all 21 comments

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I agree with this. We are nowhere near the holding capacity of earth. Especially as we get more efficient.

Human population is set to peak at 11 billion or so. The maximum rate of growth already happened in 1965 and now the rate of growth is slowing.

Overpopulation is not really a problem in the long run, imo. As long as we really do level off at around 11 billion, which all the numbers seem to indicate we will

[–]Shaylee 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Why do we need 11 billion people though? You suggest it will peak, but why? If it's not a problem, why would it peak?

[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It peaks because as countries become developed their birth rates naturally drop, and most countries are now developed

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Do you have a version of this document that isn't camouflaged with people?

[–]Shaylee 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Show me the tech you plan to introduce so they can all live comfortably then.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Do you buy into the malthusian theory? If so, why?

[–]Shaylee 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Yea I think I do because animals like deer will overpopulate and use their resources faster than they can be replenished and pretty much all small islands reach a max point of resources and then either lower population or import more resources. How about you?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

If people were similar to deer, then I might agree.

However, I do not.
Humans have the unique abilities. Improve efficiency in existing processes, and find alternatives to compensate for scarcity.

Investigate commodity prices of any unregulated product, and you will find that the price of that commodity (or alternative) goes down over time (adjusting for inflation, etc.).

I'm not suggesting that regulation isn't important.
Fishing harvests should be controlled to eliminate population collapses.
Factory farming needs to be addressed in multiple areas (environmental, decentralization, price fixing, ethical treatment, etc.).
And so on...

However, these are issues of political will, and enforcement.

These are not laws of nature, as Malthus theorizes.

Solutions, and alternatives exist.

[–]Shaylee 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Yea but who wants 11 billion people? I'd prefer a few acres of farming mixed with the tech that we have. That is the future. I prefer that if we have a miracle and cooperate instead of spending the entire gdp on blowing people up. I mean I prefer it over dystopian concrete shithole even if it was nice bc we cooperate. Nature also deserves room is in my thinking as well.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I suppose many of childbearing age, and many more grandparents-in-waiting.

I also, agree that nature deserves to have rights. I'm not sure how to legislate this.

Fortunately, the arc of justice is accelerating; each time leaving from a higher plane. (Note: IMO Identity politics is a notable exception to this (it's divisive by design, and in political intent)).

The problem is not the average person, and the desire to have a family. The threat to the planet is the avarice of the super wealthy.

[–]Shaylee 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

We could all live like super wealthy people if we lower the population, and have the same effect to the planet.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Do the powerful ever willingly cede power?
Can you cite some historical examples of this happening?

[–]Shaylee 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

That's kinda why people never consolidated in the past and left vast cities untouched, they didn't want to give up their independence. Waste management was extremely bad for one, and the methane and processing plants made it stink more. People just decided they didn't want to be packed in and would rather roam freely and set up a house or camp wherever they wanted and live the life. Not possible now, just sit in your cube life and never do anything bc it makes too much carbon.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You need to watch this.

How Big Oil Conquered The World.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't think that true. Are you interested in an interesting documentary?

[–]Robin[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do humans have to consume the planet's resources? Sure, we've gotta shit somewhere, but what if we just composted it, instead of using toxic chemicals to disinfect it etc. i.e. If instead of technoconsumermania, the normal was to do permaculture and use tech to make love not war?... From my Bangladesh perspective, the "developed" world seems not only immensely wasteful, but a pretty lonely and unfriendly place. The main recreation activity here is chatting :-)

[–]Robin[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think that more tech is necessarily going to help. Remember, I live in Bangladesh:-) Something about chillling out and taking life easy rather than rolling out a technototalitarian control grid...