Overpopulation: at the base of it all but nobody talks about it

[Cradyz]

It's not a problem and won't be, on a global scale. Overpopulation is only a problem in places that don't have sufficient infrastructure to sustain the population in a crisis or the scientific advancements to remedy such issues like more developed counries do.

Doomsayers like to point at famines in highly populated, desert climate, poorly developed countries like Ethiopia and say 'that's what will happen to the world eventually'. No it won't. Agricultural techniques are already so advanced the amount of food you can grow regardless of space or climate is staggering. Just need to have the infrastructure to apply them.

More advanced tech will spread, poor places where lots of babies are born will become more wealthy and the population growth will start leveling off, then decline and settle at a lower number when the large cluster of elderly die. It's the natural proces of a country when the economy transitions to a developed one. It's happened in all developed countries, it's happening in China right now, it's gonna happen in Nigeria too.

[Mihalik]

Starvation rate already plummeted though. The large majority of the planet has plenty of food to get through the day.

Reducing waste in the West has little connection to reducing starvation in third world countries.

That's factually untrue. The long term sustainable feeding of a larger population especially in the changing environmental conditions is resource intensive.

But then again, you are that loon, who thinks that biodiversity is unnecessary.

[PC2]

That's factually untrue. The long term sustainable feeding of a larger population especially in the changing environmental conditions is resource intensive.

But then again, you are that loon, who thinks that biodiversity is unnecessary.

What is factually untrue? You realize that if someone throws out food in the West that in no way means that food could have fed someone in a third world country. Spoilage and logistics simply don't work like that.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

I like the Birthing License method. Which I know will never ever happen, but I like the idea of it.

Want a kid? Meet this set of requirements. Don't meet them? No child for you! Have as many as you like, so long as you meet the requirements though.

What those requirements would be? I'd say they would be based on things like income, criminal record, education level, and age.

Will the police come and shoot your baby if you try to reproduce without being allowed?

[OopsReality]

Any argument about "doing something" about overpopulation carries the same implicit condemnation of those complaining about it.

Take whatever "solution" you propose, and take this to heart;

You first.

You think the unworthy should be culled? Put yourself at the top of that list. Hell, take that step on your own perogative.
You think people should be sterilized to lower birth rates? Have yourself sterilized.
And so forth.

If you're not willing to take that step, you've got no business calling on anyone else to do so for your benefit.

But doing things takes effort, it's so much easier to complain about something and let other people know of your perceived discomfort (plot twist, I doubt this "subject" adversely affects OP in any way) while doing nothing.

What kind of monster are you, to imply in any way they should be held to their own standards

[Ubermensch]

It's not a problem and won't be, on a global scale. Overpopulation is only a problem in places that don't have sufficient infrastructure to sustain the population in a crisis or the scientific advancements to remedy such issues like more developed counries do.

Bingo.

And with the way our society's system is built, overpopulation will become a problem for the developed world like it is for the undeveloped world. Simply because the concept of money, employment and taxes isn't going to match up with how many people there are going to be in say, an 1 trillion population. You're not going to be able to afford to sustain all of them because not everybody will be employed meaning the strain on the employed will be greater and will reach a point where they cannot sustain, even with heightened hours worked, taxes and wage cuts.

You're not going to have the necessary technology nor the money to build infrastructure including multiple new cities along with hospitals, homes, roads, social services/care, security, entertainment centers and so on. You're going to have to deal with a mixture of cultures, violent people and a marked increase in mentally ill people which will all cause chaos on the streets and with the lack of security services to enforce laws, yeah.

Also, even if you DID obtain the necessary money, tech and manpower to pull this off, you still cannot get the whole planet to agree to spend their money on the necessary things in order to make overpopulation a non-issue. You can't get them to agree it even is an issue. You can't get them to build things they don't want to build and then there's the issue of having to relocate people if the population gets wildly out of control in cities or towns.

It's just a horrifying system that won't work for us for much longer and overpopulation is just one of the many reasons why this is the case.

