Does Thanos have a point?

[Ghostpanther]

Is Thanos right? Would we be better off if we wiped out 50% of the earth's population? as far as resources go it would give us more time.

Would you accept being among the 50% that is removed?

[segara82]

If you survived the Black Plague that killed of 30-50% of everybody the only benefit you'd notice is that it's a lot easier to get a job. You'd miss all the friends and family that you lost.

We had threads before in this forum about rent-prices skyrocketing, wages stagnating, limited chances of getting a higher-paying job, migration (legal and illegal), ... and about every time these topics mixed because they do influence another.
When (not if) we take a look at the official numbers from back when the Black Plague hit Europe and killed about 30% of all the population the following things are very clear:
1. Less competition for housing results in lower rent, cheaper homes, more home-ownership.
2. Higher wages since you have less competition for the job.
3. Far better chances to get that promition since, once again, less competition.
4. Cheaper food, since, you know, less mouths to feed.
5. Less migration, due to the 4 points above.


Most people do not want to acknowlede that we have currently an overpopulation-problem.
Europe, Australia, Japan and North America have reduced their reproduction numbers due to technology, medical advances and higher education since it is no longer necessary to get 3+ children so that at least 1 or 2 survive till they reproduce. China also took actions to keep their population check (in more way than 1), but in other parts of the world, especially Africa ...

Hell, Gadaffi (!) warned Europe when they wanted to dethrone him that with him and his system gone millions of africans would try to get to Europe, that rich, bountiful land, and that it was him and his cronies that stemed that tide.
Well, Gadaffi is gone, Syria is not a safe country ... and this week alone i read in my (left-leaning) newspaper 3 different reports from 3 different african countries how thousands if not million of men (and women) there dreamed of getting to Europe since things 'are better there'.
Remember the thread about the refugee shipsabout these very people from Africa that want to get to Europe.

Yeah, i agree with Sir David Attenborough: We Humans need to get our numbers in check.
https://futurism.com/david-attenboro...al-world-will/

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

Seems alright to me, less people around more resources around.

Though he will need to go at it again sometime.

Also he could have just doubled planets/recources to but i see his point.

North korea is a great example of this theory. Or resources aren't dispersed equally because people vote to privatizie them. Gdp and social services scale with population as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Is Thanos right? Would we be better off if we wiped out 50% of the earth's population? as far as resources go it would give us more time.

It wouldn't give us more time a loss in work force is a loss in productive and gdp. To be honest humanity neeeds to spread out through spaces we have all our eggs in one basket whch is a bad idea. One asteroid or gamma ray burst and that's it for us. The poles can flip as well weaking the earth magnetic field but most scientist don't think that we'll cause much damage to anything but infrustrure.

[Vakna]

Isn't it funny all of the top grossing films are made in the US though

Not because US is inherently the best at making them though, it's because that's where the centers of movie production are based, so everyone around the world interested in seriously getting into the movie business has to move there.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

If you survived the Black Plague that killed of 30-50% of everybody the only benefit you'd notice is that it's a lot easier to get a job. You'd miss all the friends and family that you lost.

That's not true and employment scales with population. The more people the more money and services used. The problem is keeping that population educated and working but there is a reason the United States has a massive gdp. We're ok with it.

[Deleted]

No. Humanity has a terminal population growth point. Basically at 9-10 billion the birth rate and death rate will equalize preventing the population from growing further.

thats wishful thinking. if you look at history global population has always been bottlenecked by food production, never birthrate. even today this is true. in the future that bottleneck may shift from food to energy or living space, but birthrates are very fluid based on circumstances to the point i don't see them becoming the limiting factor until quasi-post scarcity. even educated well off people have more kids if things are good.

as for thanos, he has no point. the technology available to him could solve all the problems in the galaxy in a much better way then periodic purges.

[Kul Tiras]

It's the dumbest premise for a story I've ever seen in my life, and I've played MOP.

With all the ressources this dumb fuck spent just to get that gauntlet, he could simply have created a legion of interstellar Red Cross to teraform more planets of which there in practically an infinity, and deport people there instead to alleviate the burden on heavier taxed planets.

It's kind of why people have emigrated from continent to continent and land to land throughout history. And you know the great thing about it? With enough proper support, it works!

Nonononononoo, let me go on some fucking retarded crusade and kill half of you, only to temporarily slow down the problem. Oh what, I can only do this thing once? Well, hope it works out ok!

I haven't been so bored during a movie in a long, long time.

