states... I got "cut" no charge and abortion is covered too. I'm told that viagra isn't covered. The last time I checked I lived in a "western" country.

I wouldn't call people from third world countries "stupid". I'd call them uneducated. (there is a difference)

Two words: Soylent Green.

It's a cookbook! It's a cookbook!!!

One way or another it will sort itself out....

Yes I meant to say cases not deaths. I had deaths on the brain.

If I wanted to post "sensationalism crap" I would talk about how the world is infected with diseases that will bring us down as a civilization. Monkey Pox, West Nile, SARS, AIDS, Mad Cow, Ebola and any other infection we have seen in the last 20 years.

:)

Ignorant question: Are there enough resources on the planet to raise all the third world countries' standard of living to the point where stasis would happen on its own?

I thought I read somewhere that, according to current population projections, in the late 21st century or so the population will peak around 11 billion, experience a drastic fall-off due to disease and famine, and then plateau at a static level of about 8 billion.

All this is of course barring the development of life-extending technology, off-world colonization, or some idiot with a bunch of nukes.

One word I haven't heard mentioned here - WATER.

Comments?

In Human Geograhy, I learned something about some guy named Malthus, who said, in the late 1700s, that in 50 years, there won't be enough food to feed England. It is 200+ years later, and I dont hear anything about starving Englishmen on the news. The human race will pull through, I have no doubt about it. Even if only a small group survives, in a few millenia, the Earth will be overpopulated once again.

I am inclined to think that the problem is not that there are too many people, just that there are not enough good people. For example, there is more than enough food available to feed every single person on the planet, but because of waste and greed, millions, if not billions starve. As for water, if people could stop killing each other and live in peace then we'd be able to devote a lot more money and attention to issues like this. There have been positive developments with desalinization, conservation, etc. If people cooperated there would be a solution.

What about it? The earth is 2/3 water. Or maybe you are saying we will all drown? I could see that as being your point. As far as water goes, yea, we are no were near running out of usable water. Which is to say that I could forsee us hitting that point someday (a good thousand years away...) but sanation methods are growing by leaps and bounds. We will have a solution for this "problem" long before it presents itself as a real problem.

I'm resurrecting this thread because it seems (without knowing it) as a mother-thread for many current (2008) issues.

So... overpopulation. Human overpopulation is characterized by depletion of natural resources and facilities due to population size. In any given environment, there is a sustainability point; a population limit which exists naturally in any environment.

Currently, the planet Earth has about 6.5 billion humans living on it (projected to reach 7 billion before 2011, and 8 billion before 2024), and the number of starvation deaths sits at somewhere around 4.6 million so far in 2008.

The question: can we lower this starvation rate drastically without slowing or stopping our rate of population growth? Will we?

Yes. As an example, 70% of the grain and cereal grown in the United States is fed to farmed animals. It takes 16 pounds of grain to produce 1 pound of edible animal flesh. Do the math.

Most people can thrive on well-planned vegan diets, which have been endorsed as healthful by such organizations as the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada.

Starvation isn't a food-production-capacity issue so much as it is an economic and political issue. We are not overpopulated in terms of food capacity; we are overpopulated when it comes to the lifestyles of the wealthy and the resources required to support them. Just wait until the rise of the middle classes in China and India if you want to see what I mean. WillRavel, if you aren't already invested in natural resources, it might be too late. Speak with your financial advisor.

I don't know. :sad:

You're certainly right about food, but what about energy for growing the food and moving it to people?

BTW, I stopped eating beef about 8 months back and my cholesterol has gone down.

Still, there will eventually be a point where humans have gone beyond our geo-homeostasis if the population continues on it's present path.

roachboy has a thread about this.

This is true, but I don't think we'll continue on our present path for much longer. Just ten years ago, if you were to tell someone people would be driving electric cars by choice, they'd think you were mad. "What, you mean like in the future?" they'd ask coincidentally.

Economics will be the key. It will become too expensive to "keep up" with the middle and upper classes and their lifestyles. A computer in every household was once a dream. Only wealthy households had a computer back in the day. Now we carry them in our pockets. Some people have more than one on them at a time. I own two actual "computers" and I am by no means rich. But what will happen when it gets more expensive to pay Chinese or Taiwanese workers to make them? But that's just computers. Do you realize how many goods come from Asia these days? It's quite astounding. If oil breaks $200 by 2010 as they're predicting, the cost of shipping virtually anything will spike as well.

Globalization was cool when you had cheap job markets, cheap resources, and cheap oil. With current forecasts? Not so cool. Ideas like Diet for a Small Planet and the 100-Mile Diet are just the tip of the iceberg.

To tell you the truth, I'm not so concerned about global warming. We have more immediate threats, I think. They have already begun to surface. Are we overpopulated? Yes, but only if you look at our activities. If we lived differently, we might be able to support 10 billion or more without concern. The problem is we all want to live like Americans.

Yes, I posted in there.
Laziness will be key. I look forward to the day when it's finally evident to everyone that the US is not an economic juggernaut anymore. Or military. Or anything. That's when Americans might finally be a little bit more like those who rose up from the Great Depression and won World War 2. That was some serious shit. Can we do it again? Of course. Will we? I dunno, will American Idol still be on?

If there's one thing I give credit to you Americans for, it is your resilience in the face of adversity. Just give it time. If you ask me, it's getting to be a good time to invest in America. Some good bargains coming up.

But, seriously, America is known for resourcefulness and nationalism. Between the reds and blues, you haven't torn each other apart yet. Sure, most of you are zombified consumers of media and its manifestations, but that won't last if things get worse. You're just about finished riding out some of the worst 8 years of presidential history. Give it time.

