So what about overpopulation?

[Lethe]

A lot of people seem to sneer at this as an excuse for contraception and abortion, but really, what should be done about the problem at hand?

There are many many humans in a world that now contains few other wild mammals, and in many areas, is losing wild land, forests, grassland, plains etc to housing or in order to manufacture things for humans. Not to mention things like factory farming, needed to feed the amount of people on earth. And that’s even without everyone being fed, or even kept alive, by the resources.

Any couple who has more than two children is contributing, as they are creating more new life than will ‘fill their shoes’ so to speak.

What should be done about overpopulation if contraception and abortion (and homosexuality, heh) are no-no’s?

 

[JimG]

What about the problem of underpopulation and demographic suicide that is occurring in the western nations? Some countries are only able to maintain their population through immigration. If other countries follow the depopulation route of the west, that source will dry up as well, and the globe will enter a depopulation spiral.

Any couple that has more than two children is contributing the the future tax base and future productivity as well as helping to stave off bankruptcy in Social Security and Medicare.

Demographic Winter

 

[tjm190]

What makes you think increased availability of contraceptives would lower world population or lower growth?

 

[St_Francis]

At the density of New York City, the entire population of the world could live in Texas. If everyone lived in families of 4 on 1/4-acre lots, the entire population of the world could fit in Alaska.

Alaska is 663,000 square miles, the 6 habitable continents together have 52,000,000 square miles, which means that Alaska has 1.3% of the land, so the world’s population could fit in 1.3% of the land.

So I have to ask, what overpopulation problem?

 

[JimG]

And people like to live in New York City! I know some who would live nowhere else!

 

[Bob_Crowley]

At the density of New York City, the entire population of the world could live in Texas. If everyone lived in families of 4 on 1/4-acre lots, the entire population of the world could fit in Alaska.

Alaska is 663,000 square miles, the 6 habitable continents together have 52,000,000 square miles, which means that Alaska has 1.3% of the land, so the world’s population could fit in 1.3% of the land.

So I have to ask, what overpopulation problem?

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Bob_Crowley:
These statistics are misleading. What about the food, roads, buildings, infrastructure, energy, pollution etc? What about the non-arable land eg. the Sahara desert, more than half of Australia, much of highland Asia, mountainous areas which do produce crops.

What about the stresses on areas such as Bangladesh subject to regular Monsoons and massive flooding?

If it was that simple why do so many people live in poverty? From Poverty.com …

"About 25,000 people die every day of hunger or hunger-related causes, according to the United Nations. This is one person every three and a half seconds, as you can see on this display. Unfortunately, it is children who die most often.

And I might ask, do you live on a rubbish tip in the Phillippines or Mexico City? Or do you live in one of the more comfortable Western societies, consuming more than your fair share of the world’s goods and energy, and contribute more than your fair share to greenhouse gases, pollution and consume more than your fair share of non-renewable energy resources?

If you do, then to say that there are no population pressures is a load of bunkum.

I personally think the church’s ruling on the contraceptive pill is rubbish.

 

[Timbothefiveth]

What about the non-arable land eg. the Sahara desert, more than half of Australia, much of highland Asia, mountainous areas which do produce crops.

You could fit them all in to the United States and have a density about that of Orando Florida’s then. You could use the rest of the world, which would then be free from humans, to plant food.

 

[Lethe]

This is all very interesting and taught me a lot of new stuff - I didnt know that the US has so many unpopulated/less populated areas. I live in the UK, which, just by having travelled a lot of it, I would hasten to say is overpopulated. There is really very little in the way of wildlife anymore that hasnt had to be specially protected in parks etc. There are still some areas ‘up for grabs’ but I think it’d be a huge shame to populate these areas since theyre usually what th govmt calls ‘areas of outstanding national beauty’

Oh well, moving to the US it is If I have a mass of children anyway

 

[Bob_Crowley]

This is all very interesting and taught me a lot of new stuff - I didnt know that the US has so many unpopulated/less populated areas. I live in the UK, which, just by having travelled a lot of it, I would hasten to say is overpopulated. There is really very little in the way of wildlife anymore that hasnt had to be specially protected in parks etc. There are still some areas ‘up for grabs’ but I think it’d be a huge shame to populate these areas since theyre usually what th govmt calls ‘areas of outstanding national beauty’

Oh well, moving to the US it is If I have a mass of children anyway

Well, I’m CAtholic and you’re agnostic, but I’m afraid the only demographic advice you’ll get from the Catholic Church is not to use artificial contraceptives, so that you can overpopulate the rest of the UK as well.

Really good advice.

