Can't say that areas that have too many students in their school, too many prisoners in their prisons, too many people in their hospitals, etc. are not overpopulated. Ok, so maybe overpopulation does not affect the whole damn world, but there are definitely cities and such that suffer from it.
If anything, I suppose, we should stop reproducing so much to prevent any potential of overpopulation. Maybe it's not a global or country problem, but it possibly could be if we continue to grow as a population the rate we are, yes?
I'd like to chime in and say OvB has been making the most sense thus far. The problem of overpopulation comes down to the fact that we will run out of resources to maintain the global population. That being the case, food will be the biggest issue if we keep on our current trends of farming and harvesting. Going off what OvB said, if we can find a more sustainable way to grow our food, it'll be a step in the right direction for preserving the future of our species.
[QUOTE=TheSporeGA;33081805]Yes it is why oil prices are rising. People are using more, and more oil with the ever growing population so it's getting harder to find. Plus with that law, familys could indeed have more children with adoption, so more people would be doing it SO in turn, it would be much less crowded.
You also seem to be showing no proof to your opinion either.[/QUOTE]
What are you talking about?
Its not over population, its basic supply and demand...
Do people not teach the very basics of economics in schools anymore?
[QUOTE=27X;33097593]as the Dust Bowl showed rather handily.[/QUOTE]
[quote=Wikipedia]Finally, farmers did not use appropriate practices for the environment, but agricultural methods that allowed erosion. For example, cotton farmers left fields bare over winter months, when winds in the High Plains are highest, and burned the stubble (as a form of weeding prior to planting), both depriving the soil of organic nutrients and increasing exposure to erosion.[/quote]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl#Causes[/url]
That happened because they allowed it to, not because it was inevitable. I'm not saying crop rotation and fertilizer are the only things that are needed to continually sustain plants on the same patch of Earth, but obviously something must be working considering many farms have been growing crops in the same place for ~50 years.
Have we figured out how to terraform yet? There are several concepts.
After watching those videos, I've been convinced. It's not something I've thought so much about before, but I hear claims about overpopulation all the time.
The video posted seems convincing to me. Food simply isn't a problem. So, what actually [I]is[/I] the problem with overpopulation? Is it something to do with ethics? Is it the fact that more people will cause more contamination and pollution? The video also claims that the population will rise to reach a peak, and then begin to fall. I'd like to see some reasoning for that, or something to disprove it for that matter.
It's the seventh post in this thread! How come nobody is addressing it? If what it claims is true, almost all the arguments in this thread are completely redundant, so why is nobody trying to refute the video before making suggestions on how to solve the overpopulation?
Furthermore, the other problem I see is with oil [I](and I guess other limited resources as well)[/I], but the thing about these is that if we're using limited resources, they're going to run out sooner or later whether we are 1 billion or 7 billion using them.
Requesting some discussion about the videos on page one.
The problem with overpopulation really is that we're already using way too much of natural resources and we keep on polluting the planet.
And in some places the infrastructure can't keep up with the population.
But natural resources would be used up either way, whether we're many or few. And pollution is a seperate problem that we have to work out. I kind of doubt that dealing with overpopulation would have any significant effect on pollution?
And shouldn't we try to make the infrastructure catch up with the population, rather than having the population ruled by infrastructure?
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;33099417][URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl#Causes[/URL] That happened because they allowed it to, not because it was inevitable. I'm not saying crop rotation and fertilizer are the only things that are needed to continually sustain plants on the same patch of Earth, but obviously something must be working considering many farms have been growing crops in the same place for ~50 years.[/QUOTE]
Wrong, it happened because it's endemic to the overall cycle of resources and was simply sped up by ignorant growing practices and homesteaders encroaching land that was never suitable for perennial horticulture in the first place.
[quote]growing[/quote]
Crops which have about [B]half[/B] the nutritional value they used to, despite much more sophisticated and streamlined growing practices, and are artificially irrigated from underground aquifers that are their lowest state in history. Guess it's voodoo magic. Yes, it is inevitable unless tech and available resources catch up to demand, which doesn't happen during population expansion. I live about 10 miles from one largest cotton growing areas in the US and about 110 miles from the "peanut capital of the world", and all you have to do is talk to the people directly involved to know that things aren't where they need to be, and demand is larger every year, year-to-year.