[Easo]

Haven't we had this, eee, discussion like multiple times already?
No, we are not even close to running out of resources, their distribution is a problem, not resources themselves.
Why do all the population removers never start with themselves? I wonder...
A fantasy movie and there suddenly is an influx of new philosophic geniuses.
P.S.
He killed more than 50%. Think as to why.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

Haven't we had this, eee, discussion like multiple times already?
No, we are not even close to running out of resources, their distribution is a problem, not resources themselves.
Why do all the population removers never start with themselves? I wonder...
A fantasy movie and there suddenly is an influx of new philosophic geniuses.
P.S.
He killed more than 50%. Think as to why.

Not to mention potentially losing up to half your work force is a bad idea. The more productive members of society the more money. Randomly wiping everyone out without taking intellgience into account is a waste of time.

[Zuben]

While overpopulation is definitely a huge problem, eradicating 50% of the world's population would usher societies into a state of chaos. Some might pull through it, some will be crushed by it, but overall it won't even be a long-term solution, since there'd still be billions people to breed like rabbits. We'd face these same problems eventually if our only solution is to violently dial back our numbers every now and then.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

While overpopulation is definitely a huge problem, eradicating 50% of the world's population would usher societies into a state of chaos. Some might pull through it, some will be crushed by it, but overall it won't even be a long-term solution, since there'd still be billions people to breed like rabbits. We'd face these same problems eventually if our only solution is to violently dial back our numbers every now and then.

We need to just teach sex education in poor areas and as population advance there birth rates drop.

[Deleted]

/thread

[Deleted]

no he does not hahahaaaa

[Sunseeker]

The problem we have isn't one of population, it's one of access and distribution.

Which arguably, is probably the same problem most alien worlds would have as well.

Resources aren't divided up evenly, neither are people, neither is the skill to manage or utilize them.

Which of course shows one of the flaws of Thanos' logic: if you randomly (as opposed to evenly or selectively) kill half the people you could still be left with 100% of the people in China and India (places of poor food distribution and high population) and 0% of the people in North & South America (~1 billion) and 0% of the people in Africa, and 50% of the people in Europe. If you evenly divide the population (that means halve the population of every nation) you reduce the burden on overpopulated areas, but you also reduce the productivity of nations that have better population management.

Realistically, you'd want to trim something like 25% off productive and managed areas, mostly off of their poor and unemployed to increase the standard of living for everyone else there, while shaving 50%+ off areas that are overpopulated and/or poorly managed.

Otherwise if we're going to use a magic finger snap to solve the universe's problems, you could just bless every planet with perfect resource and population distribution.

But there's a reason Thanos is called the "Mad Titan", making him seem more "human" in the movie was great from a storytelling perspective. Psycho murderer badguys get boring fairly fast. But it doesn't make him any less mad. I just wish Ultron had gotten a better treatment.

[Skulltaker]

Exactly, that's my point. If literally billions of people are saying a movie is good, then it's safe to say it is good

Literally billions, eh? You should read up on the meaning of literally, buddy.

[Nihilist74]

Is Thanos right? Would we be better off if we wiped out 50% of the earth's population? as far as resources go it would give us more time.

I do not think we should open death camps and murder people but I do think we should make 75% of the planet sterile by vasectomies and tubal ligations so they can't reproduce. I think we should maintain a human population of about 1 billion people. Let the eco-system recover, manage our resources and give every living human a decent existence.

[Nynax]

More people being born means that there are more people developing technological solutions to resource problems.

I don't see it solving anything really. With today's technology and trends the population would return to what it currently is in a few decades.

I think recent statistical research is actually showing...that the best form of population control is basically education and higher income. Look at all the western countries that find themselves needing immigration to support their social programs, because citizens aren't having enough children. While Earths overall population is rising, all that growth isn't coming from the wealthy countries/communities where most couples have 1 maybe 2 children

We have always assumed that Earth's population will grow exponentially. However, it is possible to imagine a future, one with enough shared economic growth, where population actually reaches a relative equilibrium. The question is, will we run out of resources first? or will sustainability efforts buy us enough time?

- - - Updated - - -

Otherwise if we're going to use a magic finger snap to solve the universe's problems, you could just bless every planet with perfect resource and population distribution.

Put it this way, he really just needed to give resources a respawn timer. Guess he wasn't a gamer though, never would have occurred to him.

[goblinsapper]

Came to read these answers, some are as good as I had hoped

[Skulltaker]

I was being hyperbolic

Can you see how the use of the word 'literally' while being hyperbolic kind of undermines your point and lessens the degree as to which people take you seriously?

[Skulltaker]

Not really, there's nothing wrong with using the phrase literally when being hyperbolic - if anything it helps. I know you don't have a point so you're trying to look clever, but it's not going to work I'm afraid. Go and be pedantic about grammar to someone who actually cares and is actually using it wrong

Like you, who doesn't put a period at the end of a sentence? And I'm still waiting for you to make a point, or contribute to the thread. All you have done so far is rambling on and on how a lot of people liking a movie makes it good.