Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

Anthropology, Economics, History, Sociology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#21  Postby LucidFlight » Apr 11, 2018 7:16 pm

Alan B wrote:So one would think. War and disease usually results in an increase in the birthrate after the war is ended and the disease has run its course.

Yes, the key is to maintain the war and disease. Eventually, we will hit upon something catastrophic. We just need to keep practising.
OFFICIAL MEMBER: QUANTUM CONSTRUCTOR CONSCIOUSNESS QUALIA KOALA COLLECTIVE.
User avatar
LucidFlight
RS Donator
 
Name: Kento
Posts: 10801
Male

Country: UK/US/AU/SG
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#22  Postby zulumoose » Apr 12, 2018 7:15 am

I think the end solution may well be financial incentives. Overpopulation will not be solved by enlightenment since it is the poor and ignorant who have the highest birth rates, and they are the only ones adding to the problem in most cases. Solving poverty first is unlikely, so what can be done to induce the poor and ignorant to reduce the birth rate? Only making it in their interest to have fewer kids will work, and penalties would be impractical so the carrot approach is what is left.

Maybe extra welfare benefits for those on long-term birth control methods like 6 monthly injections or IUD?
Benefits could be proportional to the immediate cost savings for government in a reduced unproductive population, but savings for the country as a whole would quickly outstrip this since the largest reduction in population would be in those most at risk of getting caught up in the unemployment-crime loop, who would be a drain on society.
User avatar
zulumoose
 
Posts: 3625

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#23  Postby Cito di Pense » Apr 12, 2018 8:09 am

zulumoose wrote:I think the end solution may well be financial incentives.


I think the end solution may well occur when money grows on trees, and people stop shitting where they eat, which is about the time people become extinct.

Holding the exchequer hostage until people start behaving themselves is kinda weird, at least from a certain perspective. You understand that expanding welfare beneifits is not the low-hanging fruit.

I think people who want the population problem solved should donate their time, effort, and money to the good causes.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29549
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#24  Postby Hermit » Apr 12, 2018 8:18 am

Alan B wrote:...uncontrollable fertility...

If our fertility rates were uncontrollable there'd be nothing we could do to stem and reduce them, would there?

Fortunately we have clear and incontrovertible evidence that those rates can be reduced. In fact, globally they have halved since the 1960s.

Image
(Source)

Making contraceptives easily and cheaply available looks like one obvious measure to reduce fertility some more. That in turn could be made more effective by neutralising religious influences, particularly those coming from the Vatican.

Another would be education.This can only be done in many countries when they are no longer so poor that they need their children to work for a subsistence. So, an increase in income would be a prerequisite,or at least a corequisite.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Name: Cantankerous grump
Posts: 4336
Age: 67
Male

Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#25  Postby Cito di Pense » Apr 12, 2018 8:20 am

Hermit wrote:
Making contraceptives easily and cheaply available looks like one obvious measure to reduce fertility some more. That in turn could be made more effective by neutralising religious influences, particularly those coming from the Vatican.

Another would be education.This can only be done in many countries when they are no longer so poor that they need their children to work for a subsistence. So, an increase in income would be a prerequisite,or at least a corequisite.


The people who count don't really support these measures. More people means more customers in the shops. If you could encourage people to stop buying anything but food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare, things would change in a hurry, because a lot of useless shopkeepers and widget-makers would starve to death or get on the welfare rolls.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29549
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#26  Postby blindfaith » Apr 12, 2018 8:26 am

Futurama had the right idea

The best explanation for the absence of convincing reasons for god's existence is god's nonexistence

john shook
User avatar
blindfaith
 
Name: darren
Posts: 468
Age: 51
Male

Country: uk
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#27  Postby Hermit » Apr 12, 2018 8:42 am

Cito di Pense wrote:
Hermit wrote:Making contraceptives easily and cheaply available looks like one obvious measure to reduce fertility some more. That in turn could be made more effective by neutralising religious influences, particularly those coming from the Vatican.

Another would be education.This can only be done in many countries when they are no longer so poor that they need their children to work for a subsistence. So, an increase in income would be a prerequisite,or at least a corequisite.


