43 replies to this topic

[jaychant]

The greatest solution? Education. More intelligent people tend to have less kids than less intelligent people, so the key to preventing overpopulation is to educate. China's one-child policy is rather absurd. It isn't going to help very much. We shouldn't go to extremes to reduce population. Too little population growth can be bad for a country.

[webishqiptar]

Overpopulation is a subjective term in my thoughts. Europe is becoming older and older in time while China's fast growing population will bring them to lead world economy and have absolute power. These are negative effects of modern civilization, industry and highly advanced methods and techniques of medicine development.

There are no resolving issues for this problem of overpopulation. People will continue to misuse the nature and the nature won't help us anymore on preventing global warming, and global warning is some steps before the end of the world.

[jlhaslip]

jaychant, on May 2 2009, 06:48 AM, said:

The greatest solution? Education. More intelligent people tend to have less kids than less intelligent people, so the key to preventing overpopulation is to educate. China's one-child policy is rather absurd. It isn't going to help very much. We shouldn't go to extremes to reduce population. Too little population growth can be bad for a country.

I can't argue with the idea that Education is a positive step towards a reduction in Population growth, both in the education level of the population, and also in the area of Birth Control in the Third World countries.
However, I can argue against the thought that the Population of the Earth must continue to expand. The Planet has a 'carrying capacity' and we are (arguably) near the limit of the ability of the Earth to sustain what population we have. It has been noted in academic papers that should the entire population of the Earth achieve the North American standard of living, we would require 4 planets to provide the natural resources for that life style for all the population we currently have. Those statistics are not recent, so perhaps 5 planets might be required now.
Population must go down while the average standard of living is increasing. Or, the average standard of living must be brought under control to the point where all the goods and services being provided to the affluent societies needs to be re-directed to the Third world and providing a better standard of living there. North Americans need to adjust their lifestyles to allow for the more equitable sharing of the Earth's resources. Bikes instead of SUV's, walking instead of driving, eating less red meat allows for more grains for humans, less pollution and the list goes on. A more sustainable form of energy would be a good start. Hydro Carbons are not going to last forever, and the reserves we have today will run out, no question about that. What will be the alternative? I don't know, but it better happen quickly, or human civilization as we know it is doomed to fail. Look around and notice the global conflicts over resources happening today. Oil wars in the Middle East id just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Get ready for the day when other resources start ot become scarce and watch for even more conflicts.

[Misanthrope]

For the time being I will refrain from unsettling the proverbial apple cart and not argue with the premise of this much parroted argument, as it is obviously a popular one. I was once a card carrying member of NPG (Negative Population Growth), but that was two decades ago and an embarrassing by-product of my impetuous youth..... long before I discovered who was actually promoting this anti-human agenda, which I shall expound upon later.

For those who endorse this agenda, I ask: WHO will decide who is worthy to propagate? And by what criteria? These are questions I humbly submit for your consideration.

[jaychant]

jlhaslip, on May 2 2009, 11:56 PM, said:

I can't argue with the idea that Education is a positive step towards a reduction in Population growth, both in the education level of the population, and also in the area of Birth Control in the Third World countries.
However, I can argue against the thought that the Population of the Earth must continue to expand. The Planet has a 'carrying capacity' and we are (arguably) near the limit of the ability of the Earth to sustain what population we have. It has been noted in academic papers that should the entire population of the Earth achieve the North American standard of living, we would require 4 planets to provide the natural resources for that life style for all the population we currently have. Those statistics are not recent, so perhaps 5 planets might be required now.
Population must go down while the average standard of living is increasing. Or, the average standard of living must be brought under control to the point where all the goods and services being provided to the affluent societies needs to be re-directed to the Third world and providing a better standard of living there. North Americans need to adjust their lifestyles to allow for the more equitable sharing of the Earth's resources. Bikes instead of SUV's, walking instead of driving, eating less red meat allows for more grains for humans, less pollution and the list goes on. A more sustainable form of energy would be a good start. Hydro Carbons are not going to last forever, and the reserves we have today will run out, no question about that. What will be the alternative? I don't know, but it better happen quickly, or human civilization as we know it is doomed to fail. Look around and notice the global conflicts over resources happening today. Oil wars in the Middle East id just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Get ready for the day when other resources start ot become scarce and watch for even more conflicts.

I didn't mean that the population needs to keep getting larger, I meant that the population needs to not shrink. Currently, so few people are having kids in Japan that the Japanese government is worried, because once the aging population dies off, the population will be reduced dramatically. In this manner, the entire Japanese race could potentially disappear, and along with it Japanese customs, language, technology, etc. It is true that we don't want the population to grow too large, but we also don't want a situation like that, especially on a worldwide scale.

[arjupun]

Hey frens,

I think this is a great problem for future.
so, every body should focus in it and think to control this.
If it is not controlled now than it will brings many such problem by which earth should walk in deadline.

Therefore, Every one should maintain family size and also should control early marriage which leads to population increase.

To control it people should follow family planning to control their family size.


Reply by Arjun pun

[networker]

Whoever it was that mentioned that if every family had only one child
the population would be greatly reduced,sounds like the right solution to me.
Obviously, war is not a solution. Birth control and education
are obviously the right way to go about doing things.

[iGuest]

3rd World Out of ControlOverpopulation

Western civilization is doing  its part.  It is the 3rd World that is out of control. Our populations are holding steady, or in many cases cannot even produce enough kids to support the population structure we currently have. This is true in the US, Canada,  All countries in Europe and Australia. As a matter of fact - the countries of the west have to rely on immigration to maintain and/or grow our population base. 

The 3rd world is a mess and has been for a long long long time. Corrupt governments and backward thinking are largely the source of there problems. Not all countries of this world need to jump on this control the number of babies being born propaganda.

[iGuest]

Limit kids to 2 or lessOverpopulation

More and more people are realising that only by limiting our global birth rates to 2 or less can we reduce our population to sustainable levels. So we can each do our part by spreading the word to every country ... 2 or less kids ...

This along with providing free birth control, more education(especially for women) and assisting with the economic development of poorer countries is the only way to go!

There will be the usual claims of racism ,eugenics etc but these reactionary attacks will fade if more and more people agree and start having less kids for our common good. Even if the few fundamentalists continue with their 12 or 15 kids the majority can compensate for their selfishness.

Thanks Andy

-reply by Andy

[Shahrukh]

In my opinion, the real problem is not the growth of population but rather the provision of amenities to the population.
If everyone follows good ethics in the strictest sense, which is pretty improbable, the growth of number of people to feed and accommodate will not be a problem.
Just as one example, if all the ten richest people of the world shared their assets with the poor people, many families will be able to move to places where they can live for generations without overpopulation being an issue in that area.
There should be a limit to 'luxury', anyway, in my opinion. Simplicity is always best.