T Nation

Overpopulation?


#1

Do you believe this will be a problem during your lifetime? Your childrens' lifetimes? Grandchildren?

How would people go about "fixing" this, anyway?


#2

I'm going to let the compassionate conservatives handle it.

They'll kill off all the poor and all the illegal immigrants and everyone will be happy again.


#3

Vroom's blather nothwithstanding, a couple of things come to mind.

1) Overpopulation seems like a problem of geography - not enough room for people. But we are seeing people weird shifts in moving - from rural to closer to the city, out of the city to the suburbs. As for urban areas, I think the inherent problems there are less a problem of too many people and more a problem of what urban people do.

2) Overpopulation also seems like a problem of resources falling short to service the people - and it looks more like the opposite. We have a plague of too much rather than not enough these days.


#4

Encourage abortion.


#5

Eventually, whether it takes several hundreds of years or thousands, we will eventually outgrow this planet. At some point, we will have to start thinking about what to do when it happens...if we don't destroy ourselves first.


#6

Soylent Green ... tastes like chicken.


#7

Is it really a problem? It seems as nations modernize/westernize they're population growth rates drop off dramatically. As well, lots of mammals undergo a kind of 'quorum sensing' where if you cram them into a small space with their peers, reproduction drops off (not to zero, but the curve is asymptotic).

People like to theorize several hundreds of years into the future, but it's hard to do within one generation, let alone several.

Although, I would only assume that since vroom's wagging his finger at the 'compassionate conservatives' he's got some terrific solutions in his skull that no one's concieved yet.


#8

You are absolutely right. Japan and some Western European countries are currently at negative growth. China is actually desperately encouraging families to have kids again. All these single children married other single children and don't want to have ANY kids.

What is alarming is that Arabs have one of the highest birthrates. I'm not referring to the race, but rather the area. This is a problem because these guys are emigrating out of the middle east into the U.S. and Western Europe and bringing their ideology with them. I recently read a Mark Steyn article that had quoted that 65% of Muslims polled in the U.K. wished to integrate Sharia law into the British system. If people with this mentality are the only ones having kids then it won't be but a few generations off that our liberal republic governments are voted out.

Mike


#9

People have been worrying about overpopulation for centuries.

Some day it will actually happen and we will have shrinking population instead of growth.

Perhaps nature will take care of the problem and kill a couple billion people with a new virus.


#10

I suspect we aren't too far away from one of those. If Ebola ever became airborn, we might as well give it up.


#11

The populations might drop off but the demand for resources increases amazingly.


#12

I think that in the US and especially Europe this will not be a problem anytime soon. The ever increasing ideals of doing whatever you want when you want will ensure that people continue to die of sexually transmitted diseases, smoking, alcoholism, etc. And if vroom had his way abortion.

So with all this act first and think later mentality it is likely that the birth rate will not exceed the death rate!


#13

I hate to break it to you, but none of these issues is likely to have a very large impact on this issue. People live plenty long enough to have children if they wish to.

However, in particular, we all die of something, even if we have absolutely zero fun our entire lives and live according to the rules you would like to impose on us.


#14

Maybe that's it. A way to lower birth rates if needed might be to encourage more women to have careers instead of being stay-at-home moms.

Sure, both the parents could work and just hire a nanny, but then that nanny is working a job and won't be around to have and raise her own child, right? So wouldn't the amount of people being born still fall?

It's true that you could pretty much just have your kids raise themselves, but then why have children?


#15

Vroom,

Why don't you take your own advice and stop being the "dufus" that you accuse others.

Just because conservatives believe that people should be responsible for providing for themselves and their families and that immigration should be legal, does not equate to wanting to "kill" either the poor or these people.

The "poor" should be assited voluntarily if they really need help or get up off their lazy rear ends and get to work and earn an honest living like the rest of us. People from Mexico or other places that wish to come to the U.S. for the opportunities that it can provide, should do so legally -- just like my great-grandmother did back in 1902. If we catch people breaking the law -- they should be deported and not allowed to stay.

The difference is the same between someone who you invite to your house as a guest versus someone who breaks into your house. Clearly nobody would argue that you have to treat the robber well and allow him to stay.............

Now, let's get real here. The only people who are really doing anything about this "problem" as the originator of this thread puts it, are the liberals who have no problem killng unborn babies. Now these are the facts Vroom, so stop the retarded babble and get real with the facts.

Oh, by the way, the only problem here is those who think this is a problem. To think that we need to "do something" about populations is a very dangerous and potentially diabolical thing to play around with.

For the last time.....we are not God!


#16

Actually it is not so much an overpopulation as a shift in demographics. As somebody mentioned before, western civilization as we know it, USA and alot of Europe have significantly lower birth rates than for example the Middle East, parts of Asia, Central America, and Africa. In some places the death rate is high enough not to worry about it (Africa is pretty much dying cos of HIV/AIDS), but for the rest of us we have to wonder how exactly this will affect our way of life.

The simple matter is that places can only hold so many people, so what happens when they get full? The people move, guess where? USA, and Europe. Overpopulation is nothing to worry about, its Western civilization that needs to worry.


#17

Steveo,

If you want to waste your time responding to what is obviously a ridiculous post, then go ahead, but just be aware that it might make you a dufus if you do so.

Ding.

The captain has turned off the no sobbing sign, you are now free to cry openly in this thread.


#18

Ren,

While I am mostly in agreeance with you I think it is worth noting that more Africans are still dying of Malaria than HIV/AIDS.

Mike


#19

Vroom, it's time to dust off that one-cell you call a brain and use it.

Overpopulation is not about the number of people who have ever been alive on the earth. It's about how many are alive at one time! Duh!

The population growth is a ratio of deaths to births. If you have a load of deaths at younger ages that decreases the time a person is alive and reduces the population growth because less people AT ONE TIME are alive on the earth.

So the more people live longer, the greater the population growth will be in proportion to births. People living shorter lives decreases that ratio. So if people are dyeing young from stupid-ass things, then having more births is not as much of an issue.

Hello!


#20

Lorisco,

The key issue in your statement is about dying YOUNG.

If someone dies AFTER they have had all their children, then their death will not have much of an impact on the overpopulation issue.

Maybe you should consider the concept in this way... since everyone dies, the real factor in long-term population GROWTH is how many births there are per person before they die.

If on average every person alive has 1 child (each couple has 2 children), before dying, then the population will remain reasonably static, regardless of age of death.

However, if on average every person alive has 1.2 children, before dying, then the population will grow tremendously over time, regardless of age of death.

It is quite related to the concept of compound interest. Killing off the old people who are not going to have any more children, while indeed a large number, is not as significant as the long term effect of continuing growth.

So, before you berate me about needing to have a brain cell, perhaps you should figure out what the fuck you are talking about. Maybe if you shelved the hatred you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself so often?

On average, people who smoke, drink and so on, can have a ton of children before they eventually die at an age at which they usually don't have any more children anyway.