The people who count don't really support these measures. More people means more customers in the shops. If you could encourage people to stop buying anything but food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare, things would change in a hurry, because a lot of useless shopkeepers and widget-makers would starve to death or get on the welfare rolls.


Yeah, If you click the link marked "Source" you'll find evidence for the fear of economic problems resulting from reduced population growth, but I think religious factors are of greater import. Check the uptick in fertility rates of the US between 1975 and Obama's presidency. With Trump's support of the religious right via his family planning policy - if you can call it that - I fear we'll see another one until he's gone in 2004.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Name: Cantankerous grump
Posts: 4336
Age: 67
Male

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#28  Postby aban57 » Apr 12, 2018 8:46 am

We need more of those endocrine disruptors in our foods. Much more.
aban57
 
Name: Cindy
Posts: 7434
Age: 41
Female

Country: France
Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#29  Postby Cito di Pense » Apr 12, 2018 9:22 am

Hermit wrote:I think religious factors are of greater import.


Well, as long as you think that, I guess it's OK. You can mine those sorts of statistics for any conclusion you like. You could be right, and there's also no way to show you're wrong, so you get to keep that opinion, and do with it what you will. How's it going for you, so far? The notion that economic underprivilege correlates with religious fervor is not lost on you, and you could find the statistics to demonstrate it.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29549
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#30  Postby Alan B » Apr 12, 2018 9:28 am

Hermit wrote:
'snip' ...but I think religious factors are of greater import. 'snip'

We shouldn't underestimate the power religions have. They will do anything to increase their 'flock' and material control over the gullible. Even to the extent of killing others to make room for their followers.
This effect can be reduced (or hopefully eliminated) with better education (obviously).
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#31  Postby minininja » Apr 12, 2018 9:48 am

Hermit wrote:
Alan B wrote:...uncontrollable fertility...

If our fertility rates were uncontrollable there'd be nothing we could do to stem and reduce them, would there?

Fortunately we have clear and incontrovertible evidence that those rates can be reduced. In fact, globally they have halved since the 1960s.

I was about to post something similar myself. Globally we are only just above replacement levels and the trend is still downwards. The majority of population increase today is just the ageing of current populations. As long as we continue with education, reproductive healthcare and power to women to make their own life choices, then the global population is set to reach a limit of about 10 billion.

The real problem we face is the massive lack of efficiency in consumption of resources, that markets take to be unlimited until they almost run out. We need to focus on clean energy, reduction of waste, a circular economy.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
User avatar
minininja
 
Posts: 1536

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#32  Postby Hermit » Apr 12, 2018 9:59 am

Cito di Pense wrote:
Hermit wrote:I think religious factors are of greater import.

You could be right, and there's also no way to show you're wrong

Actually, there are several ways to show I'm wrong. Have a go, ya mug. :tongue:
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Name: Cantankerous grump
Posts: 4336
Age: 67
Male

Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#33  Postby Alan B » Apr 12, 2018 10:08 am

Sustainable World Population
Current Population is Three Times the Sustainable Level

Global Footprint Network data shows that humanity uses the equivalent of 1.7 planet Earths to provide the renewable resources we use and absorb our waste. If all 7+ billion of us were to enjoy a European standard of living - which is about 60% the consumption of the average American - the Earth could sustainably support only about 2 billion people.

The longer we continue consuming more resources than the Earth can sustainably provide, the less able the Earth can meet humanity's resource needs in the future - and the fewer people the planet can support - long-term.

Evidence of unsustainable resource use is all around us. Global aquifers are being pumped 3.5 times faster than rainfall can naturally recharge them. Eventually they will run dry and hundreds of millions will suffer. Topsoil is being lost 10-40 times faster than it is formed. Feeding all 7+ billion of us will become increasingly difficult. Oceans are being overfished, and a primary protein source for over 2 billion people is in jeopardy. Worldwide, we have lost over half the vertebrate species in the air, water, and land since 1970. How many more species can we lose and how many more ecosystems can we destroy before humanity’s own existence is threatened?

