Overpopulation

[Singh bling]

3 minutes ago, zen said:

It is about striking the right balance. You are posting as if there is a choice b/w being over-populated or under-populated. 

 

Let's not forget that over-population leads to degradation of environment, a curse for future generations. It is the responsibility of the current generation to preserve environment for future generations 

 

Are you implying that we have to burden the planet so our menial jobs can be done? 

 

 

I don't have answer to question of overpopulation .China even tried its level best to control population  but  in the end they just reverted back and gave people choice to produce kids as much as they want

[beetle]

The present and the next generation should be encouraged and made to invest in retirement plans so that people stop having children as retirement plan. 

We can't keep having more kids because older generations have to be taken care of.

A few generations of old people will suffer(probably our generation and the next) ...but people will learn to be more responsible.

Have a child if you can take the responsibility of bringing up the child without making him/her responsible for your old age care.I would rather save and invest for retirement than have another child as a guarantee of care in old age.

Thanks to  better medicare...the average age of people has increased.I know of families where the forty years olds are taking care of teen aged children,parents in their 60/70s and grandparents in their 90s. What kind of a life is that?

 

24 minutes ago, Singh bling said:

Solution batao.Europeans and other developed nations just import truck load of young people to do menial jobs . What wil India do if Indians have very few kids?

You want people to keep having more children to supply the menial job market in Europe ......or India???

If there is more demand and less  supply...menial jobs will not be so menial.The day we need to pay the plumber the same amount  we need to pay our doctor.... the job will no longer be menial.

People will learn to live without maids .People  will ask for better public transport if driver are not available.

Edited September 7, 2016 by radhika

[Singh bling]

17 minutes ago, radhika said:

You want people to keep having more children to supply the menial job market in Europe ......or India???

If there is more demand and less  supply...menial jobs will not be so menial.The day we need to pay the plumber the same amount  we need to pay our doctor.... the job will no longer be menial.

People will learn to live without maids .People  will ask for better public transport if driver are not available.

Edited 6 minutes ago by radhika

I don't want people to have more children. but so far no country is successful in reducing population that is fact. Even countries with terrible birth rates have increased their population .the old people of India that lives on income of children will die if there will be no children to take care of them. For smooth running of society  1.8-2.1 TFR is must O/W in future there will be very big collapse

[zen]

1 hour ago, chewy said:

With overpopulation, time for more ruthlessness to produce quality than just sustaining oneself with mediocrity, and hopefully that quality pays off; who will be more productive, raising revenues, more investments, and opportunities to expand education....reverse the vicious cycle.   

 

True, the vicious cycle needs to be turned in to a virtuous one. I recall watching Shree 420 (1950s classic movie) where Ind is shown to be facing many of the same problems as it is today .... economic development is a dream that Ind is still chasing while a selected few continue to get super rich .... this will keep continuing unless we change our approach to how we see things 

 

For me the quality of life is the key. I want to change many of the rules that we follow today for e.g. why should we work say from 8.30 to 5, Why not 10 to 5? Why can't we have 2 hour lunches? (Italy allows 2 hour lunches). Why can't we have 2 months vacation? (again Italy). Why can't we have 4.5 days work week? .... Why do kids have to do homework? Many of the brightest students come from Norway where no homework is given  .... Someone made these rules and we are still following them blindly w/o questioning 

 

We need to focus on preserving the planet first, which has to passed over from one generation to the next in a healthy shape. The society's well being should be next. It should be socially acceptable to stop to help someone in need say in an accident, than skirt the issue to be in time for a meeting. The focus should be on creating a healthy and sustainable planet + a happy society, i.e. becoming more environment and community focused

 

For that to happen, citizens should also be willing to pay high taxes to support services being provided by the govt. In Ind, paying taxes is seen like a burden 

 

Poverty is relative. Someone is always going to be poor vs someone who is rich

 

 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2016 by zen

[chewy]

fertility rates in urban areas are already coming down and below national averages of US or some European nations

http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/et-commentary/demographic-dividend-is-underway-with-collapse-in-fertility/

 

also fertility rates in most states is below the replacement rate of 2.1.

