Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It doesn't need to fall if we as humans get more efficient about being able to feed them. There are giant oceans on this planet which can be used to grow food. It may not be food we are accustomed to eating, but I would expect that to change over time.
Yah, well, except that we already use the oceans as convenient dumping grounds for fertilizer runoff from cultivated fields, dumping garbage, treated & untreated sewage. Note that a lot of pharmaceutical byproducts go right through our sewage treatment plants, & wind up in the source water for other water systems, or in the oceans. Not all the water in the oceans is suitable for fisheries/seafood. Basically, it's where enough sunlight penetrates to grow krill, the food base for the smaller fish/crustaceans, which in turn are consumed up the food chain. Thermal & ph. & other chemical pollutants are cutting into krill production, which affects the fish/seafood we prefer to eat. TMK, commercial fishery yields are dropping over time, to the point that some fish are not harvestable, to try to give the populations time to rebuild.
On what we're used to eating - yes. If we can retrain our taste buds, we can eat goat, rabbit, venison, sheep/mutton, wild boar/javelina & on & on. We need to do a better job with eating more locally (flora, fauna, trash fish), & foods with smaller carbon footprints.
If there's not enough clean water to drink, bathe, raise crops, nor enough calories to sustain human lives, we don't need to worry. Human movement will strain resource transport & national boundaries. The resulting conflicts will themselves cut into human population, & disrupt attempts to even out food distribution - & fertilizers, soil treatments, seeds, pest control, hydro engineering projects, training/education, medical efforts, scientific research, & so on. All of which will make matters worse, deepening economic recessions, depressions, & making scarce resources even scarcer. Imagine West Africa trying to deal with an Ebola outbreak without any outside assistance, other than communications with CDC or other medical support outfits.
In short, we may be able to grow more food. But I think it will be vat-grown, maybe cultured soya & so on. & that will cause some problems with acceptance in the World - hell, in the US, for that matter. The golden rice & fertilizers & weed eradication that helped feed the World starting in the 1970s (?) hasn't been replicated yet. & the inputs for vat-grown foods may be more high-tech than we can make universally available. If manufacturing these foods stays concentrated in First-world countries, there will likely develop political/economic problems to go with the questions of thirst & hunger.
The earth is NOT overpopulated! There are cities, countries and areas that are overpopulated but there are vast areas of habitable land with few or no people.
I don't think so. There's lots of open space, but most of it is desert, too mountainous, or is too cold.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,409,600 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletchman
I don't think so. There's lots of open space, but most of it is desert, too mountainous, or is too cold.
Over population is NOT about paving over all of Earth's surface. Each person needs so many acres of farmland, so much fossil fuel, etc to have their urban existence. Fossil fuels will at some point run out, many crops are grown by rapidly depleted aquafers, and there's only so much fresh water to go around.
The problem is people in poor countries will resist any effort to control their population. If a foreigner came and told you how many children to have would you not feel threatened? Rich nations actually have fertility rates that are too low, I think we let Malthus deal with poor countries population. Most have falling fertility rates anyway.
First of all fertility rates worldwide have been declining.
All of Asia's population growth is still relatively slow due to China, Vietnam, Japan and South Korea balancing out the rest. Most African countries although growing tremendously quickly do not have a starvation problem. The densest region in Africa besides the Northern Nile is Southern Nigeria were nearly 100 million live in an area the size of Arizona. The northern part of the country which is also decently dense with 80 million in an area the size of Texas has more problems with starving people than the south even though the south is exceedingly more dense. In both regions most people die from disease than starving and starving kids isn't an actual problem although they are both poor compared to the U.S.
Europe and Japan are dying out because of a very low fertility rate.
Sub Sahara Africa is over-reproducing.
What is really a joke is that those that worry about overpopulation generally come from developed countries that have a low fertility rate. All they are doing is creating a society with old people with no young work-force to keep the society healthy and viable.
I would not call it a joke; however, it is true that the more developed a country becomes, the lower the fertility rate that ensues, especially among younger women, most of whom do not desire to enter into childbearing in their youth. Most young women in developed countries want and should have the same opportunities to excel in their chosen careers as men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
As developed countries commit suicide by not having children they are heading to a chaotic era with no young people around.
Twice in your post you lament the "young workforce" and "a chaotic era with no young people around."