It is important to note that the depletion of non-renewable resources such as fossil fuels, metals, and minerals that make a higher standard of living possible are not included in Global Footprint Network data. This includes all the tons of oil, coal, iron ore, copper, and hundreds of other minerals and metals that make modern life possible. Taking these non-renewable resources into account suggests 2 billion people living at a European standard of living may be the upper limit of a sustainable global population.

I think the apparent reduction in the fertility rate shown in Hermit's post will have, in the long term, little effect and will be too late.
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#34  Postby minininja » Apr 12, 2018 10:24 am

Alan B wrote:I think the apparent reduction in the fertility rate shown in Hermit's post will have, in the long term, little effect and will be too late.

But other than horrific illiberal policies nothing can be done to end population growth faster. Moreover, if we did substantially reduce the number of new children being born further, we'd end up with a large population of old people with not enough young people to work to look after them.

There is no absolute limit on the number of people that the world can sustain. It depends on technology and how we use resources. The article you link to talks about a "European standard of living" but that doesn't actually mean quality of life, it means the amount of non-renewable resources we consume. But that's only so high because our current societies are horrifically wasteful. That's what needs to change.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
User avatar
minininja
 
Posts: 1536

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#35  Postby Alan B » Apr 12, 2018 10:24 am

Key Facts World Population
It took until the early 1800s for the world population to reach one billion. Now we add a billion every 12-15 years. (UN)
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#36  Postby zulumoose » Apr 12, 2018 10:31 am

The article you link to talks about a "European standard of living" but that doesn't actually mean quality of life, it means the amount of non-renewable resources we consume.


Unless I read it wrong, they were specifically excluding non-renewable resources, and focussing on sustainability, which is use of renewable resources only. Non-renewable is by definition unsustainable.
User avatar
zulumoose
 
Posts: 3625

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#37  Postby Cito di Pense » Apr 12, 2018 10:55 am

Alan B wrote:
Hermit wrote:
'snip' ...but I think religious factors are of greater import. 'snip'

We shouldn't underestimate the power religions have. They will do anything to increase their 'flock' and material control over the gullible. Even to the extent of killing others to make room for their followers.
This effect can be reduced (or hopefully eliminated) with better education (obviously).


Better education? Your target population is religious people who largely don't acknowledge the value of education and vote a lack of support of education accordingly. See the catch, there?
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29549
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#38  Postby Cito di Pense » Apr 12, 2018 10:56 am

Hermit wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
Hermit wrote:I think religious factors are of greater import.

You could be right, and there's also no way to show you're wrong

Actually, there are several ways to show I'm wrong. Have a go, ya mug. :tongue:


Not with the quality of statistical support you seem to like. That just leads to back and forth inconclusive debate. See my comments above to understand better how your knowledge doesn't help much, even if valid. Especially if valid.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29549
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#39  Postby felltoearth » Apr 12, 2018 12:19 pm

Alan B wrote:
felltoearth wrote:Are we over populated or do we over consume resources?

Both. One leads to the other driven by greed.

Really? Citation?
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14011
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Human Over Population. How to Stem and Reduce.

#40  Postby minininja » Apr 12, 2018 12:19 pm

zulumoose wrote:
The article you link to talks about a "European standard of living" but that doesn't actually mean quality of life, it means the amount of non-renewable resources we consume.


Unless I read it wrong, they were specifically excluding non-renewable resources, and focussing on sustainability, which is use of renewable resources only. Non-renewable is by definition unsustainable.

I think it's a different definition of sustainable/renewable than I'm using.

What they're saying is, given our current technology usage, resource management, consumption patterns, and the rate that resources like topsoil and fish-stocks can regenerate in the ways that we use them now, how many people can this sustain.

Where I'm starting from is, given our current and expected populations (because that's not something we can change any more than we already are) and our current resource management and consumption patterns, resources like topsoil and fish-stocks are not renewable.

But that can be changed. For example ending the excessive consumption of meat and changing agriculture practices away from plough or burn and reseed mono-cultures, could allow us to actively increase topsoil while feeding more people. And having areas of ocean protected from fishing allows sea life to thrive and makes the areas that are fished provide more food than the total area otherwise would.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
User avatar
minininja
 
Posts: 1536

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Social Sciences & Humanities

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest