Exponential Population Growth

[GEddie]

You know, one I had this one idea, and it is probably crazy, but we waste so much energy in gyms and excercising that we could be harnessing. If we could hook up every excersise bike to the power grid, I’m wondering how much energy, for example, 10% of the population of the plannet could generate at one time?

Its kind of like the Matrix, only good for us too. With this idea, population itself would become the renewable resource.

God bless,
Ut

Actually, our human bodies are a remarkably puny power source (so much for the Matrix). There’s an experiment in a museum in Houston that demonstrates this. The amount of energy exerted by your muscles in turning a crank even frantically
for 15 seconds is less than 1 drop of gas.

We are puny even compared to other animal life. Human beings all have a defective muscular-metabolism gene, that causes our muscles to generate only about 1/7 of the power, per weight of oxygen used, than animal muscles. (this may have been in God’s plan to require us to develop our mind, rather than relying on physical strength; IDN).

ICXC NIKA

 

[Bobby_Jim]

ok, basic biology lesson. this bacterial culture system is presented as a closed system? assumption is that there is a fixed amount of “food” to start, and then when all the food’s used up, they all just die?

A better description is is that at first, the bacteria have food a-plenty. Like children on Easter morning, their metabolism kicks into high gear, they go nuts and grow and divide like crazy. Of course some of them also die, and spill their guts back into the broth, and become food again for some other bacteria. But initially the rate of growth greatly exceeds the rate of death. So what you see is rapid growth for a while. Eventually the food does become scarce, growth slows down, and eventually the rate of growth equals the rate of death. There may be no net population change, but you still have some turnover of cells (old ones die, spill their guts, which the rest of them use as food). But it doesn’t mean food or growth is nonexistent. But you certainly don’t just keep going through exponential growth, and then all die at the same time at the exact moment when the food runs out. Eventually you will see the population start to drop, but it will be due to some other limiting factor (see below…)

The same thing happens on earth, not quite so directly. We eat food, then eventually we die, worms and bacteria and fungus eat us, return the carbon and nutrients to the earth, where some grass grows, and then a cow eats the grass, and a new person eats the cow, and so forth.

If someone wants to use microbiology to tell us we’re doomed, there’s probably a better example. Another thing that can limit growth of the cells, besides lack of food, and eventually start to kill of the population, is that they might produce some toxic byproducts as part of their metabolism. A familiar (non-bacteria) example is yeast; they will ferment sugar and grow and divide, producing alcohol as a byproduct, until they get to about 12% alcohol and they don’t grow anymore because they are all off feeling queasy or surly or remorseful. I will leave it as an exercise for the class to write a book predicting dire consequences from whatever “toxic byproduct” we are collectively excreting.

 

[ConstantineTG]

first issue is that we are getting so much better at producing food. With fewer people in farming, the rate of production has increased faster than the population growth. The only “problem” is, and always has been, ensuring everyone has access to food.

I hear ya! Just the food wasted by developed nations can easily solve world hunger. The problem is the rich nations hoard the food because they can afford it. The other problem here is the poor nations are told that they are a burden to society. No one is telling the rich nations that they are eating up more than their fair share and this is just unjust.

 

[GEddie]

I hear ya! Just the food wasted by developed nations can easily solve world hunger. The problem is the rich nations hoard the food because they can afford it. The other problem here is the poor nations are told that they are a burden to society. No one is telling the rich nations that they are eating up more than their fair share and this is just unjust.

Sure, but the only solution to this – world government – is unacceptable to rich and poor alike.

 

[ChadS]

Also, it should be noted that Europe, US, Canada, Austrailia, Russia, Japan and many nations have dropped below the sustainment level and will not have sufficient population to provide enough doctors, police, etc for their people.
Give this a look.
youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU

I’ve read articles about some towns and other areas in places like Germany, Austria and France that are basically reverting back to a natural state because enough people don’t live in the area to sustain a town that had once been there. It talked about how wolves and other wild animals were starting to be seen in areas where they hadn’t been seen for 80 or a 100 years. Towns were mentioned that neede to desperately upgrade sewar systems but there weren’t enough people to justify the expense.

I think one of the fears in Japan is that as their population ages there won’t be enough people to perform the jobs that are needed to sustain economic growth. China, with their one child policy, also faces the same issues also. Both countries, and in the U.S. to a certain extent, their demographic pyramids are inverted with more non-productive aged people outweighing younger workers who can sustain the systems already in place.