[Karaoke]

Prices rising due to supply and demand. Pollution due to manufacturing and industry. The total carbon footprint of the world. Ever increasing health costs. Collapsing social systems. It all rests on the shoulders of one factor: the ammount of people on this planet.

So while were all busy throwing the blame ball around and patching consequences of global overpopulation, the actual problem gets overlooked: the overpopulation itself.

Why is that? Is there no-one with the balls to say: you can fuck all you want, but up till 2050 you can only have one kid? Sure, youd be kicked in your autonomy balls but c'mon, it's for survival of the species!

It would also mean less uneducated people and less religious people so it's a win-win for everyone!

I don't want to see it happen in my lifetime, but if shit really hit the fan that could be a good thing for humanity in the long run. Forged by fire/necessity is the mother of invention kind of thing.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Ive always thought this.

When a human is born, a chip should be implanted in them that doesnt allow them to reproduce. Do it to boys and girls, just to have a redundant back up of this poliocy. If you can pass a test and have a job to support a child, the chips can be removed.

What if I take mine out by myself? Am I to be murdered?

[Ubermensch]

That's factually untrue. The long term sustainable feeding of a larger population especially in the changing environmental conditions is resource intensive.

But then again, you are that loon, who thinks that biodiversity is unnecessary.

I'm sorry to nitpick but it really grinds my gears when people on here say stuff like "factually" or "objectively" or "categorically" before they write "true" or "false" in their posts. It's so stupid and it's an unnecessary extension when the word "true" or "false" already covers it. I get that it gives your post the appearance of integrity and makes it sound like it has a good argument but damn does that annoy me.

I mean you said "factually untrue", the word "untrue" already covers it, I mean, it's the "truth", that's a definition of a fact itself.

Anyway, back on topic.

[I Push Buttons]

We just need to adjust to the fact that zero population growth and eventually population decline is inevitable (referring specifically to the west here) and we need to make that adjustment now.

People constantly go on about how the west needs to import tens of millions of people from the third world to provide for/replace our aging population... Ok then who provides for and replaces them as they age? The population can't just expanding infinitely forever. Its especially laughable considering the people advocating this are usually simultaneously the most vocal environmentalists as well; those two things are in direct conflict with each other, more and more people, especially in the west, is more and more destructive to the environment.

Throw on top the supposed looming automation boom, where most of the work those people hope to do will be going away... The end result being that instead of tens of millions of additional workers paying into the system you will have tens of millions more people who need to be provided for by the system.

[Alexeht]

overpopulation is a hoax just like "climate change(global warming)", also no one have a right to decide if someone will have children or not, gtfo with that commie BS.

[Boole]

Once upon a time, overpopulation was simply a matter of only the fittest would survive.

Nowadays, it's anyone and everyone deemed fit to survive (by others).

I suppose it comes down to philosophy much more than anything else. A species survives with only the healthiest and strongest allowed to procreate.

Obviously this has changed much in the past decades.

I'm not trying to be offensive to anyone, but I'll just say it. Substandard people breed many other substandard people in large quantities. Whereas the people who are actually valuable to society breed selectively.

This will likely be offense .. but that is just how people view their "rights" above Darwinian philosophies.

Cut me some slack, it was already a touchy topic.

Winner winner chicken dinner, right here.

The basic problem is that Stupid Should Hurt. In today's society, it doesn't anymore. This will be the end of all of us.

[prwraith]

I mean we produce more food than we can eat, we just suck at getting it to those who need to eat.

We had literal LOADS of empty lands, but people want to live on the coasts.

Overpopulation...i think not.

- - - Updated - - -

The basic problem is that Stupid Should Hurt. In today's society, it doesn't anymore. This will be the end of all of us.

Why?

10char

[Alexeht]

Ive always thought this.

When a human is born, a chip should be implanted in them that doesnt allow them to reproduce. Do it to boys and girls, just to have a redundant back up of this poliocy. If you can pass a test and have a job to support a child, the chips can be removed.

thats sounds like some commie/nazi BS. what next? bombs inside our skulls which blowup when you stop paying taxes?

