Is overpopulation of the planet a problem?

[KittenKoder]

No. We are not even close to any sort of critical tipping point. There are still an abundance of resources, and human ingenuity is making those resources either less relevant or more efficient. There are still vast expanses of this country which are virtually empty.

Farmland is not empty, and we need at least a functional ecosystem to survive, so technically that's not empty either. Don't think the deserts count either, if we covered most of them with cities (what few areas can actually have permanent structures) then we are not only still destroying an ecosystem we are also upsetting the natural environment. It's short sighted to think that just because there are still areas without big cities that there is a "lot of empty space".

There is a ton of empty space on this planet. Ever been to Canada? How about Siberia? Highly dense regions such as Holland and Japan produce sufficient amounts of food to feed their own countries. You could pretty much feed the world by what is produced in the Ohio Valley. Agricultural policy is tremendously inefficient, and the output of food could be much, much higher if efficient farming methods were introduced to much of Europe, let alone to the third world.

As for water, there is an enormous supply of water in the world. I come from a province in Canada that has more water in the north than land, and has so many lakes, most of them are not named.

This is the global price of commodities adjusted for inflation, before oil fell from $147 a barrel. If you were to extend this graph from 1800 to the present day - and somewhere I have such a chart but am too lazy to find it - it would show the same picture of a continuously declining price with the occasional price spike.

So ... then you would think that everyone should move into these areas which are not easy to live in without using more resources ... yeah, that would pretty much increase the amount of space we ruin not the reverse.

 

[Amanda]

I question the sanity of the one percent who clicked on "no, not ever" in terms of overpopulation.

Of course the planet is overpopulated. And the open areas people talk about? There's a reason they're open: Few resources. Most cities were built in an area that was originally abundant in resources (and on water for shipping purposes).


Having more than three kids expands the population. There are a lot of people out there who think they're dogs and want a litter.


Be fruitful and multiply?

Check. Done.

No one has ever accused me of being sane.

I think it's all in how you look at the term "over populated". If we ever get over populated the earth will take care of the problem and balance will be restored. So, no, not ever. Oh sure, we may be uncomfortable, but if we find the pain unbearable then we'll come up with solutions. Would it be nice if we came up with solutions before there was pain? Sure. But it wouldn't help...

Think of all the time saving devices we have, and yet we are always pressed for time. Something new comes out that saves us 10 minutes a day, boom those 10 minutes get taken up by something else.

So, sure we could come up with kinds of ways to make the planet more livable for more people but what will happen then? Yup, more people! Then what? We're right back to where we are now.

Tho it does seem like there's a pile of money to be made from the whole "Green" movement...

 

[KittenKoder]

I question the sanity of the one percent who clicked on "no, not ever" in terms of overpopulation.

Of course the planet is overpopulated. And the open areas people talk about? There's a reason they're open: Few resources. Most cities were built in an area that was originally abundant in resources (and on water for shipping purposes).


Having more than three kids expands the population. There are a lot of people out there who think they're dogs and want a litter.


Be fruitful and multiply?

Check. Done.

No one has ever accused me of being sane.

I think it's all in how you look at the term "over populated". If we ever get over populated the earth will take care of the problem and balance will be restored. So, no, not ever. Oh sure, we may be uncomfortable, but if we find the pain unbearable then we'll come up with solutions. Would it be nice if we came up with solutions before there was pain? Sure. But it wouldn't help...

Think of all the time saving devices we have, and yet we are always pressed for time. Something new comes out that saves us 10 minutes a day, boom those 10 minutes get taken up by something else.

So, sure we could come up with kinds of ways to make the planet more livable for more people but what will happen then? Yup, more people! Then what? We're right back to where we are now.

Tho it does seem like there's a pile of money to be made from the whole "Green" movement...

Aah ... nature is taking care of the problem, but as humans we keep fighting it, all the vaccines are one way. We fear death so much that they will do anything to keep alive, regardless of the fact that nature has a natural way to decrease excess populations, viruses. This is why viruses tend to thrive in higher populated areas, they evolved that way. Everything alive has a place in nature, and a purpose, it's a well oiled machine, one which we keep throwing monkey wrenches into. However we may just be a mistake in nature because we are also capable of reproducing too easily compared to other species. This poses a huge problem and responsibility which people do not take seriously enough. Thing is, we can use up all the resources, then we'll die off completely and become extinct, but nature will just right itself after no matter what, all the while no one will want to face the cold hard fact, the root of all our biggest problems, our population is growing too quickly now and there are not enough people dying of natural causes anymore.

 

[GHook93]

Hmm... ok, then charge what it costs and when it gets to be too much people will cut back until things go back into balance.

One of the things is the rest of the world, particularly the 3rd world doesn't protect its fresh water, doesn't have the resources to adequately purify their water and many of these countries reproduce like rabbits!

I don't mean to sound harsh, but they will do what they do and sooner or later balance will be restored. It will work that way whether we like the results or not. In CMM's description of how water could be unaffordable, yes, people will suffer, but when there is no way for people to pay more someone will come up with a way to sell it cheaper, or people will find ways to conserve more, or consume less. It will eventually balance because it has to.

Not sure that might be a little above my pay grade. However if we jump from 6.7 billion to 27 billion over the next 100 yrs I think we are in for a rude awakening when it comes to water, or better stated lack there of!

 

[Care4all]

One of the things is the rest of the world, particularly the 3rd world doesn't protect its fresh water, doesn't have the resources to adequately purify their water and many of these countries reproduce like rabbits!

I don't mean to sound harsh, but they will do what they do and sooner or later balance will be restored. It will work that way whether we like the results or not. In CMM's description of how water could be unaffordable, yes, people will suffer, but when there is no way for people to pay more someone will come up with a way to sell it cheaper, or people will find ways to conserve more, or consume less. It will eventually balance because it has to.

Not sure that might be a little above my pay grade. However if we jump from 6.7 billion to 27 billion over the next 100 yrs I think we are in for a rude awakening when it comes to water, or better stated lack there of!

It doesn't have to come to that...better educating those in underdeveloped countries about birth control measures could go a long way...

And in all westernized countries, our birth rates are already on a decline due to birth control.

I think the boom in population the past century will not happen again, when the war ended back then, the birth control pill was not legal in this country....or in many of the other countries celebrating life and the win of the war.

Just something to consider...

And yes, I can see where growing at the rate we had been growing with our population could be a serious problem, but I do not believe this is the case in all westernized countries at this present time because our birth rates are diminishing and are not even replenishing the Boomers...

So, we are not over populated right now...and we have the potential of being over populated in the third world, if we do not address the situation....or do not succeed in teaching these women and men about various birth control methods...is where I stand on this....

Care

 

[Amanda]

One of the things is the rest of the world, particularly the 3rd world doesn't protect its fresh water, doesn't have the resources to adequately purify their water and many of these countries reproduce like rabbits!

I don't mean to sound harsh, but they will do what they do and sooner or later balance will be restored. It will work that way whether we like the results or not. In CMM's description of how water could be unaffordable, yes, people will suffer, but when there is no way for people to pay more someone will come up with a way to sell it cheaper, or people will find ways to conserve more, or consume less. It will eventually balance because it has to.

Not sure that might be a little above my pay grade. However if we jump from 6.7 billion to 27 billion over the next 100 yrs I think we are in for a rude awakening when it comes to water, or better stated lack there of!

Yup, a rude awakening indeed.

 

[KittenKoder]

I don't mean to sound harsh, but they will do what they do and sooner or later balance will be restored. It will work that way whether we like the results or not. In CMM's description of how water could be unaffordable, yes, people will suffer, but when there is no way for people to pay more someone will come up with a way to sell it cheaper, or people will find ways to conserve more, or consume less. It will eventually balance because it has to.

Not sure that might be a little above my pay grade. However if we jump from 6.7 billion to 27 billion over the next 100 yrs I think we are in for a rude awakening when it comes to water, or better stated lack there of!

It doesn't have to come to that...better educating those in underdeveloped countries about birth control measures could go a long way...

And in all westernized countries, our birth rates are already on a decline due to birth control.

I think the boom in population the past century will not happen again, when the war ended back then, the birth control pill was not legal in this country....or in many of the other countries celebrating life and the win of the war.

Just something to consider...

And yes, I can see where growing at the rate we had been growing with our population could be a serious problem, but I do not believe this is the case in all westernized countries at this present time because our birth rates are diminishing and are not even replenishing the Boomers...

So, we are not over populated right now...and we have the potential of being over populated in the third world, if we do not address the situation....or do not succeed in teaching these women and men about various birth control methods...is where I stand on this....

Care

The current population is "on the brink" so to speak, it's too close and is the reason why in spite of our country producing so much food many other areas are starving to death still.

