close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Risk of overpopulation

Discussion in 'Survival/Preparedness Forum' started by RWBlue, Mar 12, 2012.

  1. RWBlue

    RWBlue Mr. CISSP, CISA CLM

    23,521
    832
    Jan 24, 2004
    This is a theoretical question. I would like to see some out of the box thinking. I think I have the basic facts correct, if not let me know where I have it wrong along with a link to the correct info.

    The earth is only so large and only has so many resources. Some resources are renewable. Some resources do not renew for lifetimes.

    The population is growing. The people from more developed countries (better educated, more skilled) are not reproducing as fast as the less developed countries (less skilled, less educated). At the same time the baby boomer generation in America is getting older and dare I say dying off.

    There is more than enough food now to feed everyone on earth right now, but that will not be the case in the next 30 years.

    The questions I have come up with so far….
    Are my facts correct?
    Will there be a price correction as the baby boomer generation passes, will there be a price correction in America for property or …?
    Can something be done about the population/population control? Will the gov. do something to help or hurt the overpopulation? Should we do something to effect the population?
    Should we do something now with the understanding that the population will continue to grow?

    What are the odds of technology increasing to the point that we will have a colony on another planet in the next 30 years?
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2012
  2. Carry16

    Carry16

    579
    1
    Sep 7, 2004
    SW Missouri

  3. janice6

    janice6 Silver Member

    30,956
    11,437
    Apr 4, 2006
    minnesota
    This is the same story I got from the teacher when I was in grade school (1940's). She said when the earth's population got to four Billion people, everyone would starve.

    Aint gonna happen now either. Not while there's money to be made creating food.
     
  4. RWBlue

    RWBlue Mr. CISSP, CISA CLM

    23,521
    832
    Jan 24, 2004
    It looks like you are saying that this will never happen.

    Although my time frame may be wrong, this risk will come to pass sooner or later. Assuming we don't leave this planet, this risk will come to play. There is only so much technology can do.
     
  5. janice6

    janice6 Silver Member

    30,956
    11,437
    Apr 4, 2006
    minnesota

    I'm saying that there's always Soylent Green.

    (I never say Never)
     
  6. Devans0

    Devans0

    124
    0
    Oct 26, 2011
    Poorest countries have many children to insure that some will survive to take care of parents in their old age. As infant mortality drops and education increases, births. decline. Our capacity to grow food is far from tapped. Even progressing to a manual plow will increase food output to third world countries 10 fold. We are ate the threshold of creating plankton protein and fuel. That is a hundred fold increase of food production, and fuel too. The future doesn't have to be grim.

    Some countries will climb out of poverty and underdevelopment. Others will languish, held down and bled dry by the jackboots of despots. Food is a political weapon to deprive ones enemies of life, amidst plenty, rotting in warehouses. Life can be mean. There are no guarantees, or fairness doctrines.

    www.globalrichlist.com/ to see where you rate in world income....an eye opener.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2012
  7. racerford

    racerford

    4,667
    277
    Apr 22, 2003
    DFW area
    Over population is a self correcting situation. It happens in nature all the time. We are more mobile that most animals and have opposable thumbs, tools, weapons of mass destruction, and large brains by comparison. We cope better than most animals.

    Malthus was quite popular and wrong. His projections were the subject of high school debate competitions in the late 70's.
     
  8. donthelegend

    donthelegend

    8
    0
    Feb 14, 2012
    I think the only flaw in your scenario is that it doesn't accurately take into account technological advancement (or at least I don't think it does). I think technology will keep up for longer than 30 years. I have no facts to back up that statement because its pretty much impossible to predict technological advances. However, necessity WILL push technology faster, especially if it becomes a global problem and is not just limited to one nation.

    Out of curiosity, where do you get the 30 year figure for not being able to feed the population? I'm not doubting it, just curious.

    WRT something being done about the population/population control... I think the best answer is responsible potential parents. Look around before you decide to bring a new person into the world. If you have trouble feeding yourself, you probably shouldn't be adding another mouth to feed. Now that may be unrealistic, and looking at things today there are too many situations where that already doesn't happen, but for the sake of discussion I'll be idealistic about it and say that is what we should do.

    For the .gov to step in and enforce some sort of active population control would have serious repercussions with the populace, and would mean that things are bad. I don't really see any way for population control to not set off a lot of people (although if the situation gets bad enough for this to even be a serious discussion, people are probably going to be thinking much differently than they are today and I don't really have a way to comprehend that).
     
