0
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Jan 0001
0 points (NaN% liked)
0 readers
0 users here now
founded a long while ago
Why would we want to stop population decline when the world is already overpopulated?
We don't have an overpopulation problem. We have with resources being hoarded by a small handful of billionaires.
I walk around the supermarket. Look at the amount of plastic. Then multiply that by all supermarkets in the world. We have many problems. Many.
Yes, we have an overpopulation problem. This has nothing to do with resources being hoarded by a small handful of billionaires. I mean thats a problem, but that's and additional problem to overpopulation.
We cant continue generating trash the way we do, nor consuming earth resources, generating toxic gases. We are destroying the earth and populating the earth more is just going to accelerate that.
No, it's just a waste of resources problem. Have a look at all the stuff packaged in plastic in a supermarket, as someone else further up the comments mentioned.
Imagine all these things just not being packaged in plastic, like it was just a few decades ago.
People in the global south are consuming mere percentages of what people in the global north consume, per capita. If we were to actually cut down on the resources we waste for convenience, fun and sheer negligence, Earth could easily support much more than the current population.
At the current rate we consume ~1.7x the resources that the Earth is able to provide each year. Cut the per capita consumption by 80% (which is easily possible) and we can fit much more people onto this planet.
Not saying we shoud fit more people here, but currently we don't have overpopulation, we have overconsumption.
We have both tho. Even if we didn't have over consumption, our current total population would produce a lot of waste and consume a lot of earth resources that would be damaging to the planet
All trends point to over-population being fixed already. You just need to wait 100 years for it to manifest. But it’s not expected to stop, or stabilize, but drop “rapidly” (in a generational sense)
This is a long term problem, like global warming in the 1970’s. Our lack of action then, locked in what we are seeing now. Similarly, the forecasts for when global population peaks and begins to decline are all in this century but with too many unknowns. Given human lifetime and fertility period, this is already locked in.
Sounds good, right? The problem is population and resources are not uniform across the globe. We still have too many areas with unsustainable growth and crowding and suffering, before those stabilize. However we also have developed countries passing peak early, despite plenty of resources. The problem is that it’s not stabilizing. It’s not even a slow and steady decrease. This I jumping into cold water levels of shrinkage. This is a serious problem for stability of a society.
Imagine all the developed countries halving their population in a generation or two. This is not just about wealth, either. Consider infrastructure, consider investment and research, consider entertainment and technology, consider even conservation actions. Every part of modern life is affected by having a mature enough society to deeply specialize in niches and crannies and temporarily profit-less endeavors.
We can prevent these problems for our grandchildren now, with relatively easy steps to stabilize the population. Otherwise there will be no quick fix, and we can be leaving a disaster for a next generation You too will be one of the next “boomer” generation who doomed society for the young
What do you mean overpopulation problems were solved already? I see it otherwise.
You talk about economical problems, what about environmental problems? If you are just ignoring those, then I see what your stand is.
In a general sense, ever-increasing population is solved. As countries develop, cities and states get wealthier, fertility rates drop. Every time.
If we change nothing, population will peak, and start decreasing.
— https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growth
Because it's not good for productive economies that can produce solutions to current problems to stagnate and die. Japan should make moves to encourage a sustainable population growth rate.
Overpopulation is a problem mostly in struggling economies.
Overpopulation is a problem overall. The problem with Overpopulation has nothing to do with money. It has to do with consuming earth resources, which cannot be renewed with money
Let’s give trees as an example of resource over-utilization solved by money …
North America chops down a vast amount of trees every year. For paper and wood products, building and fuel, etc. even as a temporary holiday decoration. We destroy a mind-boggling amount of trees every year. Sustainably (mostly). As a mature society with sufficient resources, we are doing a decent job of managing our forest resources for sustainability
Otherwise …. We all see the headlines screaming about “de-foresting the Amazon” and the global impact.
Do we want to focus on making the world mature enough to shepherd their resources for sustainability, or are we good with “slash and burn” farming by people desperate to survive?
But we do see headlines of de-foresting the amazon.
Its not really hard to understand. More people means more green areas need to be removed to make new homes, more spaces need to be dedicated to create food for those people, more greenhouse gases are going to be generated thus accelerating the climate change.
Population isn't the issue. It's bad management of resources and the creation of too many not-truly-disposable resources that is the issue.
What the hell to you think an overpopulation problem looks like? Jesus, talk about not understanding the problem