The better education and all that is just a pipe dream, the best solution is actually to stop caring, no matter how inhumane that sounds. It's because of caring too much that this is now a real issue, we save every life we can from everything that threatens it. Nature has a lot of checks and balances to prevent overpopulation of any species from happening, it was almost fool proof, until we advanced medical science too far. I love science, but sometimes we don't think enough before we advance it. Notice that in most countries they get medical aid from everyone who has it without so much as a whimper. Natural disasters, starvation, disease, etc. are all natural results of overpopulation which are suppose to cull the herd to a more sustainable level.

 

[auditor0007]

There is still room for more growth. However, we are closing in our peak population. Here is an interesting question. What will happen once we do find the need to reduce our population? How will doing so effect the economy? Economic growth has basically always relied upon population growth. Everyone could fair better when the economic pie is growing. What happens when it begins to shrink?

The good news is that if we do reach a point where over-population does become a threat, the solution is quite simple, at least mathmatically. The world population could be cut in half within one generation if it were absolutely necessary.

 

[Care4all]

Not sure that might be a little above my pay grade. However if we jump from 6.7 billion to 27 billion over the next 100 yrs I think we are in for a rude awakening when it comes to water, or better stated lack there of!

It doesn't have to come to that...better educating those in underdeveloped countries about birth control measures could go a long way...

And in all westernized countries, our birth rates are already on a decline due to birth control.

I think the boom in population the past century will not happen again, when the war ended back then, the birth control pill was not legal in this country....or in many of the other countries celebrating life and the win of the war.

Just something to consider...

And yes, I can see where growing at the rate we had been growing with our population could be a serious problem, but I do not believe this is the case in all westernized countries at this present time because our birth rates are diminishing and are not even replenishing the Boomers...

So, we are not over populated right now...and we have the potential of being over populated in the third world, if we do not address the situation....or do not succeed in teaching these women and men about various birth control methods...is where I stand on this....

Care

The current population is "on the brink" so to speak, it's too close and is the reason why in spite of our country producing so much food many other areas are starving to death still.

The better education and all that is just a pipe dream, the best solution is actually to stop caring, no matter how inhumane that sounds. It's because of caring too much that this is now a real issue, we save every life we can from everything that threatens it. Nature has a lot of checks and balances to prevent overpopulation of any species from happening, it was almost fool proof, until we advanced medical science too far. I love science, but sometimes we don't think enough before we advance it. Notice that in most countries they get medical aid from everyone who has it without so much as a whimper. Natural disasters, starvation, disease, etc. are all natural results of overpopulation which are suppose to cull the herd to a more sustainable level.

I don't believe your solution will ever happen kitten, I think people will try to help the least among us until the money runs out....there will always be someone to help.

And even with all of this help, one person dies every 2 seconds from starvation, water born disease, or AIDS....

I believe as Amanda expressed so well, imo...nature, or the economic system will eventually 'correct'' the imballance of the human population within nature....whether it be diseases in the 3rd world, 9.4 earthquake in sumatra or pompei, the swine flu, the black plague, Mega Tsunami, or yellowstone's super volcano errupting....or shortages of drinking water.....

deaths will occur that pulls us back in to the sustainable stage...

I don't see our helping other human beings in need as something that needs to stop...if we can sustain more humans in decent conditions because we learned how to continually recycle our grey water, or how to harvest the rain for drinking water, or to produce three times the crop of produce per square mile or to live and manufacture on green energy, then this means the earth CAN handle it....

There will always be those who just don't make it....the one person every 2 seconds that dies because we could not reach them or help them....and new plagues will arise as well, such as the MRCER staph bug, Mercer...where antibiotics just can't beat it, or am unstopable flu etc!

And i disagree with you, regarding birth control in the third world...i don't care where women are....for the most part...if they can take a pill to help plan their pregnancies, they will... if they could put a rubber on the hubby to prevent AIDS they would imho...it is a matter of educating them...THEY DON'T enjoy seeing 5 of their 7 children they labored and gave birth to, die....imo.

and if we taught these people how to feed themselves and give them the tools to do such, they will....instead our Food corps. get rich off of governments worldwide, buying food and water for them....year after year, decade after decade....without ever giving them the tools to provide for themselves....

if these countries could sustain themselves then our food could go farther, for us....

I guess I am saying, that it is in our nature to want to ''Save the World, and all within it'', especially humans...

and although i see us becoming a little more callous and waxed cold regarding our fellow citizens, growing....i can not see us being the Levite or Priest in the Good Samaritan parable who passed by and left for dead, someone critically injured on the side of the road.

care

 

[JohnStOnge]

We live in a self-regulating system. The population will increase to a certain point then it will crash. Is that a problem? No. It's just the way it is.