  9. Brian Lee

    Brian Lee Drop those nuts

    9,539
    427
    Jul 28, 2008
    Up a tree.
    Our teachers may have been wrong about 4 billion people being too many, but there has to be a limit somewhere. Can the world really feed 25 or 30 billion people? It's unavoidable that we'll eventually have to face facts about controlling our own reproduction, and deciding who gets to have kids & who doesn't. We may not know yet what the exact maximum population will be, but there has to be a max at some point. We also have to develop an economic system that does not depend on constant growth for it's survival. The size of the ecomony has to level off at some point too (after the population does).

    We should start thinking now about how to institute a system where people must qualify themselves for parenthood by making an effort to learn how to be good parents before they actually do it, and then get themselves licensed to do so. Violators would have to loose their illegally produced children to someone more qualified to be a good parent, and habitual criminals and other mental defectives will have to be prohibited from creating more babies like themselves. My guess is that this will solve about 95 percent of our problem with the over-bloated social welfare system, which will eventually become unneeded if we just try to be more careful about who is allowed to have kids.

    I don't advocate a Hitler-like system of trying to produce a super race, but rather the fostering of the mentally normal & average human being, just by limiting the reproduction of the lowest 5 or 10 percent of our most obvious social defectives. It is the healthy & average human genetic stocks that give birth to the mutant geniuses - not the psycho's and slothful life-long beggars.

    It is a false sense of charity & a poor excuse for kindness when society blindly chooses to help our most mentally & socially defective people become a new majority at the expense of those who should have had more children for the good of humanity's future. We could literally breed rampant criminality out of existance if we had the moral courage to do so. Right now, humanity still fools itself into thinking that unlimited and blindly bestowed charity is the highest form of kindness. It isn't.
     
  10. pugman

    pugman

    6,100
    254
    May 16, 2003
    Wisconsin
    I read an article somewhere which discussed this and boiled it down to a few things

    Energy
    Land Use and
    Standard of living/personal motivation

    Even if we farmed every possible acre in the world based on available climate we simply don't have the energy to do it for any extended period of time.

    Farm equipment is a probably a million times more efficient than hand labor but it still uses gas; then there is the problem of transportation...which uses gas.

    Then you have the fact people would rather play Xbox than garden. I helped an uncle for three summers in high school since he couldn't get hired help otherwise...very few people have the fortitude to do manual labor. Sure now a days probably 95% of this same uncle's massive farm system is mechanical but it still amazes me how many people living in Wisconsin nearly puke when they smell that "fresh country air" every spring when farmers spread.

    Think those folks in San Diego would allow their city to be upheaved and converted to farms...doubtful (I've heard overall San Diego weather is nearly perfect year long); and quite a bit of land simply is just unusable.

    The article's final assumption was given a perfect scenario where food production and consumption for the most part stayed local; you were able to exploit as much human labor as possible, storage was plentiful and waste was kept to a minimum the planet could support somewhere between 33-38 billion people.

    However, remember this was a perfect scenario...no wars...little to any price competition...and everyone's job was somehow related to the growing, transportation, storage, or distribution of food. In other words make believe.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2012
  11. bdcochran

    bdcochran

    3,323
    330
    Sep 23, 2005
    Los Angeles
    Are my facts correct?

    yes and no.

    you don't need to be an apprentice to a master journeyman (when there are videos and more modern educational techniques) to become a medical doctor, a computer assembler or a graphic artist.

    Will there be a price correction as the baby boomer generation passes, will there be a price correction in America for property or …?

    you can create benefits or detriments to real estate ownership quicker and more profoundly by building codes, property taxes, political stability, the general tax code, and delivery of medical services. oh, and i forgot, population density.

    Can something be done about the population/population control?

    yes. however, you have to change the political climate, religious beliefs, the social welfare system. heck, when you posed that question, you already knew that providing free abortions, free birth control and cash in exchange for voluntary birth control were away of keeping the population down. so, OP why doesn't the US provide this aid overseas?

    Will the gov. do something to help or hurt the overpopulation?

    your government is directed by self aggrandizing people who are largely interested in benefits to themselves or their immediate families. what your legislators do is whatever they perceive will get them political donations and re-election.

    Should we do something to effect the population?

    probably.

    Should we do something now with the understanding that the population will continue to grow?

    probably

    What are the odds of technology increasing to the point that we will have a colony on another planet in the next 30 years?

    better than they were 60 years ago when I would look up at the moon and wonder if a space ship would ever be built to get to the moon.
     
