Why don't we hear many concerns about world population?

[Alcoblog]

The obvious answer is colonisation of other planets.

 

Well, I say obvious...

I think a lot of people on here are already on a different planet!

My G/F certainly thinks I am!

[Cyclone]

What do you mean about things being based on everlasting growth? Surely this can be adjusted, and would make things even easier?

Can one child provide the care you need in old age... The inverted triangle you're talking about creating could be a huge problem.

[Norbert]

There are two choices; cut the growth of population by cutting the birth rate, or nature will cut it for us by famine, disease and other natural disasters.

 

The only question to be asked is whether we prefer to stop having children, or to watch them lead very short and very miserable lives.

 

 

To bring multiple children into a hopeless situation such as a corrupt war-torn over populated country is very selfish. To have children as an insurance policy for old age is also selfish. I’d rather kill myself tbh.

 

A child born now in this country might live until 2100 and I think some seriously bad stuff will have happened here by then. I don’t want to be caught up in it and I wouldn’t want to inflict it on an offspring of mine.

 

Have a nice evening!

[Alcoblog]

Can one child provide the care you need in old age... The inverted triangle you're talking about creating could be a huge problem.

 

I don't think so. Considering the amount of money saved on child benefits, child care etc, plus the fact that unemployment would plummet, crime would drop, wars would become rare as everyones standard of living went up, looking after the elderly would become easier and they would enjoy old age much more (as they deserve to)

[azazel666]

I think the more we discuss it the more it seems like humanity really is heading up a certain creek without a paddle, and probably taking the planet with it if we keep on behaving as we are doing across the world.

 

Which leads me back to the original point, why does it seem this is not being addressed at all? Do we live in a society that always thinks of the situation RIGHT NOW, rather than thinking ahead to the future. Even if it's a future where were are more than likely gone, but our descendants have to deal with it?

[JFKvsNixon]

I think the more we discuss it the more it seems like humanity really is heading up a certain creek without a paddle, and probably taking the planet with it if we keep on behaving as we are doing across the world.

 

Which leads me back to the original point, why does it seem this is not being addressed at all? Do we live in a society that always thinks of the situation RIGHT NOW, rather than thinking ahead to the future. Even if it's a future where were are more than likely gone, but our descendants have to deal with it?

 

There is hope. If the tends in the developing countries follow the trends in the developed countries as they were developing the population growth will drop off.

 

In almost every developed country the birth rate drops when the prosperity of the population increases.

[andygardener]

There is hope. If the tends in the developing countries follow the trends in the developed countries as they were developing the population growth will drop off.

 

In almost every developed country the birth rate drops when the prosperity of the population increases.

 

The problem with that is whether you're an environmentalist or not, what is undeniable is that western/japanese standards of living are very resourse intensive and we as a planet have finite resources.

 

We cannot as an eco system remotely afford the third world to all have western standards of living - to a large degree because of their ever expanding populations which are not controlled by ability to sustain those populations on their own.

 

Western money can continue to exaserbate the problem for a while but ultimately the planet will find it's sustainable population level, we have a choice in terms of whether to continue to contribute to this death spiral or to look after our people and let the planet do the balancing on it's own overseas.

[JFKvsNixon]

The problem with that is whether you're an environmentalist or not, what is undeniable is that western/japanese standards of living are very resourse intensive and we as a planet have finite resources.

 

We cannot as an eco system remotely afford the third world to all have western standards of living - to a large degree because of their ever expanding populations which are not controlled by ability to sustain those populations on their own.

 

Western money can continue to exaserbate the problem for a while but ultimately the planet will find it's sustainable population level, we have a choice in terms of whether to continue to contribute to this death spiral or to look after our people and let the planet do the balancing on it's own overseas.

 

You are very right of course, currently the world cannot consume as we do in the West. The major challenge facing the West is freeing ourselves from our reliance on oil, once we do that I feel everything else will fall in place.

[HeadingNorth]

Which leads me back to the original point, why does it seem this is not being addressed at all? Do we live in a society that always thinks of the situation RIGHT NOW, rather than thinking ahead to the future. Even if it's a future where were are more than likely gone, but our descendants have to deal with it?

 

There are two major factors in that.

 

Firstly, it's a global problem, and requires a global solution. Do you see any global agreement on anything in the near future?

 

And, secondly, short-termism as you suggest. A government in this country has to get re-elected after five years; implementing policies which will make everyone suffer for the next ten years but lead to a higher standard of living in fifty, are not going to win many elections.

[BritPat]

China and India account for about 25% of the global population.

 

The media constantly harp on about their super economies without mentioning the fact that per capita they are still dirt poor with a huge percentage of the population on less than $2 per day.

 

If populations literally explode they will starve and suffer the ravages of disease.

 

Nature doesn't do virtual food and housing when populations reach a certain level they are ruthlessly thinned out.

 

So long as UK Europe Aus/NZ and North America keep their doors tightly shut we needn't overly worry.