It's the economy, stupid, and all that rot.

I'm actually reading the cookbook counterpart to this book right now, in an effort to be more prepared for the farmer's market this season. I want to be able to do as much as I can with local ingredients.

The problem with trying to initiate some kind of population control or family planning measures is that there is no possible way you can get 7 billion people of different belief systems to follow the same or even similar family planning protocols. What about those Quiverfull people? Clearly they're not fans of population control or family planning. And if we're not careful, and intelligent people control their growth too much, I'm afraid we might end up with an Idiocracy.

Oregon will be a good place to live if things do go down hill. Plenty of fresh water, nice liberal people, more farmers markets than California, and no where near where China will nuke!

Dude, we practically have a whole country of that up here.

Believe me, I know. Oregon is like... little Canada.

There is no population crisis. No need to panic and start a run to Oregon or Canada.

We will adapt and find our way. It is the American way. There are Jeffersonian movements all over the place as people start to move off the grid and become self-sufficient.

Personally, I love the idea of living off the land (as long as I can still have my internets!). I am organic farming on a small scale in the middle of Orange County using nothing but my wits, the internet and the library as my resources and the good folks at Home Depot. I have a 4 x 5 corn patch and a 6 x 4 raised vegetable garden that I built myself - all on the cheap. I also have a compost pile going. No pesticides, no herbicides. I used ladybugs to fight off a pest invasion. I'm planting marigolds to fight off other bugs. God I love nature!

Can't wait for the first harvest.

Oh yeah. China will never ever ever nuke the US so please, let's not get hysterical here. By the way, Oregon is well within range of their strategic weapons.

We can start another thread for this interesting discussion.

That nuke thing was a joke, dude.

Relax buddy, just engaging in conversation! C'mon now, I've been gone for six months and this is how you greet me? Where is the love baby? Where's the "Welcome back Jorgelito!", slap on the back and a cold beer coming my way? :)

*sigh* I guess you can't go home again *sniff*

Anyways, joke or not, I think it's interesting nonetheless.

Well, total fertility rates (TFR--more indicative than just plain birth rates) ARE going down in a lot of places, since the end of the last century... not just the West, either. Take a look at Thailand, for a great example of a country going through the demographic transition very quickly (demographic transition means the change from high birth and death rates, to low birth and death rates)... in the 1960's, the TFR was around 6, and today it's significantly below-replacement at 1.64. I think that cultures can and will change, with time and education (especially for women, regarding birth control), but a LOT of time will have to pass for some cultures. I'm optimistic, though.

It would also help (as Baraka said) if we all became vegetarians and ate locally... but I'm not ready to take either of those steps yet. Try eating only local vegetables in ICELAND!!! :lol: Yeah, that would control the population real fast... we'd all be dead, here. It's happened a few times in Iceland's history, up until the 1940s when they actually became prosperous (as a result of the American occupation during WWII, in fact--they hate that).

We should start eating the Irish.

Yes, but we're not close to any strategic targets. There is little military presence in Oregon beyond the various national guard and reserve branches. The closest strategic target to Oregon is the Bangor Submarine Base that's part of Naval Station Kitsap in the Puget Sound. Unless someone decided they wanted to bomb the hell out of Intel Corp., we're pretty safe.

That said, I'm learning to identify edible native plants, such as camas. I'm also going to plant a "Victory Garden" this summer--I'll have to use nursery plants because I'm moving so late in the season, but next year I'm going to grow from seed. I'd recommend that anyone who can do so do the same.

Oh, um, I started early.

it seems that situations like the AIDS epidemic in Africa is controlling population a bit

AIDS is population control by eliminating the poorest places. That kinda thing makes me sick to my stomach.

I'd think that if we as a species decided that we needed to reduce population, would could just have people volunteer to have 1 child per couple, and promote adoption more.

So is obesity worldwide...through infertility and premature mortality, among other things.

Disease and warfare have the biggest impact on populations.

Isn't this just evolution, or Darwinism in action? In other words, removing all empathy and emotions aside, is this not just the natural order of things. The life cycle if you will. Famines happen, natural disasters occur, living things move around. On a human level, yes there are other inputs and stimuli that may contribute to disaster etc too. War, politics, economics etc..

Whether AIDS, cancer, small pox, bubonic plague, influenza, whatever, there will always be something that "culls" the human herds just like diseases that affect the flora and fauna of our planet.

Hm.... The largest expansion of population in the history of history was accompanied by the largest expansion of the quality of life, life expectancy, innovation, and economic progress in the history of history.

EVERYONE PANIC!

Ancient Greece?

No stupid, it's Manbearpig.

No Will, I think he means the Baby Boomers, LOL.

I mean the 20th Century.

Confusing cause and effect is a fallacy. The population boom didn't cause the "largest expansion of the quality of life, life expectancy, innovation, and economic progress". Those things made a population boom possible.

This is a good point, but let's not leave out one significant aspect of evolutionary theory: the survival of the fittest. In our case, the fitness we will require is our ability to adapt to a changing environment within the backdrop of our sometimes disruptive activities. Human innovation as far back as the advent of agriculture is something without which we would not be where we are today. There are other innovations coming down the pipeline that will increase our evolutionary fitness—that is if we can overcome the bad things within nature and within ourselves.

Will's right; this is a fallacy. But you bring up an interesting point, nonetheless. As I've mentioned above, human innovation is a factor that is crucial to this issue. Human expansion should be coupled with innovation that allows us to program sustainability into our existence. In order for us to thrive (I would argue that we aren't exactly thriving at the moment), we will need to live in such a way that avoids compromising our "evolutionary fitness" within the world.