ChadS

 

[gavanhe]

There’s data available to show that population will peak at somewhere between 9 and 11 billion in the next 150 years with a decline beyond then. Other studies show a peak of 9 billion mid to late century followed by a decline.
I think the main point to remember is the doomsayers of the 60s predicting that we’d run out food by the 80s, and the reality of the abundance of food we are now able to produce.
Pessimists tend to leave out of their calculations the natural population limiting factors that come into play as societies develop technologically. In fact there’s a school of thought about that suggests that once a population goes into decline it becomes very difficult or impossible to reverse that decline. Some European countries now find themselves in this predicament, Italy, Russia for example and others are maintaining theirs by immigration.
Gerry

 

[ConstantineTG]

Sure, but the only solution to this – world government – is unacceptable to rich and poor alike.

Well, it depends really. I believe a socialist government with a responsible and moral leader is the right solution. The problem is where do we get that leader? Almost everyone given such power will abuse it. There’s always Singapore who has a totalitarian government who’s leader cared for the development for their country. But its a small nation. Can we count on that for large countries? They key is finding a system that will work in preventing unfair and selfish practices. How can we be sure that all wheat and rice be equally distributed? In the Philippines for example where rice is a staple, there are rice cartels who’s only goal is to make huge profits. It hard to initiate a fair trade when people distrust one another, or when their real intent is to be ahead on the deal.

 

[ConstantineTG]

There’s data available to show that population will peak at somewhere between 9 and 11 billion in the next 150 years with a decline beyond then. Other studies show a peak of 9 billion mid to late century followed by a decline.
I think the main point to remember is the doomsayers of the 60s predicting that we’d run out food by the 80s, and the reality of the abundance of food we are now able to produce.
Pessimists tend to leave out of their calculations the natural population limiting factors that come into play as societies develop technologically. In fact there’s a school of thought about that suggests that once a population goes into decline it becomes very difficult or impossible to reverse that decline. Some European countries now find themselves in this predicament, Italy, Russia for example and others are maintaining theirs by immigration.
Gerry

Many Western countries are dependent on immigration. Canada is one, the reason I found myself here is because they have a rather open policy on immigration because their birthrate is below the level of replacement. Visible minorities will take over the population by 2030. Shortly after, Hispanics will take over as the largest ethnic group in the US. Even today in most urban areas in Canada, its mostly immigrants from China, India and the Philippines. Vancouver city I think is 40% Chinese. Population is booming in many parts of the world that are relatively poor, and those nations that are rich are in decline. People blame the poverty on the population growth. But if that were true, why are these countries on population decline shaking in their boots? They know their economies are unsustainable unless their population increases.

 

[GEddie]

Well, it depends really. I believe a socialist government with a responsible and moral leader is the right solution. The problem is where do we get that leader? Almost everyone given such power will abuse it. There’s always Singapore who has a totalitarian government who’s leader cared for the development for their country. But its a small nation. Can we count on that for large countries? They key is finding a system that will work in preventing unfair and selfish practices. How can we be sure that all wheat and rice be equally distributed? In the Philippines for example where rice is a staple, there are rice cartels who’s only goal is to make huge profits. It hard to initiate a fair trade when people distrust one another, or when their real intent is to be ahead on the deal.

Any form of socialism is a dirty word for Americans, and probably others.

We’ve seen that in the health care debates. How DARE Washington interfere with the right to deny treatment to those who aren’t healthy already!

The earth will fall into the sun before the Earth’s third largest nation signs on to the system you imagine.

ICXC NIKA.

 

[Abu]

ConstantineTG
I believe a socialist government with a responsible and moral leader is the right solution

Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120:
“We have also summoned Communism and Socialism again to judgment and have found all their forms, even the most modified, to wander far from the precepts of the Gospel.” (#128).

Wealth has to be created before it is distributed.
Recall Pope John Paul II’s affirmation of free enterprise in Centesimus Annus, 1991:
“CA 42. Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society? Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?

“The answer is obviously complex. If by ‘capitalism’ is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a ‘business economy’, ‘market economy’ or simply ‘free economy’."

It’s good to face reality.
See: http://www.demographicwinter.com"
“Demographic winter” denotes the worldwide decline in birthrates, also referred to as a “birth-dearth,” and what it portends.