- - - Updated - - -

Any argument about "doing something" about overpopulation carries the same implicit condemnation of those complaining about it.

Take whatever "solution" you propose, and take this to heart;

You first.

You think the unworthy should be culled? Put yourself at the top of that list. Hell, take that step on your own perogative.
You think people should be sterilized to lower birth rates? Have yourself sterilized.
And so forth.

If you're not willing to take that step, you've got no business calling on anyone else to do so for your benefit.

I agree, this is what happen when people think they are better than others...

[Cradyz]

I mean we produce more food than we can eat, we just suck at getting it to those who need to eat.

We had literal LOADS of empty lands, but people want to live on the coasts.

Overpopulation...i think not.

- - - Updated - - -

It's more like spreading the techniques and building the infrastructure required in less developed places that will solve the few at risk of famine places left. Food really isn't an issue at all.

People want to live on the coasts because the big cities are on the coast. Big cities is where most of the action is.

[Mihalik]

I'm sorry to nitpick but it really grinds my gears when people on here say stuff like "factually" or "objectively" or "categorically" before they write "true" or "false" in their posts. It's so stupid and it's an unnecessary extension when the word "true" or "false" already covers it. I get that it gives your post the appearance of integrity and makes it sound like it has a good argument but damn does that annoy me.

I mean you said "factually untrue", the word "untrue" already covers it, I mean, it's the "truth", that's a definition of a fact itself.

Anyway, back on topic.

There's a difference between something being factually, objectively and subjectively untrue. His statement in a certain context is both objectively and subjectively true, but if further contextualized with a larger data set (facts) than it becomes untrue.

Semantics matter. And I intentionally try to be as exacting as possible so I don't have to go back and have a retarded argument about semantics.

[Ubermensch]

There's a difference between something being factually, objectively and subjectively untrue. His statement in a certain context is both objectively and subjectively true, but if further contextualized with a larger data set (facts) than it becomes untrue.

Semantics matter. And I intentionally try to be as exacting as possible so I don't have to go back and have a retarded argument about semantics.

Do you really think he's thinking as deeply as you are? Not everybody here is out to mind-fuck each other with semantics and psychological warfare to slowly wear down their enemies. Like the usual suspects, like Endus or Machismo that get a high out of goalpost moving their arguments and then gaslighting the other guy into thinking he's goalpost moving. There are still sane people left on this forum, thankfully, however rare it is to encounter them.

These people live just to have arguments for the sake of having arguments, absolutely asinine and out of touch with reality.

[Stormdash]

Prices rising due to supply and demand. Pollution due to manufacturing and industry. The total carbon footprint of the world. Ever increasing health costs. Collapsing social systems. It all rests on the shoulders of one factor: the ammount of people on this planet.

So while were all busy throwing the blame ball around and patching consequences of global overpopulation, the actual problem gets overlooked: the overpopulation itself.

Why is that? Is there no-one with the balls to say: you can fuck all you want, but up till 2050 you can only have one kid? Sure, youd be kicked in your autonomy balls but c'mon, it's for survival of the species!

It would also mean less uneducated people and less religious people so it's a win-win for everyone!

NARRATOR: Overpopulation has been self-apparent mathematical bullshit since barely a few years after it became the big hype in the 70s, but people keep talking about it.

[Shadowferal]

Overpopulation hype...like climate change? hmf...
Sure the world can have more, but who the hell wants to live in such a world?

[kasuke06]

Any argument about "doing something" about overpopulation carries the same implicit condemnation of those complaining about it.

Take whatever "solution" you propose, and take this to heart;

You first.

You think the unworthy should be culled? Put yourself at the top of that list. Hell, take that step on your own perogative.
You think people should be sterilized to lower birth rates? Have yourself sterilized.
And so forth.

If you're not willing to take that step, you've got no business calling on anyone else to do so for your benefit.

So if you're not willing to take the third world into your own home directly why are you demanding others import it?