Overpopulation

Glock17

We're constantly told about climate change and other environmental problems. We had COP 26 last year which discussed the environment. Greta Thunberg is constantly on the telly complaining (she never seems to have any solutions though). However no one ever discusses a key cure for protecting the environment....

Virtually every single environmental problem is made worse by overpopulation....... overpopulation increases greenhouse gasses, causes overfishing, causes species extinction, reduces forest etc.

It's time reducing the population was a world priority. There's little point trying to reduce the amount you drive etc if the world population is going up millions a week....

whisky_galore

But, but the economy and my pension.

zell12

China did it with their forced one child policy - now reversed

Tow

Overpopulation was the buzz word years ago, is no longer a problem in developed countries. Even China cannot get their citizens to have enough children to replace their ageing population. Once people become more educated the problem becomes the opposite. The new problem is who is going to pay the old's pensions.

Igotadose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404245#Comment_118404245

It's still a problem in developed countries. Children born in developed countries produce far more CO2 waste than in the 3rd World. US leads the way.

More education indeed leads to smaller families, but all western countries have growing populations and their infrastructure is strained. A global 1 child policy would ameliorate the impacts of global warming to some degree at this point, but it's likely too late.

Pawwed Rig

Gretta does have solutions tbf and it was echoed by David Attenborough in his documentary last year (or the year before). It involves everyone adopting a plant based vegan diet and the removal of fossil fuels.

The problem is that the appetite is not there to do what we have to do.

Mrs OBumble

Covid is mother nature's solution.

mickuhaha

The issue is not the population but the use of the earth's resources. If we moved from a country based approach to a united earth, we could build new cities in more appropriate locations on earth and move the populations to these cities. You would need to move to a per building ecosystem i.e. every building would need to be an apartment complex with school, office floors, laundry mat, restaurant, gym ect. The more specialised areas you would have in central locations with a regular rail system. The reason for this is to reduce movement of people and goods. The things we build or make would need to be recyclable or durable enough to last generations. Current buildings and structures have a lifespan of around 150 years max which is not very long in terms of things. We would have to give up consumerism as we know it.

Speak Now

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404268#Comment_118404268

Population is still rising so its a pretty poor solution.

Igotadose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404317#Comment_118404317

Countries don't have infrastructure to provide clean running water. I'd worry about that first before putting everyone in some sort of urban utopia that you're talking about. Plus, do you relo all those people living in areas that can't be terraformed to the environment you want?

Better to limit childbearing to reduce the number of humans suffering in the future.

Glock17

I suppose a few people here will remember Band Aid from1984. There was a famine in Ethiopia and the media classes raised money for them.

Ethiopia's population in 1984 was 39 million. In 2020 Ethiopia's population was 115 million... it's the same in more or less all of Africa.

I just dont see how population growth like this is sustainable....

People breed so quickly that they cut down forests etc for farmland and firewood. It means animals like rhino and elephants are likely to go extinct in Africa...

Igotadose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404411#Comment_118404411

The real mistake made was moving away from ZPG in the 60's. Pro-natalism is what's destroyed the environment. Too damn many people. We don't need more of them to produce 'smarter' ones. There are more than enough people. Should've been investing in reducing CO2 emissions when Keeling started publishing his data in the early 1960's.

kevthegaff

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404268#Comment_118404268

Could actually cause the opposite, with new medical technology developed from the covid crisis

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404471#Comment_118404471

But people in developed countries shouldn't?

Atlantic Dawn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404496#Comment_118404496

People in developed countries can't afford to have 7 kids.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404357#Comment_118404357

Is that you Kevin Myers?

