People Should Start Accepting that Overpopulation is a Real Issue

[Sharkconas]

As I implied earlier the bottleneck is not human body volume capacity, it is natural resources like arable acreage.

So let me get this right you assume that people around the world are not working on solutions to this problem? Shouldn't the formation of new farming methods such as urban farms and the much hated GMO's help us survive those issues ? I mean we already have plenty of those foods on the market and we do eat the regularly.

[PC2]

So let me get this right you assume that people around the world are not working on solutions to this problem? Shouldn't the formation of new farming methods such as urban farms and the much hated GMO's help us survive those issues ? I mean we already have plenty of those foods on the market and we do eat the regularly.

It depends on how climate change effects arability. If it only reduces it globally by 10% that could be adapted to. If it is more like 30% it would be a crisis.

[Sharkconas]

meanwhile in hong kong, they are so overpopulated, this is there idea of a five star hotel.



and living arrangements.

http://www.rfa.org/english/news/chin...015125826.html

As I said before they are going to lose a lot of their population in the coming decades thanks to the way their economy tears most Chinese families apart and even though there a welfare state their a very bad one at that.

And the other two articles show that their birth rates are about to plummet thanks to the one child policy and sexism.

[Radaney]

Almost none of these are Overpopulation issues in OP.

Also Modern World population is in decline.

[Sharkconas]

It depends on how climate change effects arability. If it only reduces it globally by 10% that could be adapted to. If it is more like 30% it would be a crisis.

Also depends if we can stop livestock farming since they are one the major factors in climate change, and we would need to adapt to lab grown meat something people would also find creepy .

[xChurch]

Someone should really tell that to Japan quick!

Seriously though overpopulation is not really the issue. Resource management and the fact some humans live in extremely poor climates for our species is the real issue. If only we had some kind of world government that could properly solve global issues like this. Oh well, I can dream.

[Mihalik]

Overpopulation is a problem since the rest of the world is becoming modern.

Still not a problem. Only a problem if they copy the unsustainable energy/environmental model used by developed nations. We don't actually need to be so unsustainable. We can maintain our quality of life and be more sustainable...but then again, you are the first to always rail against any sort of environmental measure.

[nanook12]

Completely agree TBH.

Mankind the biggest plague to ever grace the Earth. So many world issues would be solved with the control of an exponentially increasing population. Just because the Earth can sustain our current population, doesn't mean it should. There has been a billion people added in the last 10 years, that increase in population will keep rising. Human life is not significant and the sooner the world understands it needs to be kept in check the better.

I can't imagine how poor quality of life is going to be in another 20-50 years. Scared to bring a child into this world with the way things are headed, between the mindset of newer generations, and the decline in everything environmentally. The trash and ultra religious just won't stop procreating while intelligent people are rarely if ever because careers.

All the nations that require assistance currently, should have enforced sterilization. Do not sustain something that cannot sustain itself. Stop having children when you and the ones you already have cannot eat. Asians and middle easterners definitely need to put a damper on things, at least China has the sense to control the population a little bit. Look at the cesspool that is India, that will be the future everywhere

Well said.

[Polarthief]

Massive amounts of birth control and contraceptives spread worldwide for free, make abortion free and encourage it instead of stigmatizing it, 1 child policy like China in industrial nations with very heavy fines passed out if people disobey the law. See I solved the problem without saying that we should kill a portion of the population.

Yeah, good luck with that when religion rules this world. Also good luck with limiting the number of kids people can have. This isn't really an issue that laws can fix. Drugs are illegal yet there's a mass market for them and millions still use them to this day.

I at least promise to do my part and not conceive a child. Then again, I am a homosexual male, so it'd be preeeeetty hard to even accidentally make a kid... If I ever did decide to have one though, I'd adopt.

[Kaleredar]

Overpopulation isn't a concern in any first-world country.

Addressing overpopulation in third-world countries is a matter of better education, the elevation of women's roles in their respective societies, distribution of birth control, and the advent of greater social and economic stability.

But people advocating for "population control" don't usually approach it from the humanitarian standpoint. It's always a "POOR PEOPLE NEED TO STOP HAVING BABIES!" diatribe.

[nanook12]

Overpopulation isn't a concern in any first-world country.

Addressing overpopulation in third-world countries is a matter of better education, the elevation of women's roles in their respective societies, distribution of birth control, and the advent of greater social and economic stability.

But people advocating for "population control" don't usually approach it from the humanitarian standpoint. It's always a "POOR PEOPLE NEED TO STOP HAVING BABIES!" diatribe.

I don't give a fuck about humanitarianism. Human beings are no different that pest populations, and need to be controlled.

[Masark]

meanwhile in hong kong

Yeah, it's a tiny island about 1/4 the size of Hawai'i subject to very high residency demand in part due to its special status within China.