Demographer Philip Longman (author of The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity) observes: “The ongoing global decline in human birthrates is the single most powerful force affecting the fate of nations and the future of society in the 21st century.” Worldwide, birthrates have been halved in the past 50 years. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world’s population, with below-replacement fertility.

“Sometime in this century, the world’s population will begin to decline. At a certain point, the decline will become rapid. We may even reach population free-fall in our lifetimes. For some countries, population decline is already a reality. Russia is losing three-quarters-of-a-million people a year. Its population (currently 145 million) is expected to fall by one-third by 2050.”

Europe’s Demographic Winter threatening the U.S.A.
Having Children: Anatomy of a Cultural Strategy
“…for the first time, the birth rate in the United States has fallen below the replacement level. All of this is finally generating a buzz. If you’re a young Catholic looking for an effective long-term strategy to reclaim Western culture, having a large family should be on your short list.”
See: catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=444

 

[ConstantineTG]

I agree with free market. But what market is actually free these days? Everything is controlled by someone who has the money or influence. Do you believe that the US has a free market? The culture of death I believe is a proliferation of the pharmaceutical companies. Who else will benefit the most from ABCs? Is it not those who sell condoms, pills and other devices? And who makes those? Who’s benefiting most from the sexual revolution of our culture? Why are there so many viagra and cialis and trojan ads everywhere today?

 

[Abu]

ConstantineTG
I agree with free market. But what market is actually free these days?

The free market is incompatible with socialism which you stated was the “right solution”!

While government intervention has nearly always distorted the free market, no wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Catholic Late Scholastic system of free enterprise works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. The economic laws they discovered are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason. It is not economic laws but human sin and error that peddles immoral goods and immoral actions.

The separation of the natural economic laws from human failing is well recognised by Pope Benedict XVI:
In Caritas in Veritate, the latest social Encyclical (2009), Benedict XVI has explained that “Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (#36).

Human failings have nothing to do with free enterprise economics and everything to do with fallen human nature and any incompetence in law makers to make just laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and against monopolies. The laws of economics of free enterprise developed by the Catholic Late Scholastics have nothing to do with harming anyone.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The free market is incompatible with socialism which you stated was the “right solution”!

Sorry, what I meant was I believe in a true free market in the same way I believe in a true socialist society. I believe both are unattainable though.

While government intervention has nearly always distorted the free market, no wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Catholic Late Scholastic system of free enterprise works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. The economic laws they discovered are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason. It is not economic laws but human sin and error that peddles immoral goods and immoral actions.

The separation of the natural economic laws from human failing is well recognised by Pope Benedict XVI:
In Caritas in Veritate, the latest social Encyclical (2009), Benedict XVI has explained that “Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (#36).

Human failings have nothing to do with free enterprise economics and everything to do with fallen human nature and any incompetence in law makers to make just laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and against monopolies. The laws of economics of free enterprise developed by the Catholic Late Scholastics have nothing to do with harming anyone.

The problem with the economic models we’ve been coming up with is that they all depend on good human nature, which most of the time we as a society fall short of.

 

[Abu]

BTW, free enterprise depends on the natural laws of economics of cause and effect, not on economic “theories” or “models” which are legion. As Pope John Paul II affirmed in Centesimus Annus, 1991, #43: The Church has no models to present;”

ConstantineTG
I believe in a true socialist society

Further, no Catholic can be a “true socialist” while being faithful to the Church. Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120: “If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.

 

[ConstantineTG]

BTW, free enterprise depends on the natural laws of economics of cause and effect, not on economic “theories” or “models” which are legion. As Pope John Paul II affirmed in Centesimus Annus, 1991, #43: The Church has no models to present;”

Right. But when was the last time, if ever, did the market did not have any artificial influence on it? Its even hard to maintain the ideal level even by theory. Whoever has more money would create and artificial demand to stockpile, thus limiting the supply, thus increasing the prices which cut off the poor. Free market is based on actual supply and actual demand. I never see that followed.

Further, no Catholic can be a “true socialist” while being faithful to the Church. Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120: “If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.