[quote]Food simply isn't a problem[/quote]
Quality of food is a problem, and it spreads to other areas of society in the form of poverty and general health stability/costs of a given population, which directly adds to other infrastructure issues that are present. Because something hasn't changed in [i]your[/i] lifetime doesn't really mean jack shit to your kids, and their kids.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;33096799]Dumb. It'd take centuries to convert the atmosphere on Mars, likely decades to get any sort of permanent settlement that supports more than a handful of people. And Mars is the closest inhabitable planet, which human beings have never even set foot on yet. Other planets/moons with already (somewhat) sustainable atmospheres are very far away (closest would likely be one of Jupiter's moons), and often pose other dangers such as freezing cold, erratic weather, and unstable conditions.
And then there is the problem of getting supplies to those planets for long term survival. It would cost a fuck ton just to get there, let alone ship supplies there every few months.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization[/url][/QUOTE]
From what are you basing that from? I'm trying to hope that science will find a solution. Given the advancements of science over the years, whos to say that a solution won't come up in say, 100 years, or 200 years?
I don't think that it matters what we say here because secular conflict, oil depletion and maybe even the military industrial complex will fix the problem of overpopulation by continually killing people. I don't think it's a conspiracy, rather it will be the end of us if we don't find a solution to end the 3 reasons I listed.
[QUOTE=TheSporeGA;33080368]Because the other thread was not fully made right I decided that, it was a reasonable topic, and I remade it!
So Overpopulation. A few days ago the population of Earth has reached 7 billion. Is it a problem? How should we deal with it? Should population control be considered?
I personally think that a family should only be able to have 2 kids for their entire life. Other then adoptions.
Discuss![/QUOTE]
The world reached over 7 billion a long time ago. Countries like China do not share or accurately keep records of birth, thus the figure 7 billion is only an estimation.
There is no overpopulation crisis.
It would help if people in third world countries stopped screwing like rabbits, which brings even more people in the world to suffer, but the problem of food shortages would still exist - it's not that there's too many people, it's the logistics of getting it around, and safety of transports and vendors, or a lack of cash for the person that wants the food.
Apparently the world's population can fit in an area the size of France, it isn't overpopulation, it's strain of resources. It would probably be a bit more manageable if we had a one-child policy like China (not necessarily compulsory, but preferred) or, what saber said, people in the third world stop having so much goddamn kids
[QUOTE=fox '09;33109660]From what are you basing that from? I'm trying to hope that science will find a solution. Given the advancements of science over the years, whos to say that a solution won't come up in say, 100 years, or 200 years?
I don't think that it matters what we say here because secular conflict, oil depletion and maybe even the military industrial complex will fix the problem of overpopulation by continually killing people. I don't think it's a conspiracy, rather it will be the end of us if we don't find a solution to end the 3 reasons I listed.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Mars[/url]
To convert the atmosphere of Mars to be usable to us, we would first have to release a ton of gasses into the air. If they're gasses other than oxygen & nitrogen, we'll have to find a way to convert all those gasses into breathable air. It'd take a long, long time.
While all of you may be looking at the effect on food supplies, have none of you noticed the increased populations effect on water supplies?
Mexico city, one of the most overpopulated cities in the world, is having trouble to getting water to all its citizens. So much so that a lot of people go without water each day, even if they have a house with electricity.
[editline]4th November 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Saber15;33110740]
It would help if people in third world countries stopped screwing like rabbits, [/QUOTE]
It's not just third world countries that have a high fertility rate. Ay country that has a bad education system, or high immigration has a high birth rate. For example, the UK's fertility rate was decreasing, but has suddenly risen due to immigration. Studies have shown that because immigrants are less well education, they tend to have more children.
Assuming there is a population crisis, limiting children isn't a bad idea. They're doing it China right now ... and no no let's not jump to the "OMGZ dats coz dey evil commies police state!!!!" - It's something that makes sense.
Overpopulation = less jobs/resources to go around = more unemployed/disadvantaged = more poverty
THIS is why China has the one child policy. The Chinese government does not want their country to turn into one giant poverty state ending up like some other countries I won't mention and I don't think I need to.
Either they try to play the angel trying to give themselves a good image and say "freedom!" and have their country turn to poverty, or limit the children ... BUT giving them a better chance at a good future.
