is population growth a good thing?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Japher


Good

Population Growth is a good thing, IMO. So long as we don't exceede our capacity, which I think we have. But, that is why I like gay people; they are doing their best to curb pop. growth!

I like them because they're so happy and gay.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man


there are 6billion people alive today, they have still come no where near the intellectual hights of 5thBC Athens, which had about 40,000 i think.

Ancient Athens is overrated. Now the Vienna Circle ...

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man


there are 6billion people alive today, they have still come no where near the intellectual hights of 5thBC Athens, which had about 40,000 i think.

That's semi-BS - 90% of the scientists in World history are still alive and kickin'. But to support your statement, only a very minor part of us are as innovative as the classical heroes (Archimedes, Newton, Einstein etc)

[Odin]

We have to stop population growth before it wrecks the planet and the humans-caused current mass extintion gets even worse. The 3rd world shows that Maltus' grim prediction is comming true. we should slowly reduce our population to about 500 million people. I am for population control, as in China, since we can't get the religious folks too stop having 10+ kids. 2 KIDS MAX!!!

[MOBIUS]

POPULATION GROWTH IS A BAD THING!

Personally I think that the rampant population growth of today is probably the single most dangerous thing affecting our planet!

More people equals more global warming, more pollution, more mouths to feed, more destruction of natural habitat, more species extinctions, more poverty - just more bad stuff all around!!!

The median UN estimate for 2050 is something like 11 billion and already half the planet can't feed itself and is busily despoiling the environment in an attempt to survive...

6 billion is more than enough people on this planet to go around!!!

For those of you that think that population growth/large populations is a surefire route to economic success, one only has to look at the two billion + nations of the world: China and India...

Sure China is undergoing an economic revolution, but then it too has implemented a nationwide one child per family limit as its own form of population control - ah the (occasional) joys of a communist country!. Most of those in the 'economic revolution' are earning slave wages of 12c a day making clothes for the likes of Nike etc...

Yes, there might be more potential genii being born through sheer weight of numbers - but by all accounts Mozart would have been a dud if he hadn't got his little fingers on a piano as a child! So if an already 3rd world nation cannot even raise its literacy rate above 50% - just how are these genii going to get the recognition they deserve!!?

Of course the flip side of all this is the ludicrous situation of most western nations who are doing there level best to hold the unwashed masses at their borders at the very same time as their populations are straining under the huge numbers of people of pensionable age 'coming of age'...

Case in point is Australia, which could actually do with and absorb a good few million more people - but where members of its government are exhorting the native population to breed for the country rather like Hitler did in 30's Germany! Whilst at the same time they have a zero tolerance of even allowing refugees the opportunity to apply for asylum...

They could quite easily kill two birds with one stone...

What is needed is population redistribution - not growth. Nations of the west should figure out their projected population shortfalls and start letting in more people to make those up.

Personally I would try and adopt a population control scheme a la China worldwide if I could - and I'd sterilise stupid people!

[Odin]

MOBIUS! Quit reading my mind!!!

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Caligastia


I like them because they're so happy and gay.

[Dis]

I'm against population growth.

But what are we going to do to stop it without turning into China?

I say we just keep the birth rate just enough to prevent depopulation. That would cause problems.

[Az]

Originally posted by The Templar


Or if religious fanatics would curtail their attempts to breed themselves into the majority we could live on normal foods.

Hardly an anti-american bash. More of an anti-muslim one.


In any case, I am waiting for the anti-muslim enviromentalist demonstrations.

[optimus2861]

Originally posted by The Templar
Note also that the more people there are, and the more space they take up, the bigger a footprint they leave. Thus the more planetary capacity is reduced due to enviro degradation.

You sound like the ecology professor from UBC that gave a speech I listened to on the radio last night. His thesis was very much along those lines, determining the ecological footprint of mankind and whether or not it is sustainable over the long term. He determined that the average human being on the planet requires about 2.8 hectares of land to produce all the resources (food, water, raw materials, energy, etc) needed to sustain themselves in our current lifestyle, though there is quite a disparity between the rich countries like Canada, USA, Australia, and western Europe (averaging between 8-12 hectares per capita) and the Third World (as low as 1 hectare per capita). However the total land mass on the planet divided by the total population only works out to about 2-2.1 hectares per person. Therefore he concludes we are overconsuming the available resources on the planet, and if there is not a shift in the cultural lifestyle expectations of the Earth's population, that we will inevitably cause a severe ecological shock, much like your high-school biology example.

I'd never heard the argument put that way before. It was quite compelling. And depressing .

[GePap]

Earth could most certainly sustain twice as many people as today, perhasp 3 times. The question is, wasting how much? that the environment has been damagued is not a direct effect of population growth only, but wasteful cponsumer society as well.

Population growth just is folks. Biology (we are aniamls after all) trumps all in this respect.

[el freako]

What people have to remember is that technology is changing the 'footprint' that the average person has on the planet all the time, and it's almost always a smaller footprint.

To give an example, there is much worrying about what the state of the earth will be when (if) much of the third world attains our standard of living.
But if we had today's standard of living with the energy/resource efficency of 1903 then the planet would have already been wrecked (for example CO2 emissions would be over 3 times higher than they are), or air and rivers poisoned.
As this didn't happen then we can safely assume that there will be equally stunning improvements in the future.

[:) Smiley]

It's more than just the environmental consequences, though. Population growth is also bad for the human ego. The more people there are, the more people become numbers.

[mrmitchell]

Economically and politically, population growth is good, and so is immigration. It's more people--more people that can produce and consume more goods. What's wrong with that?

Environmentally, population growth can be okay if the children are not Earth-raping corporate whores, of course.

[Mr. President]

Ever played SimEarth? Sooner or later SARS II or something similar will wipe out the people who can't be supported by their local resources.