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.
Every political and economic system on the planet, capitalism, socialism, etc., doesn't matter, is based on growing the economy which is based on a growing population. It's like a global Ponzi scheme. How long can this continue before the earth is unsustainably overpopulated. Massive population reduction doesn't sound like a good idea but what about something approaching zero population growth?
Absolutely false that these economic systems are based on a growing population. Let's just start with capitalism since its the easiest to simplify and distill down to a small number of participants. All capitalism needs to work is an exchange where goods and services can be transferred between parties.
There is no inherent requirement that the number of participants even changes, let alone increases.
In fact, it works fine as a static system.
What you're talking about is probably any bastardized MONETARY system, which has absolutely no connection to an economic system. Capitalism works regardless of the units of exchange. It can be fiat money (the one that is actually responsible for driving growth, since its a Ponzi scheme that relies entirely on inflation), or it can be precious metals, or it can be brightly colored pieces of sea glass. It doesn't matter what the unit of exchange is.
We can't grow forever. And in fact life is becoming so stressful and expensive that a lot of people all over the world are choosing smaller families, if they have a family at all. I think the world would be a much better place if the population were cut in half or more. The people who would be born would enjoy more space, nature, inheritance, and parental love.
Smaller families aren't the only or even the best way to have a smaller impact on the planet. Large families can and often do live happily in ways that consume fewer resources than wasteful small families or singles.
Seems like most have not been paying attention the last 15-20 years.
Population growth has slowed down.. to sustainable levels, in ALL but a handfull of countries.
The "problem now" is that all the children born in the last 15-20 years will also become parents themselves, and then world population will stabilize at 10-12billion in 2100.
5 Billion in Asia
4 Billion in Africa
1 Billion in EU
1 Billion in Americas
What worked:
Female empowerment
Schooling for girls
Sex Education
Prevention
Basic healthcare
Government planning
Micro loans so women can start their own companies
It does not matter where you live or what religion you belong to, or what your religious leaders tell you to do, the average Female gives birth to approx. 2 children. Then they want to see their children succeed, be healthy and go to school, just like any other "western family".
Before vaccines and medications and schooling, females would give birth to 6-8 children, 4-6 would die and 2 would survive. Now with modern medicine, the 2 firstborn survives, and the family decides NOT to have more children, by using prevention.
The more the females and males are educated, the less children they choose to have. They would rather spend more resources on 2 children, then less resources on more children. So, the safer and better society a family lives in, they choose to have fewer children.
I don't really care what happens in the rest of the world much. I just don't want any of the overpopulated world emigrating to America ( and Europe, Japan or any successful nation that doesn't have irresponsible population growth). That way America's population would stabilize and the rest of the world can lie in the bed they made.
Seems like most have not been paying attention the last 15-20 years.
Population growth has slowed down.. to sustainable levels, in ALL but a handfull of countries.
...except in Africa, where it continues on wildly out of control in most countries.
Quote:
The "problem now" is that all the children born in the last 15-20 years will also become parents themselves, and then world population will stabilize at 10-12billion in 2100.
5 Billion in Asia
4 Billion in Africa
1 Billion in EU
1 Billion in Americas
Four billion Africans. Yes, that will be a problem, if not an existential threat to human civilization. And this is a lowish estimate which assumes fertility rates will fall dramatically in places where they haven't fallen much to date.
African female childbirth rate is falling, and is soon under 2. There are a few war ridden countries where its still high. But on the African continent as a whole the childbirth rate is stable and falling each year.
However, those already born today and tomorrow, will have children, but as their lives improves, each female will reproduce 2 children each, just like every other country on earth that has become safer and more stable.
So, they will hit approx. 4 Billion in 2100, but will be stable.
If we could get them up closer to "western" standards, they will have fewer and fewer children, because they are sure their child will survive disease, war, famine, hunger etc... and there is a safety net for themselves, so they dont need to have 6-8 children supporting them when they are old.
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.
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.