I don't see the problem related to youth versus age or that we don't have enough "young people," but rather to a lack of scientific ingenuity that has not significantly increased vitality, fertility and longevity of the educated people we already have in the developed world. Why should the workforce be only young? We can have a healthy and viable society by keeping the most experienced employees healthy and vital and able to work alongside new employees.
I would not call it a joke; however, it is true that the more developed a country becomes, the lower the fertility rate that ensues, especially among younger women, most of whom do not desire to enter into childbearing in their youth. Most young women in developed countries want and should have the same opportunities to excel in their chosen careers as men.
Twice in your post you lament the "young workforce" and "a chaotic era with no young people around."
I don't see the problem related to youth versus age or that we don't have enough "young people," but rather to a lack of scientific ingenuity that has not significantly increased vitality, fertility and longevity of the educated people we already have in the developed world. Why should the workforce be only young? We can have a healthy and viable society by keeping the most experienced employees healthy and vital and able to work alongside new employees.
A society with few young people and lots of old people is not natural. As people age they retire and become dependent on the work force. Why do you think Germany needs immigrants? Old people cannot be productive forever. You rather prolong longevity than to have kids. Can you imagine a world where old people never die?
Yep the world is way over populated and i've been saying that for a long time. The earth may be able to handle all the people but the people can't handle all the people...if that makes sense. I go to my local super market and we now have lines of people waiting to use the self checkout lanes. The line gets so long that they have the ropes they use in banks to keep people in line and not staggered all over the place. This while 7+ registers are also open but have long lines also. This is almost every day the place is packed like that and i live in the suburbs not the city.
A society with few young people and lots of old people is not natural. As people age they retire and become dependent on the work force. Why do you think Germany needs immigrants? Old people cannot be productive forever. You rather prolong longevity than to have kids. Can you imagine a world where old people never die?
I think my post was very clear. I believe that science can keep us all "younger" longer, healthier longer, and the chronologically older VITAL seniors (people who look young [without plastic surgery] and have the health of, for example 30-50 year-olds, have vim and vigor and brainpower can and would contribute a great deal to society. Scientific breakthroughs should be able to accomplish this. Science is advancing rapidly
I do, indeed, think that the world would be far better off if there were significantly fewer people on the planet, and I don't care to return to the old, "natural" ways where women were essentially chattel, kept pregnant, at home, and especially in the kitchen.
Speaking of natural, it is not the least bit natural for extreme premies (that nature would likely have miscarried) to be hooked up for months to machines, to suck up the funds in the healthcare system, and older people not given premium health care, and instead having plugs pulled by family, nurses, doctors prematurely.
I think my post was very clear. I believe that science can keep us all "younger" longer, healthier longer, and the chronologically older VITAL seniors (people who look young [without plastic surgery] and have the health of, for example 30-50 year-olds, have vim and vigor and brainpower can and would contribute a great deal to society. Scientific breakthroughs should be able to accomplish this. Science is advancing rapidly
We are already doing that! And because of the economy many people work full time into their 70s. But, don't take my word for this: Just look at China who had the same mindset you have. AND CHINA was overpopulated so population control made sense. Now after a few decades of only one child per couple they have discovered it was an ERROR and now they got rid of the one child per couple mandate.
But, folks like you want to go childless when you live in a developed country where the fertility rate is already quite low and the population is shrinking!
Quote:
I do, indeed, think that the world would be far better off if there were significantly fewer people on the planet, and I don't care to return to the old, "natural" ways where women were essentially chattel, kept pregnant, at home, and especially in the kitchen.
Yes, but this only applies to the 3rd world----------- and even the 3rd world has drastically reduced the fertility rate. The only place with a very high fertility rate is Sub Sahara Africa. Otherwise the fertility rate is coming down in India, Asia, and South America.
I understand the desire to sacrifice children for the sake of having a career and nice material things, but in the end this is genetic suicide. Species that do not procreate become extinct. I am not saying humans are about to become extinct, but certain segments of the population are on their way out.
Regarding a career: It is not Children or children. Lots of successful women have kids and great careers. Sure, they may have less material things, but life is much more that just that.
Quote:
Speaking of natural, it is not the least bit natural for extreme premies (that nature would likely have miscarried) to be hooked up for months to machines, to suck up the funds in the healthcare system, and older people not given premium health care, and instead having plugs pulled by family, nurses, doctors prematurely.
I agree that from an evolutionary point of view it is not practical to keep alive those that would otherwise perish, but the same can be said about the sick and elderly. Why spend millions in keeping 95 year old granny alive three extra months?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.