World Population

[inflames07]

Originally Posted by reuben_tate

Did I say I want to kill random people? No, I said I want to promote things such as war. Humans have been at war with each other for a long time and it seems to work as one of those things that kill people faster.

Try imagine if there was never war, never natrual disasters, no death penalty,etc... The population of the planet would be at astronomical rates.

What I meant to say when I said we should promote things like that was that making birth laws is not working and we need to find a alternative solution.

Like everyone has said already, you can only propose bills in your own country and I guarantee a bill like that would never be discussed by congress. Humans have the natural ability and rights to pass along their family name.

Also, there is a ton of open space left on the planet and will probably never be filled. Go ahead and try to promote what you said to people "Hi will you please kill your children, join the military and cut off your genitals to regulate the population? thx"

Oh, and if you feel so strongly about the population, you can set an example to others by jumping off a bridge or something.


Right now there isn't a problem with population, at least one that outweighs the current issues of pollution and such. However in the next 1,000 years it might become one with the life expectancy of humans increasing. But as the others said above, there will always be natural disasters.

[Zythus]

What I meant to say when I said we should promote things like that was that making birth laws is not working and we need to find a alternative solution.

There is no other HUMANE alternative. Unless you would suggest something I haven't thought of. Killing, warfare, genocide, etc. are all out of the question. At NO time would government(s) ever initiate such a protocol to limit population growth. It is not realistic.

It might as well be said we will meet our doom due to overpopulating. And that is why there is space exploration going on, to extend the human inhabitant's borders. Society is in its way naive and empathic which will not accept something like killing. We just use birth control and hope it lessens our load. Obviously, its not working, but it does some contribution.

Inflame, its not always the worry about space or land. Resources have a limit and their finitude will eventually be depleted someday. But as time passes, technology also evolve. The hopes of space and celestial bodies seem very promising.

[Dolphin2016]

The reason why exponential growth is occurring in 3rd world countries is because people can't sustain themselves and their children like we do (people living in 1st world countries). Therefore, they must resort to having so many children to work for them and support them. However, as the children grow up, their needs to survive also grow rapidly, so they end up having a bunch of children to support them, resulting in exponential growth.

Until the country's infrastructure, economy, etc. shapes up, this cycle will continue. Many countries (especially in Africa) have little to no resources, meaning it will take hundreds in not thousands of years for them to develop into 1st world countries by themselves. How do we fix the overpopulation problem? We (the 1st world countries) must step in and help, even more so than today. If every single one of us even donates a penny, that will do wonders as compared to suggesting mass-massacres.

[reuben_tate]

Originally Posted by Dolphin2016

The reason why exponential growth is occurring in 3rd world countries is because people can't sustain themselves and their children like we do (people living in 1st world countries). Therefore, they must resort to having so many children to work for them and support them. However, as the children grow up, their needs to survive also grow rapidly, so they end up having a bunch of children to support them, resulting in exponential growth.

Until the country's infrastructure, economy, etc. shapes up, this cycle will continue. Many countries (especially in Africa) have little to no resources, meaning it will take hundreds in not thousands of years for them to develop into 1st world countries by themselves. How do we fix the overpopulation problem? We (the 1st world countries) must step in and help, even more so than today. If every single one of us even donates a penny, that will do wonders as compared to suggesting mass-massacres.

Never mind, your plan seems a whole lot better.

[Waffl3]

Originally Posted by fido123

Humans destroyed natural selection however our society couldn't handle it. IMO we should all go back to living off the land with no docters and farm but this won't happen lol.

QTF
I like the idea of living off the land.

Limiting the amount of children a family can have is the only thing that i can see actually be enforced. No lives would be at risk, and we wouldn't be promoting ideas such as war. I am very against war and think that the world would be better off without it. All violence as a matter of fact is unneeded imo.
I completely agree with what dolphin said.

[irishknight]

Originally Posted by Dolphin2016

The reason why exponential growth is occurring in 3rd world countries is because people can't sustain themselves and their children like we do (people living in 1st world countries). Therefore, they must resort to having so many children to work for them and support them. However, as the children grow up, their needs to survive also grow rapidly, so they end up having a bunch of children to support them, resulting in exponential growth.

This is true. Most 3rd-world countries are in the 2nd demographic transition stage which coincides with exponential population growth. It has been theorised that economy affects population growth.

In case some of you are not familiar with the demographic transition stage, there are four stages. Each stage demonstrates birth rates/death rates/growth/economy.

1st stage -- Hunters and Gatherers (no countries are in this stage anymore)
2nd stage -- Agriculture (almost all 3rd world are in this stage)
3rd stage -- Industrialisation (U.S. is in this stage even though they're tertiary-based economy.)
4th stage -- Tertiary/service-based economy (Some countries in Europe this stage)

The way I learned this, population growth reaches equilibrium when in both 1st and 4th stages. Population can indeed be controlled without enforcing law in well-off areas following this model. An example of this would be Switzerland. Their population is basically at equilibrium and they're placed at the 4th stage of demographic transition.

More about exponential growth in population: it has been theorised by Thomas Malthus. Neo-Malthusians today still fret over exponential growth with worries of food shortages even though this isn't really much of a problem now in our well-off areas. However, if I remember correctly, there's a limit of rice.

Now my response to this thread:
The way I see it, Population will eventually cease in growth when all countries are in stage 4. Well-off societies will reach this event first, obviously. Also, there's even a possibility in reverse population growth (as seen in Sweden).

Also, a 5th stage of demographic transition is possible. I've read that countries such as Sweden are losing population. The 5th stage has been said to have a lower birth rate than death rate. So it's possible that we can lose population due to economy.

If we're only looking at 1st world countries, I'm sure we'll be fine in population in the future. Only time will tell when the population of the U.S. is in this equilibrium. It's not like we're going backwards through the stage model. That is, unless a cataclysmic event were to occur.