[Fat Mac]

we need a disease to come in and wipe out 95% of the planet. restore the natural balance.

starting to sound like a super villain

i agree. of course we will both be dead also from said disease

just doing our part

[Aphrel]

I can't think of any other single issue that links to nearly every other problem like overpopulation does.

1.) If populations were held in check societies would have far less energy demand and less C02 would be released into the atmosphere. Climate change would not be nearly as big a problem as it is today if previous populations were managed.

2.) If previous populations were held in check, then immigration would not cause as much tension as it does today because there would be more resources and jobs for everyone to share.

3.) If previous populations were held in check, there would be higher wages today because a smaller labor pool gives individuals in that labor pool more power over wages resulting in increased compensation.

4.) Crime and corruption rates would decrease with population decrease. People would no longer have to resort to crime to survive because jobs would be plentiful and wages would be livable.

5.) There would be less environmental destruction, human waste products, and species loss if there were less human being on the planet. Nearly every animal on the earth would benefit from less human activity.

6.) With livable wages and ample job opportunities people would have more free time to play sports, go hiking, learn something, read a book, etc.


Please just accept that this is truth and stop cranking out kids like an m&m's factory.

Look up Hans Rosling talks about populations. He concludes that education and improved living conditions leads to a more stable population that doesnt grow exponentaly.

[Elegiac]

meanwhile in hong kong, they are so overpopulated, this is there idea of a five star hotel.

That is a capsule hotel in Tokyo, Japan.

So, no.

[Kallisto]

Overpopulation is a problem since the rest of the world is becoming modern.

And 60% of humanity live in a corner of Asia which has shown it is borderline into being modern and slowing down birth rates. Plus Earth can easily hold double the population we have now with current technology. As it improves, it becomes less wasteful and polluted. Distribution increases and more areas of the world enter growth stagnation. Long run humanity will likely hit 10 billion and level out or start a slow decline.

[tiptopmemer]

Its why the west needs to stop taking in 3rd world migrants.

They dont have the societal/cultural respect for our stability.

[Kaleredar]

I don't give a fuck about humanitarianism. Human beings are no different that pest populations, and need to be controlled.

What makes you so enlightened to talk down about humanity?

Don't cut yourself on that edge, now.

- - - Updated - - -

Its why the west needs to stop taking in 3rd world migrants.

They dont have the societal/cultural respect for our stability.

...except third world immigrants are more likely to be brought up to the standard of living of the country they're entering.


Look at every immigrant population to ever come into the United States.

[tiptopmemer]

...except third world immigrants are more likely to be brought up to the standard of living of the country they're entering.


Look at every immigrant population to ever come into the United States.

It takes them 1-2 generations to catch up.

And i dont see why western nations need to suffer the burden of being smarter and having to be handhold these underdeveloped nations.

[Tijuana]

I can't think of any other single issue that links to nearly every other problem like overpopulation does.

1.) If populations were held in check societies would have far less energy demand and less C02 would be released into the atmosphere. Climate change would not be nearly as big a problem as it is today if previous populations were managed.

2.) If previous populations were held in check, then immigration would not cause as much tension as it does today because there would be more resources and jobs for everyone to share.

3.) If previous populations were held in check, there would be higher wages today because a smaller labor pool gives individuals in that labor pool more power over wages resulting in increased compensation.

4.) Crime and corruption rates would decrease with population decrease. People would no longer have to resort to crime to survive because jobs would be plentiful and wages would be livable.

5.) There would be less environmental destruction, human waste products, and species loss if there were less human being on the planet. Nearly every animal on the earth would benefit from less human activity.

6.) With livable wages and ample job opportunities people would have more free time to play sports, go hiking, learn something, read a book, etc.


Please just accept that this is truth and stop cranking out kids like an m&m's factory.

None of this is truth. Say for example, half of us died off. In your mind, that would lead to everyone making more money. But, you fail to realize that would also halve the economy. The RATIO of supply and demand (for labor) would remain exactly the same overall.

Not all crime is theft. Being poor doesn't really explain away rape and murder.

Just because there are less people, doesn't necessarily mean there would be less pollution. The variable rates of pollution, nation to nation, are not based in population, but in wealth. Scarcity of resources is the only check on their use, and that would remain unchanged by population changes.

Also, depending on how far down you want to whittle the population, you will also have to give luxuries up. For example, if we sent 10,000 people to colonize a planet, that would not nearly be enough for them to produce the things we have here today. Too many of them would need to be farming for there to be enough of them to make microchips, for example. It takes millions of people to arrive at the level of luxury we currently enjoy.

I could go on and on and on but, this notion is just nonsense, and not founded in any level of critical thinking, in science, in sociology, or in math.