Either say "OMG I WANT FREEDOM TO HAVE AS MANY KIDS AS I WANT!" and have them grow up struggling to get a job and earn money in a country filled with poverty, or you agree to a limit of kids and give them a brighter future.
I'm not saying the whole planet do this, all I'm adding here is how limiting children isn't bad depending on the scenario.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus[/url]
This is the man who started it all.
[QUOTE=Malthus]Must it not then be acknowledged by an attentive examiner of the histories of mankind, that in every age and in every State in which man has existed, or does now exist
That the increase of population is necessarily limited by the means of subsistence,
That population does invariably increase when the means of subsistence increase, and,
That the superior power of population is repressed, and the actual population kept equal to the means of subsistence, by misery and vice.[/quote]
What we need are famine, war, illnesses, natural calamities..
[QUOTE=lapsus_;33116741][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus[/url]
This is the man who started it all.
What we need are famine, war, illnesses, natural calamities..[/QUOTE]
It should also be noted that Malthus's ideas are incorrect.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;33115570][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Mars[/url]
To convert the atmosphere of Mars to be usable to us, we would first have to release a ton of gasses into the air. If they're gasses other than oxygen & nitrogen, we'll have to find a way to convert all those gasses into breathable air. It'd take a long, long time.[/QUOTE]
I never said mars, I never said terraforming. Mars may be the most plausible solution, but that's besides my point. I have no interest in combing over wikipedia pages for solutions, I'm not debating how it can be done.
There isn't an overpopulation problem, there might be one in the future, but not yet.
But if there will be one, here are some suggestions for cities and living places.
A) Start converting the atmosphere of mars for if overpopulation gets horrible in 1000 or so years.
B) Build cities above the sea (not directly on since enviormental damage)
C) Gigantic towers with appartments, stores, restoraunts, and soforth.
D) Flying cities, probably a few hundred years in the future, since a bit harder to create
There is overpopulation. Not world overpopulation, but civilized area overpopulation. I personally don't see anything morally wrong with 1 child policy. The problem is how to punish people. You can't take away the child and you also can't imprison or fine parents, which kinda makes the restriction useless.
All I can think of is to advertize and popularize contraception like condoms and pills. Sex is popular, everyone talks about it, everyone does it. Now make contraception the shit so everyone wants to get it.
People just need to spread around. The cities are getting crowded and it's bad for an individual. A person needs space, for crying out loud. Early on in history we used to travel miles after miles in a pack of maybe 20, rarely making contact with any other groups. We had lots of space and now we're crammed into a 100 square meter box of a house by the hundreds. Block after block we're almost being caged, we need to spread more evenly. More people in Russia, for example, which has an incredible amount of unused land. The climate is not a problem, you can use clothes ffs.
There's not overpopulation, really, just not too effective ways to recycle everything we consume and the aforementioned population concentration that really isn't that healthy in the long run.
[QUOTE='[ToRn];33115900']Assuming there is a population crisis, limiting children isn't a bad idea. They're doing it China right now ... and no no let's not jump to the "OMGZ dats coz dey evil commies police state!!!!" - It's something that makes sense.
Overpopulation = less jobs/resources to go around = more unemployed/disadvantaged = more poverty
[/QUOTE]
Generational booms can also cause great economic success. Much of America's success in the 70's - 90's can be traced to the large amount of baby boomers entering the workforce and buying products and/or making investments.
Of course, then you have the problem of what to do with all of the aging boomers once they leave the workforce.
[QUOTE=Badboyuk;33086217]I have a solution we should get of are asses and start to convert a planets atmosphere that then it will be able to substane life tadaaa that easy Example we could make mars just a planet with farms on it venus a livestock planet ect ect. Thats what i think we should do because i am not up for the dieing because of over population on earth .[/QUOTE]
Jesus Harold Christ, I have never seen such misappropriation of science and general common sense in a general discussion befo- Oh fuck it all
[img]http://www.ibreak4bacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Star_Trek_suicide.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=lapsus_;33116741][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus[/url]
This is the man who started it all.
What we need are famine, war, illnesses, natural calamities..[/QUOTE]
if you think we need famine, war, illnesses, and other calamities then why don't you just end your own life to serve the cause
[editline]6th November 2011[/editline]
every death counts!!
Gray Death anyone?
:v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.