 

The problem is in the Hindi speaking belt (Rajasthan, MP, UP, Bihar) where fertility rates are still above 3.0, and unfortunately these states account nearly 50% of India's population!!! 

an old article from the The Hindu: http://www.thehindu.com/data/india-to-reach-replacement-levels-of-fertility-by-2020/article6717297.ece

Edited September 7, 2016 by chewy

[Singh bling]

Quote

http://newsroom.iza.org/en/2016/04/19/chinas-new-two-child-policy-not-enough-to-cope-with-aging-population/

China’s new two-child policy not enough to cope with aging population

 

[zen]

31 minutes ago, Singh bling said:

I don't have answer to question of overpopulation .China even tried its level best to control population  but  in the end they just reverted back and gave people choice to produce kids as much as they want

If I am not wrong, China now has a 2 kids policy vs 1 kid .... And having this policy is about having the right mix of population 

 

Ind already has a large proportion of young population (many of them are jobless). With the current state of resources, if these young people have multiple kids, it would lead to chaos and further exploitation of environment 

 

 

[zen]

37 minutes ago, radhika said:

A few generations of old people will suffer(probably our generation and the next) ...but people will learn to be more responsible.

To drive change, it is likely that someone would have to make the sacrifice. And if that is the case - I would prefer it is our generation than the future ones  

Edited September 7, 2016 by zen

[zen]

1 hour ago, Vilander said:

India is overpopulated in comparison to the world population density. India has arable land, but very little perennial water source with the impending water crisis it would be a spectacle. Solution is for more and more people to leave India and settle-down in other immigrant friendly countries and bring population control measures. In India everyone gets hitched and its easy( relatively cheap as well) to have and raise a baby, may be this needs to be changed.

 

various criteria can be put in place including paying additional taxes for having children beyond a certain limit, income criteria for having kids, etc. 

 

To give mortgage, banks consider income level, down payment, etc. to evaluate if the person is responsible enough to pay the mortgage. Raising kids is a bigger responsibility and we allow anyone to have as many kids as they wish without having the appropriate means to support kids

 

below - what is her fault in the life she has to live?

 

 

[Crookbond]

India has lower population density than many developed countries like England and The Netherlands. The problem is not overpopulation but concentration of population in certain pockets as beyond that there isn't much to live in terms of essential elements of life.

[Vilander]

34 minutes ago, zen said:

 

various criteria can be put in place including paying additional taxes for having children beyond a certain limit, income criteria for having kids, etc. 

 

To give mortgage, banks consider income level, down payment, etc. to evaluate if the person is responsible enough to pay the mortgage. Raising kids is a bigger responsibility and we allow anyone to have as many kids as they wish without having the appropriate means to support kids

 

below - what is her fault in the life she has to live?

 

 

after becoming a dad i feel a huge amount of pain and anger when i see infants/children like this, poor things have no ability to comprehend or react to what is happening to them.

 

The problem is child protection is not a concept at all in India, there has to be child protection + punitive liability to parents who do this to children. Either dont have a child and do this to her or have a child and take proper care of her.

 

I'd day take away voting rights and certain other civil liberties if a child is left to be exploited and denied basic existential resources like this by a parent.

[Vilander]

1 hour ago, chewy said:

fertility rates in urban areas are already coming down and below national averages of US or some European nations

http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/et-commentary/demographic-dividend-is-underway-with-collapse-in-fertility/

 

also fertility rates in most states is below the replacement rate of 2.1.

 

The problem is in the Hindi speaking belt (Rajasthan, MP, UP, Bihar) where fertility rates are still above 3.0, and unfortunately these states account nearly 50% of India's population!!! 

an old article from the The Hindu: http://www.thehindu.com/data/india-to-reach-replacement-levels-of-fertility-by-2020/article6717297.ece

BiMaRU with lots of Muslims as well in the mix, they will change the demographics of the whole nation. But hard working folks like the Bangladeshis that one finds a lot in south india these days. 

[Vilander]

1 hour ago, Singh bling said:

I don't want people to have more children. but so far no country is successful in reducing population that is fact. Even countries with terrible birth rates have increased their population .the old people of India that lives on income of children will die if there will be no children to take care of them. For smooth running of society  1.8-2.1 TFR is must O/W in future there will be very big collapse

in ways what you are saying it correct, and that would mean the human world is hurtling towards a certain doom. Unless there is a way back to minimize consumption by living off the land simply there will come a point where the resources will simply not be enough. 

[Vilander]

Low income urban dwellers are the ones that contribute least to greenhouse gas emissions in europe may be that is what would be the norm in the upcoming decades.