Not that I’d contend with what the Church says, we’ve seen how bad it went in practice. But the ideals of Socialism I believe is something that requires nothing short of a benevolent all-good leader. The idea of equality of the classes of course appeals to the poor, that is why many poor countries were conned into accepting it. I wouldn’t call myself a socialist by any stretch, but at the same time coming from a poor nation and seeing the evils of capitalism there and the abuse by the wealthy and powerful, I can see some good in a society that doesn’t allow for such control by so few people. The evil of socialism is its ideal that the society makes the people, not the other way around, and its a deterrent to free will. But given how the wealthy and powerful today influence the lives of most of the people through their money, I don’t know how much free will people have anyway.

Maybe its just my experience. I know here in North America, there aren’t that many examples of such abuses. But you go to third world countries who are otherwise supposed to be democracies, the poor are used and manipulated and abused for the further enrichment of the wealthy.

 

[Abu]

ConstantineTG
Whoever has more money would create and artificial demand to stockpile, thus limiting the supply, thus increasing the prices which cut off the poor.

That is precisely why we have laws, and corruption in governments simply points to human failure not free enterprise. In a democracy competition between businesses will prevent hoarding to raise prices.

So, people can make their own trouble and it is people, NOT free enterprise, who do so. Failure to get to know the free enterprise laws discovered and developed by the Catholic Late Scholastics, and what they mean, is at the root of the dilemma. People can, and some do, undermine the common good, and the primary role of government is to support families in solidarity, and the role of the Church in subsidiarity, and that’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, lie, and against monopolies and harmful products – to name a few. People have to be formed in families, schools and parishes to become responsible adults with sound faith and morality. That’s why we have the Catholic Church to guide us – She who invented charity in the West.

 

[ConstantineTG]

That is precisely why we have laws, and corruption in governments simply points to human failure not free enterprise. In a democracy competition between businesses will prevent hoarding to raise prices.

Yes, but thats the ideal. Not the practice. Even in America there are lots of examples of this.

So, people can make their own trouble and it is people, NOT free enterprise, who do so. Failure to get to know the free enterprise laws discovered and developed by the Catholic Late Scholastics, and what they mean, is at the root of the dilemma. People can, and some do, undermine the common good, and the primary role of government is to support families in solidarity, and the role of the Church in subsidiarity, and that’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, lie, and against monopolies and harmful products – to name a few. People have to be formed in families, schools and parishes to become responsible adults with sound faith and morality. That’s why we have the Catholic Church to guide us – She who invented charity in the West.

But the thing is Free Enterprise is nothing but a thought without people. And thats the weakness in this equation, people. People just cannot be expected to adhere to the ideals, but rather selfish nature. If only we are all good and honest and well meaning Christians. But even the Christians themselves do not adhere to the good values that will make this work. Selfishness makes people want more, more resources, more money, more power. Its greed, thats the weakness of the Free Market. Its counting on a genuine and honest nature of dealing, but the reality is it will never happen. Don’t tell me that free enterprise and democracy works in America when 400 people hold 90% of the country’s wealth. And this is a country of over 300 million people. I know what we have today isn’t the ideals of Free Market, but thats my point, we’ll never achieve it because there’s always greedy people and these people will always turn it into consumerism, which is an evil because it banks on greed rather than genuine need.

 

[GEddie]

Yes, but thats the ideal. Not the practice. Even in America there are lots of examples of this.

But the thing is Free Enterprise is nothing but a thought without people. And thats the weakness in this equation, people. People just cannot be expected to adhere to the ideals, but rather selfish nature. If only we are all good and honest and well meaning Christians. But even the Christians themselves do not adhere to the good values that will make this work. Selfishness makes people want more, more resources, more money, more power. Its greed, thats the weakness of the Free Market. Its counting on a genuine and honest nature of dealing, but the reality is it will never happen. Don’t tell me that free enterprise and democracy works in America when 400 people hold 90% of the country’s wealth. And this is a country of over 300 million people. I know what we have today isn’t the ideals of Free Market, but thats my point, we’ll never achieve it because there’s always greedy people and these people will always turn it into consumerism, which is an evil because it banks on greed rather than genuine need.

It works quite well, in that even that final 10% allows the 300Mp to be wealthier that almost any other society. Socialism also has its inequities (the “nomenklatura” in the old CCCP).

The strength of capitalism is that it is self-limiting and self-regulating. The other systems are not. They depend on human altruism that isn’t normally there. Capitalism does not require anybody to be altruistic.

ICXC NIKA