In 3rd world countries, I agree that they will take a long while to stabilise in population growth.

I might be ignorant on this, but I don't see why Africa's population will affect our societies seeing how they don't tap into our surplus of supplies (with exception of U.N.). With their population increasing, I don't see how they'll affect our environment since we're here, and they're over there.

[ddr_f4n]

Although people may think that the world is really crowded in terms of population, there are still countries with a lot of available space. Here in Canada, a majority of our population is at the south of Ontario, near the border of the U.S. If we are willing to spread out and move up north, out country wouldn't look so populated as it is in the south now.

And we're pretty much reaching the limit of the "baby boomers" age, so we can see a huge decline in population once they die from some natural disease.

[irishknight]

Originally Posted by ddr_f4n

Although people may think that the world is really crowded in terms of population, there are still countries with a lot of available space. Here in Canada, a majority of our population is at the south of Ontario, near the border of the U.S. If we are willing to spread out and move up north, out country wouldn't look so populated as it is in the south now.

And we're pretty much reaching the limit of the "baby boomers" age, so we can see a huge decline in population once they die from some natural disease.

Northern Canada isn't ecumene-worthy, I've heard.

EDIT: Well it isn't so much about habitable land or climate now. Urban environments attracts residents to reside in suburbs to commute back and forth. I don't think they'll be very willing if most of Canadian cities as well as employment opportunities are prominent in the southern areas as opposed to northern areas. I'm not really sure how they'll grow some other city in the north when most of Canada's primary economic sectors reside in the South.

[chunky_cheese]

If it wasn't for immigration, Canada's population would actually be declining right now. Like it was said earlier, the real problem lies in third world countries where they both need several children working to get the very basic neccesities, and the lack of use of condoms, due to poor education and poverty. By helping these countries develop, we can basically solve this "horrible world population growth rate" that we have. Or we can just all move to Canada, eh.

[OneHandNow]

The population of the world will not be a problem by the time we die, so it shouldn't worry any of us here..

Also, there are a lot of countries in which birth rates are falling drastically..

(Singapore is a good example, 1.24 children per household, and the government is making How to Make Love classes in universities..)

(In Japan, households with young wives prefer dogs over having children, which explains why in Japan, there are more dogs than kids. The women don't want to take of a baby/child for 10+ years...)

[Frozen Beat]

I believe that natural disasters, and war will keep the human race in check.

Not saying we should have more of it.

[sumzup]

Yay people support me.

Natural disasters and war already happen often enough without anyone's meddling; why would one want to encourage this? If we just make a concerted effort to give people tools to better themselves the problem will resolve itself.

[Russ_on_a_bus]

First off even though world population is a problem, laws restricting people from having children in poor countries isn't necessary. It cost resources to enforce these laws and chances are that most poor countries won't enforce them. Now I'm going to answer your question. Quote: So my question is how can we control the world population? The answer is to do nothing. Eventually the world population will grow to a point were the resources are going to reach a low (but not crictial) point. In turn the cost of these resources are going to go up to a point where only a few people can afford them, and they will have to resort to not having children (because raising children costs money and there isnt enough resources to raise them) in order to survive. Even though many people might not survive for a couple of genorations when the world population stabilizes, humans will have learned there lesson, and the resources will have recovered.
The end.

[Go_Oilers_Go]

First of all, I'm pretty sure that it's almost impossible to control the world's population. China has attempted to prevent families from having lots of babies, but instead all that leads to is little babies getting killed (especially girls, since the Chinese like to have boys).

Secondly, are you focusing on any specific resources when you say that the earth only has so many resources? Although there is an impending food crisis at the moment, there is more than enough food for everyone, although the issue is who can access our resources. Also, it is only a relatively small percentage of the world's population that uses our resources so recklessly. The population in the poorer parts of Asia as well as Africa is almost irrelevant to resource consumption.

[Beethovens mask]

All we have to do is remove signs like "warning, sticking your hand into this blender will hurt you" from everything. Bam, a lot of people are gone.

[irishknight]

Originally Posted by Beethovens mask

All we have to do is remove signs like "warning, sticking your hand into this blender will hurt you" from everything. Bam, a lot of people are gone.

Technically, companies that do not provide the necessary disclaimer to the product will get sued by the consumer if he/she gets effected from it.

See where this is going?

[devonin]

Obviously you a) realise that he's just saying something trying to be funny and b) if this were somehow to be done, it would be accompanied by laws forbidding the filing of a lawsuit for personal injury caused by products that weren't demonstrably faulty.

(mind you if you ask me, even WITH warnings, people should only be able to sue based on demonstrably faulty products)

[JonXia]

A bunch of countries are in the more advanced in medical technology. This makes it so that people live longer, more babies are born without dying, more people are being saved from diseases and other things (like car accidents, loss of blood, etc.) Two things happen because of this:

1) People aren't dying as fast
2) Less babies are being born

In fact a bunch of countries are having minor problems due to their growth. If it wasn't for immigration, Canada and the US would lose more of their population due to the death rate beign slightly higher than the birth rate. Look at all the third world countries. More babies are born because the children die easily, so yes a family might have 5 kids but most likely 4 more have died due to disease, death during birth etc. The developed countries don't have this problem.

And for enforcing the birth rate... how? Especially in developing countries. Wat are you going to do?

[Corbin Wells]

There is so much empty spaces in places like Nevada, etc, there is enough space for people, the problem is we just waste too much I guess.

[ballaw hare]

Originally Posted by Corbin Wells

There is so much empty spaces in places like Nevada, etc, there is enough space for people, the problem is we just waste too much I guess.

No, it's because the black hole scientists have named Las Vegas has sucked everything into it.