  12. PettyOfficer

    PettyOfficer

    1,009
    0
    Nov 24, 2011
    Houston, TX
    This movie should be taught in schools with a focus on why its funnier than they think: the underlying social commentary which scares the bejezus out of me.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808
     
  13. PettyOfficer

    PettyOfficer

    1,009
    0
    Nov 24, 2011
    Houston, TX
    The problem is that many responsible people already do that.

    It's the religious nuts who think they need to populate the planet with gods warriors.

    It's the uneducated and dirt poor folks who rely on welfare to pay them more when they have more kids but don't have the basic mathematical reasoning skills to understand more kids = more costs = less disposable income

    Its the idiots who grew up with multiple siblings because their parents were boomers who were raised that way because of the WWII vets who felt they needed to go forth and multiple and make the world a better place after the war. Back when times were less advanced and having a larger family meant more help on the family farm (without regard to what happens to the younger children who won't get a share of the land when the eldest laid their claim). It's people like this who thinks their family should be just as big because it worked out so well for them (my damn family falls in this trap every other year, I have so many damned 2nd cousins that I can't remember any of their names). Several cousins have 3 kids each, one cousin has 5!!!

    This might trigger some flames but the book (and movie) 'Freakonimics' statistically justified the rise in crime in some eastern european country when women were forced to have children they didnt want. The children grew up without proper parenting and made a mess of things. The counter argument is that legal abortion prevents the unwanted from being born and raised in households where they won't be treated well properly and they won't develop social issues that cause a burden on society.

    In the end, my reference to the movie Idiocracy above is becoming apparently realistic.

    First things first: force Snookie to have an abortion, lock up all the Kardashians (mom and brother included) and just outright execute the cast of (and all those who auditioned for) the show Jersey Shore.

    Only then will we have a chance at stemming rampant ignorance.

    I have no solution for the ignorance of the religious right however... They at least think they're doing the right thing.
     
  14. racerford

    racerford

    4,667
    277
    Apr 22, 2003
    DFW area
    For those that don't click unknown links. It is the IMDB page for "Idiocracy" a future classic cult film. And possibly a future classic documentary:crying:
     
  15. pugman

    pugman

    6,100
    254
    May 16, 2003
    Wisconsin
    More true than you know

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate

    Let just focus on the CIA list since its from 2011. Look at the top ten...Zimbabwe, Niger, Uganda, Burundi, Ethiopia, Rwanda...

    What does this list also represent? Places I would never want to visit or live.

    Then look towards the bottom...Japan and Germany were both negative. A good portion of Europe is less than 0.50% and the U.S didn't crack 1%

    Another scary idea: As of 2011, it is predicted that the world's Muslim population will grow twice as fast as non-Muslims over the next 20 years

    Or "Monsignor Vittorio Formenti, who compiles the Vatican's yearbook, said in an interview with the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano that "For the first time in history, we are no longer at the top: Muslims have overtaken us". He said that Catholics accounted for 17.4 percent of the world population—a stable percentage—while Muslims were at 19.2 percent. "It is true that while Muslim families, as is well known, continue to make a lot of children, Christian ones on the contrary tend to have fewer and fewer," the monsignor said
     
  16. RWBlue

    RWBlue Mr. CISSP, CISA CLM

    23,521
    832
    Jan 24, 2004
    I am a 1%er. So are most of not all the people who post here. I guess we should go after the 99% people who were protesting Wallstreet.
     
  17. RWBlue

    RWBlue Mr. CISSP, CISA CLM

    23,521
    832
    Jan 24, 2004
    It just happens to be the number I settled on.
    It is a semi-educated guess based on population growth, death rates, conversations with farmers, loss of land to subdivisions.....

    I think we are already on the down ward slide when it comes to oil reserves. 30 years may be an over estimate of what we have left.

    Additionally, it is close to my life expectancy. If I live another 30 years I will be beating the odds for my family genetics. Things will be what they are at that point for me.
     
  18. Chindo18Z

    Chindo18Z

    109
    1
    Apr 17, 2010
    I imagine that standard ecosystem factors will reduce immense population pressures.

    Famine
    Drought
    Pestilence (natural mutation or bio-engineered)
    Predation (protracted global warfare or use of WMDs)

    These four things will inevitably reduce regional or global overpopulation to a sustainable level.

    The same factors that correct overpopulation by rabbits, whitetails, locusts, or bison.

    Except for the nuke thing.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2012