Is there a looming over-population crisis?

[Dutch]

This video makes our population look like it's spiraling out of control and quick. Is there a threshold for when we need to universally start investigating this as a problem? For reasons of food distribution, global warming, water shortages, there's got to be a point where this becomes just as important as say...Global Warming (which to be fair, isn't treated very importantly...yet.)

World Population
Video showing the population explosion taking place in modern times and through to 2030.

I'll admit, I think this is something we need to address (or begin socializing publicly and politically) as much as we need to address Global Warming, but I'm not sure if others agree. Not sure what a solution would be other than family size limits aka China's attempt at it.

[Kodos]

We could impose "Children of the Corn" rules.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Not sure what a solution would be other than family size limits aka China's attempt at it.

Improve standards of living for people and they naturally choose to have less kids.

Think about it. How many folks do you know that have between 0-3 kids? And a lot of that is because our standard of living is high enough that kids are hella expensive (college, etc.). People have lot of kids when the standard of living is low enough that the kids provide a net value (more labor) instead of a net expense.

Heck, high-standard-of-living areas like Japan and Europe are actually in trouble because they are not having enough kids to support the previous generation in retirement.

If we want to combat overpopulation, we should invest massively in increasing the global standard of living (which is a good thing to be doing anyway).

[lungs]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Improve standards of living for people and they naturally choose to have less kids.

Think about it. How many folks do you know that have between 0-3 kids? And a lot of that is because our standard of living is high enough that kids are hella expensive (college, etc.). People have lot of kids when the standard of living is low enough that the kids provide a net value (more labor) instead of a net expense.

Heck, high-standard-of-living areas like Japan and Europe are actually in trouble because they are not having enough kids to support the previous generation in retirement.

If we want to combat overpopulation, we should invest massively in increasing the global standard of living (which is a good thing to be doing anyway).

This is a less crude way of what I was going to say, so I'll just let it stand.

[tarcone]

While a great idea Albion, I think you run into religious constraints. The quickest way to spread religion is to have a bunch of kids. This how Catholicism spread and it is how Islam is spreading today.

You wont be able to impose your great idea on populations that have no interest in anything except spreading their religion.

[rowech]

Growth rate has gone down some. I've always felt there must be limits as to how willing people were willing to have children given space, resources, etc. in my opinion, we are destined for massive war if we don't figure out a way to get people off the planet and start exploring space for other places to live.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Kodos

We could impose "Children of the Corn" rules.

Going to assume these are Nebraska corn and not Iowa corn rules.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Improve standards of living for people and they naturally choose to have less kids.

Think about it. How many folks do you know that have between 0-3 kids? And a lot of that is because our standard of living is high enough that kids are hella expensive (college, etc.). People have lot of kids when the standard of living is low enough that the kids provide a net value (more labor) instead of a net expense.

Heck, high-standard-of-living areas like Japan and Europe are actually in trouble because they are not having enough kids to support the previous generation in retirement.

If we want to combat overpopulation, we should invest massively in increasing the global standard of living (which is a good thing to be doing anyway).

This, specifically if you improve female education and work force participation then the birth rates go down.

[Ned Doolittle]

Not an issue at all. Plenty of rural areas will become booming, thriving cities as space limitations force ppl to move and set up residence in places that aren't traditionally high population areas. Every possible space in America and Canada and Mexico would have to be filled up before overpopulation becomes an issue. There are literally places all over North America that there is nothing for miles that are perfectly suitable for living.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Ned Doolittle

Not an issue at all. Plenty of rural areas will become booming, thriving cities as space limitations force ppl to move and set up residence in places that aren't traditionally high population areas. Every possible space in America and Canada and Mexico would have to be filled up before overpopulation becomes an issue. There are literally places all over North America that there is nothing for miles that are perfectly suitable for living.

Yeah - but then where will we go to escape people?

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Ned Doolittle

Not an issue at all. Plenty of rural areas will become booming, thriving cities as space limitations force ppl to move and set up residence in places that aren't traditionally high population areas. Every possible space in America and Canada and Mexico would have to be filled up before overpopulation becomes an issue. There are literally places all over North America that there is nothing for miles that are perfectly suitable for living.

It's not just the living space but it's also finding the resources to satisfy lifestyle wants.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Improve standards of living for people and they naturally choose to have less kids.