[Vilander]

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160311-how-many-people-can-our-planet-really-support

 

amazing article

[zen]

28 minutes ago, Vilander said:

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160311-how-many-people-can-our-planet-really-support

 

amazing article

Exactly. If Ind and China start to consume like USA, the planet's demise could accelerate 

 

Which is one of the reasons why I don't appreciate Ind's politicians sprouting the term economic development without considering sustainability. Planet should always be first

 

On argument that these countries make is that West developed without considering sustainability, so why should Ind and China care for environment. This argument is faulty because the concerns were not as understood as today when the west was developing. Now we know the negative impacts. West also enjoyed the first movers advantage so what is the point in complaining for being late.  Now the focus should be on making West more environmentally friendly rather than trying to ape it to cause more problems for the planet

 

Our metrics need to change from measuring development from an economic / consumption PoV to quality of life (clean air and water, low crime rates, enjoyable working environment, decent education that enhances social responsibility of the students, health care facilities for all, etc.) and happiness of the population 

Edited September 7, 2016 by zen

[mishra]

2 hours ago, Singh bling said:

I don't have answer to question of overpopulation .China even tried its level best to control population  but  in the end they just reverted back and gave people choice to produce kids as much as they want

Dont you know that It has worked for them. There are cheap houses, more jobs then population, enough facility, and average chinese is rich too.

Despite what we read in media, one child policy didnot hamper growth of their economy, infact it helped the country to manage thr transformation from farms to industrialisation to technology to modern imperialism. Hence, Now they can afford two children as everything is in abundance. 

If unchechecked, Growth of population allways be such that a developing country can never come anyehere near to a developed countries Quality of life

[gattaca]

Op has become pukka NRI. We can always send Indians to Canada, Australia  and USA which has huge area. The biggest problem is going to be world food growth. 

[zen]

9 hours ago, sarchasm said:

How is the so-called overpopulation a root cause when there are countries with a higher or similar level of population density doing well for themselves? Can you explain the success of Japan, Israel, South Korea, Taiwan, Netherlands, countries with much, much less natural resources than India, and a higher or comparable population density?

 

Your example in fact demonstrates you do not fully comprehend the population issue. You are making a linear correlation between population and available resources. That is so pitifully wrong and mistaken I don't even know where to begin. It's not surprising though, a large population that fares poorly on HDI can make people miss forest for the trees. An illiterate, sickly, and economically stagnant population is a liability, but an outright asset when they feature as high as Japan or South Korea on the HDI. 

 

Your last equation is meaningless for all purposes as it assumes resources are constant, and ignores entrepreneurship, technological advances etc, all of them being a factor of HDI.

To understand that 1st let's look at some of the reasons for high density:

• Economic clusters 
• Low mortality rate
• Urban areas / major cities 
• Immigration - which implies that people moving to a country would be reasonably qualified to get the entry. For e.g. Israel allows for Jewish immigration. Jews are considered to be usually a successful community 
• High birth rates - I have not looked at the data but will assume that Ind has a higher birth rate than the countries that you mentioned which also implies that we are discussing a somewhat different problem in the context of Ind

 

2nd, let's remember the Bell Curve - In a normal distribution, there are outliers. So exceptions do not make a rule 

 

3rd, Culture - For e.g. in Japanese culture, worker are known to go on strike by working for longer hours and putting a black band on their arms

 

4th, Developed countries - Some of the countries are already developed which mean resources (not only natural) and capabilities are advanced enough to support a larger population

 

Putting all the above together, each country that you mentioned would have one or a combination of factors that make them successful 

 

 

Coming back to India:

• States such as UP, Bihar, WB, etc. are overpopulated resulting in higher density. These are among the poorest states in Ind. While some of the states are reasonably populated
• As mentioned before, population growth in Ind has been largely driven by high birth rates
• India has relatively limited resources and capabilities
• The infrastructure to support the ever increasing population is lacking. Even the current population is not supported well enough
• Ind's literacy rates are below the countries that you listed

 

When you look at these factors holistically, over-population is the root cause. Ind is locked in a vicious cycle where on one hand it lacks the necessary resources and capabilities (demonstrated by the state of current situation) and on the other hand, it keeps pumping out new citizens

Below is the projected population growth chart.  Doing "xyz" can theoretically solve problems, but the question is will it esp. considering how Ind has not measured up so far? Considering Ind's limitations, can Ind grow at a rate where it can not only uplift its current population, but also create the infrastructure and environment to support the yet to be born

 

 

 

On the other hand, the rising population could put more pressure on the fragile environment and infrastructure. Ind already suffers due to air, water and land pollution. Waste management is lacking. There are not enough schools and medical facilities to provide quality service. Crime rates could increase as well including against women and children. Now one can say do x to solve y, do a to solve b, etc. but many of these issues can be solved by optimizing the population number to have a socially responsible, well educated and contributing citizens leading to a situation where many of these problems may not even crop up 

 

 

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by zen

[zen]

11 hours ago, gattaca said:

We can always send Indians to Canada, Australia  and USA which has huge area. 

Sending people could lead to brain drain