And, no, there's nothing we can do to stop it from happening and you shouldn't be worried about trying to force people to limit the number of children they have.

 

[seaninomaha]

Humans, as well as all other creatures on this planet have a need for survival which is in the genectic code. Since this is the highest priority of every living thing each species will use a different method to try and reach that goal. Not all succeed. Usually those species which fail are those which were unable to adapt to changing conditions. Some died out due to a disaster that was world wide and world changing. Homo Sapien Sapien may be the first species that can change the natural order and extend life beyond natural means. If this is the case, then Humans will be the first species to control its own destiny.

Since the end of the last ice age Human life span has increased almost two and a half times what it was during the ice age. The population went from around 10 million (estimate/guess) to 6.5 billion today. Humans went from hunter/gathering tribes, to a self sustaining agricultural based species. Humans went from a high calorie (need) based diet due to daily activity, to a high calorie (not needed) sedentary lifestyle. Lifespan has increased as needed daily activity decreased. The reason this has occurred is human ingenuity. Science, and engineering. Although the main reason why humans have reached this place in the evolutionary chain may be because we developed the ability to use language.

If you look at science and engineering you may come to realize that they were always tools that have been available to every species, but humans were the only ones able to use them. By using these tools we have been able to domesticate plant and animals which enables us to live a longer (maybe) healthier life than our ancestors. People talk of viruses as a way to control population. The problem with that is you need other circumstances like famines or poor living conditions for a virus to thrive. This has happened many times in the past, but today with science we may be able to curb the damage done by a virus by creating a vaccine. I know we have created resistant strains, but I am only talking natural virus here.

What may be the downfall for mankind does not come from the natural world, but from our own creation. That is economics. If you look at almost every problem humans have it will stem from economics. Yes the United States currently can produce enough food to feed the world, but is it economically feasible? Is it in the best economic interest of a government to send food to an African nation which is over populated and stricken by drought? The world has become tied together by economics as has been seen recently with the stock markets around the world. It is easy to envision what the world would be like if the United States fell under a long drought that devestated the corn and grain belt. A lot of the world would either starve or they would have to find ways to grow food in areas that may not be able to sustain it for very long. Then what? More engineering would be needed to grow food.

As for water, the key here is not the amount of fresh water available, it is about managing the water that is available. Though the amount of easily available fresh water is limited and will become even more limited in the future. As mountain glaciers continue to recede the availabilty of fresh water will recede along with it. As the aquifers of the world are pumped dry, our natural springs will also run dry as they are tied together. When it comes to desalinization, well economics become tied directly with the solution. To desalinate water you must first boil the water and turn it into a vapor. You then remove the salt that remains in solid form, then condense the water vapor back into liquid form. It takes a lot of BTU's of energy to do this on a mass scale.

BTU = the amount of heat it takes to raise 1 pound of water 1degree farenheight.

I could go into a whole dissertation on sensible heat, and then on latent heat to change the state from water to vapor but I will not. What I will tell you is that desalinizing water currently and for the forseeable future will not be economically feasible. It takes a lot of energy to remove salt from water and the return on investment would be too low for any company to try a for profit endeavour. As for a government doing this, the cost would be unbelievably high which would mean we would pay a lot of money in taxes to have this luxury in our lives. Once again the economics may lead to many deaths due to lack of water for drinking, livestock, and food production. The end of human society as we know it may come not from nature but from the inability to turn a profit. -Sean

 

[Newby]

Yes, I think we are wasteful people, and a green movement of businesses needs to take place in our country....
When I was on vacay in Bermuda, the roofs of all homes were built in a manner where they harvested the rain for their drinking water...the tiles on the roof with their intertwined covered gutter and filter type system brought the water to a cistern in their lower level basements which was then filtered and purified before being pumped in to the house.

There was no city water and there was no fresh water under ground, this was too salty so every home is built with these Hip Rooves with tile and the water capturing system....

EVERY HOME IN FLORIDA and many others in the south, should have this type of system....capturing a good deal of their drinking water in this manner just from afternoon thunderstorms...

We also should retrofit all of our homes to STOP FLUSHING DRINKING WATER down our TOILETS, a grey water system should be installed.

And cutting back on these bottled water companies taking our own drinking water from us and selling it around the world...

There are many other ways to preserve our water and use our water better and whole industries are out there for the taking in this kind of green industry...we just need to focus on it....

