The Stupid Thread 2 (Part 1)

While I’m not refuting that, people have been saying the same thing for like a century - the world population keeps a growing and we keep innovating how to grow more food

Do you know if the models you a referencing (the math) figures in for innovation or agricultural technology improvements? I read somewhere recently that someone in Asia (I think) figured out how to grown rice with minimal amts of water (drought resistant)

1 Like

The timebomb hasn’t hit. It is broadly true that Europe will have a declining population assuming mass migration doesn’t occur.

I think it’s even longer than that honestly. If I remember correctly people were saying this in the 1600’s too.

2 Likes

Fuck, isn’t this true. Not speaking as a dad, but as a son whose sister just moved back to the country. My father, and employer who I’ve spent the last 5 years building the business with, is dropping everything to give my dumb-sister whatever she wants.

1 Like

It’s because he still sees the same little 4 year old girl that just knew he was superman every time he looks at her.

And either she never stopped seeing him as superman, or once she wrapped him around her finger, he never wanted to leave.

1 Like

They were simply wrong about the timeline. Over the course of centuries, the global population is a scaling numbers problem. Even if we figure out how to feed them, they still need water and a place to sleep. The jetsons isn’t a viable solution (although it’d be cool as fuck lets be honest).

As the father of a daughter myself, I can confirm everything @countingbeans is saying.

A common conversation in my household when she was young:

Daughter, to mom: Will you do x for me?
Mom: No.
Daughter (utterly unperturbed): That’s OK, I’ll ask Daddy. He’ll do it.

Fortunately for me, and despite my over-indulgent parenting, she’s turning into a wonderful, responsible young woman.

6 Likes

Maybe.

Water is an issue more so than food imo. Place to sleep? Humans are an amazing bunch … ever see a slum? Go to Dharavi in Mumbai - has a population density of 717,280/sq mi … Not saying it’s a solution - but it’s an occurrence. Place to sleep will emerge. Water won’t. Food could (as demonstrated)

I dunno man … I don’t recall ever seeing what life as like on the ground there.

Happens daily lol.

I know she has me, and I’m more than happy to be had.

The upside is when I’m giving discipline she knows she’s stepped over the line. At this point a look and deep sigh works

2 Likes

Without a reduction of the scaling population, it’s not a maybe. It’s just a matter of when.

What happens when a large chunk of the planet has this happening? Do they sit there and take it quietly? Or do we end up with a major war over land?

Jury might be out on how the human race will respond, but short of a negative growth, all of the problems are simply a matter of time. I’m just thankful it won’t be in my lifetime.

1 Like

This argument was the population bomb in the 70s (ish?). Technology completely changed the game, and will have a larger impact going forward.

1 Like

Ofc, I’m not disputing that. But without the population increase stalling out, technology can only do so much.

Tech did an outstanding job of delaying the inevitable though.

The problem is that WE need to figure out how to feed them. I’ve got my own dinner table to worry about.

You’ll most likely be long gone before the population scales high enough to cause massive problems.

Was this posted yet

I like Rubio’s tweet, lol.

1 Like

You mentioned land. If cars fly we don’t need roads, opening up a ton of space. Buildings can go up instead of wide. Technology enables people to live in rural areas but have amenities and work remotely, reducing the need to be in a city.

You mentioned water, technology related to cleaning, processing, or making fresh water out of sea water can change the game. Right now it’s not always cost effective but 50 yrs from now things will be different.

This doesn’t even get into whacky potential future solutions like cities in the sky, or just greenhouses in the sky for crops. The speed of technology is amazing, and it’s really hard to see how that will change our current assumptions of how things work 50-100 yrs from now

1 Like

That’s not what I meant. What I meant is that the countries where people aren’t producing kids they can’t feed need to feed those who are producing kids they can’t feed. If they could feed themselves, and accepted civil and human rights like the west, they would end up like countries in Europe which have a zero or negative birthrate.

Agreed. In 1802, at the beginning of Thomas Jefferson, the 3rd President’s term, would ANYBODY have thought that within 100 years man would be flying?? Have Gatling guns? Have rail lines, let alone ones that spanned the entire continent? Have discovered the fundamental constituents of atoms?

In 1902, would anybody have foreseen the muscle car? cruise missiles? Automated irrigation? Vaccines on the scale we have them? Nuclear bombs?? THE INTERNET??

Not a chance in hell. We went from barely figuring out flight to hopping on the the moon inside a lifetime.

Technology is likely to outpace the land issue, or provide us with new planets, before we reach critical population density. My money is on other human vices killing us off before then if anything does.

3 Likes
1 Like

Evo ga, indeed. Couldn’t have said it better myself

3 Likes