(He got villified for some articles on the topic a decade or so ago)

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058225433/overpopulation

...its clearly obvious we re over producing, over consuming, and ultimately wasting an enormous amount of resources, its clearly obvious, our economic ideologies and beliefs are pure bullsh1t!

mickuhaha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404352#Comment_118404352

I don't think you got the point I was making. Most of the infrastructure we use at the moment was made in the last 150 years. Alot of it has been made to bring resources to area's where there were city's or towns and rebuild those cities and towns. This aslo includes fuel for heating and water. There are better locations on earth to build cities that would require less energy and resources for the long term. Also it is more economical from a transportation of resources point of view to have as many people in one area rather then spread out. You wouldn't be terraforming anything in the sense of the word. It's more important for humanity to begin working on long term projects. Like building a new city. You would pick the most ideal location for a city. Then you build the infrastructure required for the city i.e a rail line, water lines, electrical infrastructure ect and then you build the buildings on top of the infrastructure.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404501#Comment_118404501

And people in developing countries can?

banie01

Overpopulation and the BS surrounding it are an overly simplistic view of the issue that finds popularity with Stanley Johnson and Prince Charles.

In simple terms it's a tenuous extension of Malthusian economics, a thoroughly discredited but easy to grasp model of population growth and demand cycles, into a slogan. It is a theory based upon a food poverty cycle that has been debunked for 150yrs.

The issues around industrialization and the concurrent effect on environment have long been decoupled from population.

More efficient modes of manufacture, power generation and transport only further decouple the production/population link.

Population and in particular IMO population density in limited and constrained areas are an issue. The reduction of unpopulated areas and impact on biodiversity are an issue. In particular for Ireland? The sheer volume of one off housing encroaching upon land that could otherwise be left to nature and the concurrent encroachment that servicing such home involves.

Anyone who proclaims overpopulation as a root cause of current global issues? Is an Ill educated clown IMO.

Overproduction, overconsumption, Consumerism and the reduction of virgin wilderness are all incredibly more pervasive than any population growth concerns.

Hamachi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404268#Comment_118404268

What a peculiar comment.

Thelonious Monk

It's not developing countries that are destroying the planet, so whether they are having kids or not isn't really the issue. It's high polluting countries like Ireland that are the problem, the amount each one of us consume in rich countries dwarfs anything in developing countries by some measure.

We could halve the population of the planet, but if we continue living our totally unsustainable lifestyles the planet will be f*cked sooner or later anyway.

We need to change how we consume and how we live. Less meat and dairy, less flying, less buying stuff, degrowth of economies, rewilding... There are many solutions but people just want more and more and no one will vote for politicians with policies that will inconvenience them or lead them to having less spending power.

I find the overpopulation argument is used by a lot of people who are unwilling to make any changes.

B.A._Baracus

Ah, I'd be wiling to place a large wager that your average person is this world doesn't care one bit about environmental issues.

I mean, people are wrapped up in their own lives. Self interested. Self gain. Can you really expect someone like that to look past themselves....

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404836#Comment_118404836

I think you are dead on.

Just take this conversation for example and how much energy it consumes.

The energy of producing the device (phone usually), the energy of mining the materials that go into it.

The energy of the electricity to charge the device.

The energy used to support the wifi in the house 24/7/365

The energy for the ISP to give you internet access, be it in the home or 4g.

It all has to be generated some way, and cheap enough for it to be viable for us.

All for this to be on a message board blaming someone else about the state of the planet.

World population increased by 74,000,000 in 2021.

However there are precipitous drops in lots of the world now. I do study demographics and population statistics in general.

Some interesting figures (for nerds 😀)

World fertility is now approx 2.24 (with a replacement tfr (total fertility rate) of 2.1-2.2 needed) So in theory the population is stabilizing, albeit with a few decades of population momentum left.

The West, i.e Europe and America are now entering natural population decline. America may well have negative natural population growth in 2022. They were only about 200,000 positive in 2021.

East Asia is falling off a cliff and are in serious trouble. (Specifically China, Taiwan, Thailand, Japan etc.) There are rumours of an announcement by the Chinese government later in January of this year that their official fertility rate will be 1.1.

India is at replacement level following the publication of their latest 5 year household survey. They are at approximately 2.1, so realistically are below replacement now due to the need for a slightly higher replacement figure because of child mortality and sex imbalances. They will continue to add a few hundred million people to their population over the coming decades with the effects of population momentum.

Most of South America and the Caribbean is at or below replacement level.