 

[Calliso]

These statistics are misleading. What about the food, roads, buildings, infrastructure, energy, pollution etc? What about the non-arable land eg. the Sahara desert, more than half of Australia, much of highland Asia, mountainous areas which do produce crops.

What about the stresses on areas such as Bangladesh subject to regular Monsoons and massive flooding?

If it was that simple why do so many people live in poverty? From Poverty.com …

"About 25,000 people die every day of hunger or hunger-related causes, according to the United Nations. This is one person every three and a half seconds, as you can see on this display. Unfortunately, it is children who die most often.

And I might ask, do you live on a rubbish tip in the Phillippines or Mexico City? Or do you live in one of the more comfortable Western societies, consuming more than your fair share of the world’s goods and energy, and contribute more than your fair share to greenhouse gases, pollution and consume more than your fair share of non-renewable energy resources?

If you do, then to say that there are no population pressures is a load of bunkum.

I personally think the church’s ruling on the contraceptive pill is rubbish.

Yep it;s not as simple as how many people you could fit in one area. I mean heck just managing the human waste from so many people in one area would be a nightmare. And yeah we could grow food else where…But ummm if everyone is living in one area who is going to grow the food? Who is going to transport it. Not to mention a number of other things. So really while yes you could squeeze the entire human population in a fairly small area…that is not the same as the entire human population could actually survive in said small area.

 

[JimG]

It seems that human populations actually tend to thrive better in moderate to high population density areas, such as NYC, Tokyo, or even Kansas City. Low population density areas such as towns in western Kansas have a hard time staying alive. People leave for high density areas; populations decline, resulting in unpopulated ghost towns.

 

[Timbothefiveth]

Yep it;s not as simple as how many people you could fit in one area. I mean heck just managing the human waste from so many people in one area would be a nightmare.

A density of NYC, or, for the entire U.S., less than Orlando’s. Do either of those cities have those problems?

And yeah we could grow food else where…But ummm if everyone is living in one area who is going to grow the food? Who is going to transport it.

You’re right, we might only be able to have 5 or 6 billion people in the U.S. and leave a half-billion or so in the rest of the now extremely rural world.

 

[JimG]

Heck, even Trantor is not impossible.

 

[tjm190]

At the density of New York City, the entire population of the world could live in Texas. If everyone lived in families of 4 on 1/4-acre lots, the entire population of the world could fit in Alaska.

Alaska is 663,000 square miles, the 6 habitable continents together have 52,000,000 square miles, which means that Alaska has 1.3% of the land, so the world’s population could fit in 1.3% of the land.

So I have to ask, what overpopulation problem?

Over population has to do with resources not just land- and our situation with respect to resources (water, food, and fuel come to mind) is at or near crisis levels, especially water.

 

[tjm190]

It seems that human populations actually tend to thrive better in moderate to high population density areas, such as NYC, Tokyo, or even Kansas City. Low population density areas such as towns in western Kansas have a hard time staying alive. People leave for high density areas; populations decline, resulting in unpopulated ghost towns.

That’s what happens in industrialized nations/ service based economy nations

 

[cfdmpo]

People say there is a population problem because there are starving people and diminishing resources. Most of these people believe the solution is contraception and abortion. All this has really done is increase the number of diseases (which can have the affect of reducing the population, but in a wrong way). The real solution is through conservation and teaching (farming, health practices, etc). Killing can never be a solution.

 

[tjm190]

People say there is a population problem because there are starving people and diminishing resources. Most of these people believe the solution is contraception and abortion. All this has really done is increase the number of diseases (which can have the affect of reducing the population, but in a wrong way). The real solution is through conservation and teaching (farming, health practices, etc). Killing can never be a solution.

The only real solution “long term” solution is to reduce the number of births in LDCs. However, increased availability of contraceptives won’t do this, since couples in LDCs tend to desire more children than we do in MDCs.

 

[Calliso]

A density of NYC, or, for the entire U.S., less than Orlando’s. Do either of those cities have those problems? You’re right, we might only be able to have 5 or 6 billion people in the U.S. and leave a half-billion or so in the rest of the now extremely rural world.

Yes but there is a huge difference between a few million and several billion people. It can be done on smaller scales but we are talking much larger scales here. I think even with leaving a half million in the rest of the world it wouldn;t be workable. Really I think no matter how you slice it so to speak it really wouldn;t be workable.

 

[marci]

A lot of people seem to sneer at this as an excuse for contraception and abortion, but really, what should be done about the problem at hand?

There is no problem.

There are many many humans in a world that now contains few other wild mammals, and in many areas, is losing wild land, forests, grassland, plains etc to housing or in order to manufacture things for humans. Not to mention things like factory farming, needed to feed the amount of people on earth. And that’s even without everyone being fed, or even kept alive, by the resources.