Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up. That's a good thing. You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement. Kids and careers in america do not mix.
Only minorities that won't work and illegals. (-:Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
There is plenty of food to go around for everyone. It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
So, no. We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water. We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up. That's a good thing. You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement. Kids and careers in america do not mix.
And because a lot of those kids would die. Infant mortality has taken a nose dive. That's a good thing, as it means in order to have 2 kids make it to adulthood you probably only need to have 2. In the old days you'd probably need to have 3-4 kids to make sure you had 2 make it.As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up. That's a good thing. You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement. Kids and careers in america do not mix.
In the old days folks had a lot of kids so they could help raise enough to eat.
And because a lot of those kids would die. Infant mortality has taken a nose dive. That's a good thing, as it means in order to have 2 kids make it to adulthood you probably only need to have 2. In the old days you'd probably need to have 3-4 kids to make sure you had 2 make it.As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up. That's a good thing. You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement. Kids and careers in america do not mix.
In the old days folks had a lot of kids so they could help raise enough to eat.
Also, if you get married at 17 (my grandparents) I guarantee you're going to have more kids. You have a longer span where kids are possible as well as a lot of hormones right there are the start that taper off as you get older.
That's what I said, correcting it for Texas's density. With New Jersey's, which I meant to say in the first place, it would be around 700 million.The Sage of Main Street I think you might not realize just how huge Alaska is. 663,267 sq miles for 70,000,000 folks is 105 persons per square mile... or roughly the population density of the state of Ohio, and still not at the top density for the US (New Jersey)
The Thrilla From WasillaGRRR stupid thing... Sorry bout that
I live on the far side of the lake there. I love my city very much(and yea that's most of the city there on the left side, we're kind of a suburb of JBER military base)
Most of our money is oil and tourism
Whoever Controls Language Controls ThoughtI think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
There is plenty of food to go around for everyone. It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
So, no. We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water. We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
First, those who starve, come and get North America's food surplus. And don't forget to pay for it.
Second, similar "problems" were voiced 40-50 years ago, claiming that cooling of the Earth will lead to global hunger.
Third, water does not disappear. Any kid in third grade who knows about the tale of Water Drop knows this.
Fourth, desalinating sea water only works for countries who are indecently rich with natural wealth they never earned.
Additionally: If you object to coal, work on developing clean way to burn it, rather than daydreaming in wind mills and cloudy day sun panels.
BTW, where does your Prius or $80,00.00 Tesla get its power?
Prometheus Spat UponNecessity is the mother of invention.Is see. Then it's a matter of will. Which we don't have. Because we are unable to feel enough to make the the changes needed. Unable. Lack of ability.
Nothing in Nature Is Where It Belongs Unless Man Put It ThereI think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
There is plenty of food to go around for everyone. It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
So, no. We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water. We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
G,
Don't normally disagree with you but on this one I must, even only slightly...
The problem with over-population is not humans directly but on the environment we live in...
"According to a 1998 survey of 400 biologists conducted by New York's American Museum of Natural History, nearly 70% believed that the Earth is currently in the early stages of a human-caused mass extinction,[40] known as the Holocene extinction. In that survey, the same proportion of respondents agreed with the prediction that up to 20% of all living populations could become extinct within 30 years (by 2028). Biologist E. O. Wilson estimated [10] in 2002 that if current rates of human destruction of the biosphere continue, one-half of all plant and animal species of life on earth will be extinct in 100 years.[41] More significantly, the current rate of global species extinctions is estimated as 100 to 1000 times "background" rates (the average extinction rates in the evolutionary time scale of planet Earth),[42][43]while future rates are likely 10,000 times higher.[43] However, some groups are going extinct much faster."
Look at Bees alone...
“The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world’s food, over 70 are pollinated by bees.”- UN report.
Lets face it we are humans and as a collective are idiots because we adhere to the lowest...
We will probably populate to the point a virus comes about and we probably killed the cure somewhere...
The Thrilla From WasillaGRRR stupid thing... Sorry bout that
I live on the far side of the lake there. I love my city very much
Most of our money is oil and tourism
From your command post
In an igloo
You'll turn Russian pilots
Into MiG-glue
The present excess of human population will inevitably lead to sudden reduction of numbers, doubtlessly involving widespread suffering.
I think it's sad people are no longer taking up bee keeping as a business.....I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
There is plenty of food to go around for everyone. It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
So, no. We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water. We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
G,
Don't normally disagree with you but on this one I must, even only slightly...
The problem with over-population is not humans directly but on the environment we live in...
"According to a 1998 survey of 400 biologists conducted by New York's American Museum of Natural History, nearly 70% believed that the Earth is currently in the early stages of a human-caused mass extinction,[40] known as the Holocene extinction. In that survey, the same proportion of respondents agreed with the prediction that up to 20% of all living populations could become extinct within 30 years (by 2028). Biologist E. O. Wilson estimated [10] in 2002 that if current rates of human destruction of the biosphere continue, one-half of all plant and animal species of life on earth will be extinct in 100 years.[41] More significantly, the current rate of global species extinctions is estimated as 100 to 1000 times "background" rates (the average extinction rates in the evolutionary time scale of planet Earth),[42][43]while future rates are likely 10,000 times higher.[43] However, some groups are going extinct much faster."
Look at Bees alone...
“The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world’s food, over 70 are pollinated by bees.”- UN report.
Lets face it we are humans and as a collective are idiots because we adhere to the lowest...
We will probably populate to the point a virus comes about and we probably killed the cure somewhere...
Like a high speed vehicle in a freeway, inertia means the stopping point is already far in front. The earth's population had already doubled two times in my lifetime. It cannot double again. Of course, anyone is free to believe anything one can imagine. Perhaps a kind and gentle Creator will intervene and spare humanity from natural law.