The only areas of the world that are really higher are Africa and central Asian republics. The figures for Africa while also dropping relatively quickly are off the scales when compared to the rest of the world. Averaging about 4.5 in Sub-Saharan Africa, with some countries still around 6-7 children per women.

It will be interesting to see how Africa plays out over the next few decades, if they can sustain a massively increasingly population (UN suggests it could grow anywhere to 3-4 billion) or will mass migrations gather more speed and the continent fall asunder? 

Brussels Sprout

A Eugenics thread to kick off the New Year. Nice one OP!

Harryd225

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058225433/overpopulation

People are living far too long nowadays, them nursing homes are like a zombie apocalypse these days.

John Doe1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058225433/overpopulation

Overpopulation in Africa is also a contributing factor in the European migrant crisis.

There needs to be some financial penalty for countries with high levels of overpopulation.

Thelonious Monk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404968#Comment_118404968

What about financial penalties for countries with high levels of pollution and consumption? That's what is really putting the planet under strain, not poor Africans.

John Doe1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404971#Comment_118404971

Why not both?

Do you think that the fact that Africa's population is expected to double to 2 billion by 2050 is going to be a net positive for the world?

Also, they not poor as you said, do you think more poor people fighting over smaller and smaller resources will be benficial to Africans themselves?

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404968#Comment_118404968

Yes let's punish poor African families for having too many children in the hope that they will survive into adulthood, do well for themselves and help support the other members of their family.

All because I don't want more foreigners in my country.

John Doe1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405026#Comment_118405026

Of course, I am a racist, cheers for that.😆 Yeah lets let all 500 million Africans below the poverty line into Europe and see what positive outcomes that will have....you are a genius.

Africa is getting slightly richer and quality of life is getting better hence more children are surviving into adulthood. What is needed is more education and access to to contraception.

Richer countries need to do everything in its power to help Africa become more economically viable which will in turn stop overpopulation and lessen the strain on Europe of the migrant crisis.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405122#Comment_118405122

funnily enough, you ll find, the more we consume, the quicker we cause the likelihood of our extinction, you ll also find many of the jobs created from these activities are what graeber called 'bullsh1t jobs'!

Thelonious Monk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405122#Comment_118405122

Honestly are you completely insane? Do you think we can carry on as is, consuming the way we do? Even though resources are finite and we need the life support systems of the planet?

The accuracy of that Don't Look Up film is so scary.

Brucie Bonus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404268#Comment_118404268

i think the PRC's solution.

Glock17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404735#Comment_118404735

Tbh, I dont understand what point you're making?

The first part of your reply says overpopulation isnt an issue. The second part of your reply says it is?

IMO, anyone that doesnt accept overpopulation has an adverse on the environment is an ill educated clown.

joe40

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405248#Comment_118405248

We're going to get resources from other planets..... That is pure science fiction. A few rich guys flying straight up fo a few miles to get to the edge of our atmosphere is not space exploration.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405220#Comment_118405220

has a significant rise in unemployment truly been that disastrous during covid? many ive spoken to on pup have actually never been happier, getting to spend more time with loved ones, and doing what they truly want with their time! theres also evidence to support, many in these so called bullsh1t jobs are in fact deeply unhappy in doing so, leading to all sorts of social dysfunctions and mental health issues!

yes historically with such outcomes, in particular rapidly rising wealth inequality, in which we re now experiencing yet again, would have been 'solved' by conflicts and wars, funnily enough, we re slowly starting to realise, we dont actually have to do the war thing, we can simply just give people money, and try to reduce these inequalities, i.e. no need for the war thingy!

please explain how our trial run of ubi, isnt looking great?

excess consumption is rapidly increasing the likelihood of our extinction!

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405450#Comment_118405450

Population is not equal to population density or poor utilisation of land and resources due to encouraging low-density development. Ireland has a particular issue with low-density development and its poor resource utilisation.

Your comment skirts that link and misinterpets the point spectacularly though, so thinks for highlighting the need for clarification on my part 👍️

jackboy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405551#Comment_118405551

Free money is a fantasy. We have seriously damaged our economy in the last two years and will reap the pain in years to come.