Think about it. How many folks do you know that have between 0-3 kids? And a lot of that is because our standard of living is high enough that kids are hella expensive (college, etc.). People have lot of kids when the standard of living is low enough that the kids provide a net value (more labor) instead of a net expense.

Heck, high-standard-of-living areas like Japan and Europe are actually in trouble because they are not having enough kids to support the previous generation in retirement.

If we want to combat overpopulation, we should invest massively in increasing the global standard of living (which is a good thing to be doing anyway).

I agree, mostly. Some cultures, even with improved standard of living are still culturally encouraged to have large families*. That's not a western culture thing, so globally, there needs to be a culture change of serious proportions.

Some ideas locally on culture change have not been effective, and that seems to be income related. We see low income families that join the middle class having fewer children here so that's promising (and why I can get on board with what your saying). But I don't think we ever fully solve the low income issue. That's why I am on board with initiatives like pro-choice and contraceptive initiatives...a break from my conservative (religious) brothers and sisters...but I feel we have no alternatives at the present time except to embrace these types of programs. Unfortunately, it's a drop in the bucket compared to much of the world.

*http://www.wired.com/2014/09/human-population-2100/

[Butter]

I think there will be one eventually, but "looming" overstates it.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Kodos

We could impose "Children of the Corn" rules.

Or "Soylent Green" or "Logan's Run"!

[Edward64]

I actually think the US don't have enough kids.

Don't think we have an overpopulation problem.

[wustin]

China is peaking or will peak pretty soon. They changed the single-child policy to two recently because there isn't enough children in the country.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

I think there will be one eventually, but "looming" overstates it.

To be fair, it wasn't a statement, but rather a question for discussion. I thought it might be interesting to ask because it's not a political discussion (at least, I don't think it is).

[Suicane75]

Yes. There are people everywhere I go and 95% of them annoy me. Let's get rid of em or keep them from reproducing.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Dutch

To be fair, it wasn't a statement, but rather a question for discussion. I thought it might be interesting to ask because it's not a political discussion (at least, I don't think it is).

Yeah, you're right. My answer is "no". I think we'll be dead and our children will be dead before it gets serious.

So in true world problem fashion, no one will care about this for another 100 years.

[The Jackal]

something something malthus something something

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Yes. There are people everywhere I go and 95% of them annoy me. Let's get rid of em or keep them from reproducing.

No, I did NOT hack Suicane75s account.

I swear.

[JonInMiddleGA]

We have a population that is surplus to needs, that in & of itself is a population crisis at some point.

And, in simplest shortest form, yes the Chinese had the right basic premise.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Yes. There are people everywhere I go and 95% of them annoy me. Let's get rid of em or keep them from reproducing.

I've done some reading on pre-Columbian America (North and South America). Some of the things they talk about are amazing. Like, where did the Aztecs come from (and the Maya and the Incas). They were originally nomadic from North America that slowly migrated south. The first people in what is currently Mexico arrived no more than 10,000 years ago.

How amazing must some of those explorations have been! To hike south from the edge of civilization into a vast continent that was void of people. Just astounding when you think about it. But I digress.

[timmae]

The area of the world that is allocated for the use of the worldwide population is staggering. Too damn many people I say.. But growth will not be stopping anytime soon. Poor people will always be able to procreate.

[Dutch]

Agh!

"Is there an looming..."

Fixed, but my poor grammar (was) out of the bag in the thread title.

My apologies! So ashamed...

[Ned Doolittle]

Also factor in marriage rates are severely down, there's nothing to suggest more ppl are having kids without marriage. I would say an entire generation (at least in America) of millenials not getting married or at least holding off on marriage will allow birth rates to taper off.

[Dutch]

Yeah, I think the US is probably the least of our concerns.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Dutch

I've done some reading on pre-Columbian America (North and South America). Some of the things they talk about are amazing. Like, where did the Aztecs come from (and the Maya and the Incas). They were originally nomadic from North America that slowly migrated south. The first people in what is currently Mexico arrived no more than 10,000 years ago.

How amazing must some of those explorations have been! To hike south from the edge of civilization into a vast continent that was void of people. Just astounding when you think about it. But I digress.

Now that I live in the Hudson Valley, I've thought about what it must have been like for Hudson to see the river and the mountains around it.