I think we are very overpopulated in other areas of the world, but I also know that cutting back our own population in the USA will solve NONE of those area's problems....though ingenuity could.

Care

I completely agree with you Care, also with recycling there are so many more things we could do. The problem is that the environmental movement has been hi-jacked and is being used for political control and financial gain instead of what it was intended to be. As soon as certian organizations figured out the billions of dollars to be made on a carbon tax they took over the environmental movement and have put it in a very poor light. It's putting the rest of the environmental movement in a bad light as well unfortunately.

 

[Newby]

Anyone ever see this?

Soylent Green (1973)

 

[Amanda]

Yes, I think we are wasteful people, and a green movement of businesses needs to take place in our country....
When I was on vacay in Bermuda, the roofs of all homes were built in a manner where they harvested the rain for their drinking water...the tiles on the roof with their intertwined covered gutter and filter type system brought the water to a cistern in their lower level basements which was then filtered and purified before being pumped in to the house.

There was no city water and there was no fresh water under ground, this was too salty so every home is built with these Hip Rooves with tile and the water capturing system....

EVERY HOME IN FLORIDA and many others in the south, should have this type of system....capturing a good deal of their drinking water in this manner just from afternoon thunderstorms...

We also should retrofit all of our homes to STOP FLUSHING DRINKING WATER down our TOILETS, a grey water system should be installed.

And cutting back on these bottled water companies taking our own drinking water from us and selling it around the world...

There are many other ways to preserve our water and use our water better and whole industries are out there for the taking in this kind of green industry...we just need to focus on it....

I think we are very overpopulated in other areas of the world, but I also know that cutting back our own population in the USA will solve NONE of those area's problems....though ingenuity could.

Care

I completely agree with you Care, also with recycling there are so many more things we could do. The problem is that the environmental movement has been hi-jacked and is being used for political control and financial gain instead of what it was intended to be. As soon as certian organizations figured out the billions of dollars to be made on a carbon tax they took over the environmental movement and have put it in a very poor light. It's putting the rest of the environmental movement in a bad light as well unfortunately.

Exactly. I'm all for recycling, etc., I'm not for political agendas that try to make money and gain power and influence through fear and intimidation tactics.

 

[auditor0007]

Ok, here are my water questions...

Where does it go?

Why can't we get it back from there?


I ask because it's my understanding that unless we shoot something out into space it's here... somewhere.

Of all the water on Earth, only 1% is usable, accessible, fresh water. If we ever developed a cheaper desalinization process, things would be much diffferent. However, with only 1% being usable, and a growing populaton, there just isn't going to be enough to go around at any given time.

 

[Amanda]

Ok, here are my water questions...

Where does it go?

Why can't we get it back from there?


I ask because it's my understanding that unless we shoot something out into space it's here... somewhere.

Of all the water on Earth, only 1% is usable, accessible, fresh water. If we ever developed a cheaper desalinization process, things would be much diffferent. However, with only 1% being usable, and a growing populaton, there just isn't going to be enough to go around at any given time.

Sounds like a business opportunity.

 

[Zebra]

From my point of view, there can be no doubt: overpopulation of the planet is the biggest problem we, and all life on the planet, face. It might be the root source of increased wars over resources, the destruction of the rain forests, the over harvestation of the oceans, water and food shortages, accelerated global warming, increased crime rates, extinction of animal species, the spread of HIV/AIDS, and perhaps much more stife than listed here.

Yet, some people don't think so. My girlfriend's 30 year old cousin just had his 5th child. I know plenty of young people who have had three children. The birthrate among hispanics is far higher than it is among any other US ethnicity. The birthrate among the lower income classes is higher than the middle or higher classes. The global birthrate scale is tipped heavily toward South America, Africa, China, India, and Southeast Asia, the developing world and third world countries where resources are rare, education is either poor or uncommon, and the governments corrupt or powerless to do much to address the problems the nations face.

Do you think overpopulation is a problem? Vote!

If yes, what do you think could be done to slow or reverse it?

If no, why?

yes!

 

[Woodznutz]

Cities are over populated not the world still plenty of open space out there,maybe a limit on city populations is in order LOLOLOLO

Nothing good happens when people move to the country. Keep them rascals in the city where they belong.

 

[Woodznutz]

Ok, here are my water questions...

Where does it go?

Why can't we get it back from there?


I ask because it's my understanding that unless we shoot something out into space it's here... somewhere.

A lot of it soaks deep into the ground, never to be seen again.

 

[fncceo]

I don't worry about over population. I live in a gated community .