Pa ElGrande

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058225433/overpopulation

Whose grandchild are you trying to prevent from being born? Yours or mine?

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405581#Comment_118405581

what free money, where? how have we damaged our economy?

jackboy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405590#Comment_118405590

😂 Are you serious.

Pa ElGrande

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404955#Comment_118404955

And they tend to follow a certain pattern

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_sXxZVPxg8

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405597#Comment_118405597

very! again, please explain, what free money, and how have we damaged our economy?

dublin49

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404836#Comment_118404836

totally agree,imagine a lot of those burnt out house owners in Colorado voted for climate denier Trump.We will always retain the ability to ignore threats that don't seem to directly threaten us until its too late.In general we align our principles with our personal interests,so if we deem climate risk low we are against banning petrol cars ,reducing meat intake ,flights etc ,until our neighbour's roof is blown off or massive coastal flooding nearby and then we miraculously see the light and demand the government take action immediately.

jackboy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405609#Comment_118405609

Of course things look great when vast sums of money are printed and just handed out. You do know the consequences of that though I hope.

Hospitality and tourism has been long term damaged. Our debt is now much bigger. Farming is under constant attack. All we have left is the multinationals but now with our corporate tax rates being dismantled the long term prospects for that is uncertain.

We are not going to be in a place where ubi can be considered.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118404971#Comment_118404971

The problem with that logic is that Africa (just as Asia is doing) still has to industrialise to become competitive on a global scene. Any "poor" or underdeveloped nation will seek to modernize it's infrastructure/economy, which will mean the implementation of industries that produce pollution due to the lesser costs involved (environmental "friendly" tech tends to be expensive).

Then there's the other side of the coin with underdeveloped nations in Africa, where we see agricultural practices which continue to contribute to desertification, contamination of water sources, etc. Education hasn't done much to prevent that from happening, nor have the moves towards modernisation.

The simple fact of the matter is that most areas need to modernise to provide standards of living comparable with Europe, and that will result in serious amounts of pollution, along with the damage to the local environment. Financial penalties will do nothing except to ensure a lasting bitterness towards western nations, because they're essentially making the lives of others worse, due to short sighted initiatives. Just look at the destruction of the textile industries in Africa, due to the export of used clothes by Western nations (into Africa under the guise of charity), ensuring the limitation of African economies, destroying economies in the process.

The entire human race is putting the planet under strain, and will continue to do so. We are a destructive species.

Still, we really need to move away from all these short-sighted and naive feel good gestures, that make little effort to truly understand the conditions that people, around the world, live by.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405641#Comment_118405641

you re eluding towards 'inflation', its important to realise why we re experiencing such a thing, again, its primarily due to supply side issues, as was the case in commonly used examples such as 'Zimbabwe'!

the 'handing' out of pup money actually provided our economy with critically needed 'liquidity', as the private sector money creation systems effectively shut down, due to the dramatic fall in the demand for private sector money, i.e. credit. the only way to counteract this was to move our economies towards our public money creation system, i.e. by running a deficit, and giving citizens the money, which in turn they spent into the economy, and are still doing so... oh yea, since this is now a part our national debt, most, if not all citizens will be paying this back through taxation, including these recipients. if we did not do so, more businesses would have collapsed, as there would have been less money spent into the economy, i.e. less money spent into these businesses, so we in fact saved many businesses, therefore jobs, and actually created some along the way, i.e. win win win.

oh corporation tax, one of my favorite topics! the biggest game of 'your it', particularly in relation to taxation, i.e. since they aint paying much, you re actually paying it, and the longer theyre not paying it, the more you re gonna pay it!

we re actually heading into a world whereby ubi might only be the only option, cause if we maintain the status quo, the whole lot will more than likely collapse!

joseywhales

No worries, we will be worrying about under population in 50-100 years.

jackboy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118405726#Comment_118405726

We have seen in the past that an attempt to maintain the status quo will be carried out at all costs. High taxes and austerity are on the way.