Overpopulation

[gattaca]

17 minutes ago, zen said:

Sending people could lead to brain drain

 

 

Only people who couldn't survive in India will go Phoren. But people are a big asset you are underestimating power of people. Indians(NRIS) can now help with foreign policy.

Edited September 8, 2016 by gattaca

[Laaloo]

1 hour ago, gattaca said:

Only people who couldn't survive in India will go Phoren. But people are a big asset you are underestimating power of people. Indians(NRIS) can now help with foreign policy.

That's not true. I was perfectly fine in India. Had really no problems. I came to US because my aunt sponsored my family. Of course, now it would be difficult to go back. I've been away for years so disconnected.But what you say doesn't apply to everyone.

[gattaca]

5 minutes ago, laaloo said:

That's not true. I was perfectly fine in India. Had really no problems. I came to US because my aunt sponsored my family. Of course, now it would be difficult to go back. I've been away for years so disconnected.But what you say doesn't apply to everyone.

Ok greed and promise of better life ?

[Laaloo]

1 minute ago, gattaca said:

Ok greed and promise of better life ?

Probably not greed as we were well set off in India. But yeah 'promise' of a better life' could apply here.

[randomGuy]

Today if anyone talks about overpopulation and resource crunch, he obviously doesn't know abt ground situation. 

 

World population was 1.2 billion hundred years ago.

 

It won't be surprising if it again goes back to 1.2 billion In 100-200 yrs time. Fertility rate has dropped due to women empowerment, better healthcare, prosperity, people kept busy by technology (such as Internet) n by other things (rather than wanting to Raise kids) etc .

 

In addition, the productivity level, efficiency, technological advancements today is very high n going higher to tackle any so-called resource crunch.

Edited September 8, 2016 by randomGuy

[zen]

6 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

It won't be surprising if it again goes back to 1.2 billion In 100-200 yrs time. Fertility rate has dropped due to women empowerment, better healthcare, prosperity, people kept busy by technology (such as Internet) n by other things (rather than wanting to Raise kids) etc .

Do you know what the projections are for the next 100 years or so?

[randomGuy]

17 minutes ago, zen said:

Do you know what the projections are for the next 100 years or so?

These projections are almost always wrong, as demographics is not science. People today aren't interest in having more than 1 or 2 babies. To show you how a demographic pyramid will evolve over 60 yrs for 1 baby per couple, I have drawn it for you just now. Have a look -

 

http://tinypic.com/r/167ja6g/9

 

 

[randomGuy]

^ This is not the actually dem. pyramid of the world right now. this is just an illustration of how drastically population can fall after topping out. and this is what's going to eventually happen to the world, i believe.

[Vilander]

here we go i reported the image, dirty bed covers and all :)  - i am trying to understand the match though - interesting - could you explain the factoring you used.  Why is 80 year olds and 60 year older number stay constant over 20 years pyramid and 40 years pyramid - because its relative - say we get that. 

Next question is if this happens world is screwed - since imagine having to support 4 elders all by yourself - your dad,mom - their brother and or a sister - while your wife support similar number in her side. That is supporting 8 older people by you and your spouse. There is no way this is sustainable, forget it its not even attainable. 

 

[zen]

51 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

^ This is not the actually dem. pyramid of the world right now. this is just an illustration of how drastically population can fall after topping out. and this is what's going to eventually happen to the world, i believe.

Actual projections by various bodies are available. I already posted one graph from UN for Ind, China, etc. World population is actually expected to reach 11B by 2100. 

 

 

 

Even if there is 1 baby per couple, it is unlikely to revert to 1.2B in 100 years or so (2116) like what you had suggested.

 

Also the current 7.3B people are causing enough damage to the planet, so any additional exploitation of the planet could have compounding effects. It is like to pull something firmly planted in the ground, you have to pull hard at first. When the object becomes loose, a soft pull could pull it out easily

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by zen

[randomGuy]

^bro what about the next 200 years? The fall can still be drastic from yr 2100 to 2200. Did u know that effective fertility rate (after taking gender gap etc. In account) of China had been1.08-1.25 babies per couple in last 5 yrs. One of the scholar predicts that Chinese population is gonna be 600 million by 2100 -

 http://en.yibada.com/articles/137309/20160702/scholar-predicts-china-s-population-would-be-below-1-billion-by-2100.htm

 

The trend of crashing TFR has been the same in Japan, korea, Europe , Thailand etc and the same factors are at play ( women empowerment, technology etc.) Even in urban india, TFR is 1.8 and getting lower. The higher average of 2+ is only due to rural households where it is declining equally fast.

 

So overpopulation has stopped being a problem. World doesn't think about overpopulation anymore.

Edited September 8, 2016 by randomGuy

[randomGuy]

^bro what about the next 200 years? The fall can still be drastic from yr 2100 to 2200. Did u know that effective fertility rate (after taking gender gap etc. In account) of China had been1.08-1.25 babies per couple in last 5 yrs. One of the scholar predicts that Chinese population is gonna be 600 million by 2100 -

 http://en.yibada.com/articles/137309/20160702/scholar-predicts-china-s-population-would-be-below-1-billion-by-2100.htm

 

The trend of crashing TFR has been the same in Japan, korea, Europe , Thailand etc and the same factors are at play ( women empowerment, technology etc.) Even in urban india, TFR is 1.8 and getting lower. The higher average of 2+ is only due to rural households where it is declining equally fast.

 

So overpopulation has stopped being a problem. World doesn't think about overpopulation anymore.

[randomGuy]

31 minutes ago, Vilander said:

 

31 minutes ago, Vilander said:

 

 

31 minutes ago, Vilander said:

here we go i reported the image, dirty bed covers and all :)  - i am trying to understand the match though - interesting - could you explain the factoring you used.  Why is 80 year olds and 60 year older number stay constant over 20 years pyramid and 40 years pyramid - because its relative - say we get that. 

Next question is if this happens world is screwed - since imagine having to support 4 elders all by yourself - your dad,mom - their brother and or a sister - while your wife support similar number in her side. That is supporting 8 older people by you and your spouse. There is no way this is sustainable, forget it its not even attainable. 

 

bro..every 20 yr age group will move 1 step upwards (20 yrs upwards) after 20 yrs and the assumptions like

-80+ people will die

- 20-40 age group only will reproduce. so if  20-40 age group has x people , then after 20 years 0-20 years agegroup will have x/2 people if fertility rate is 1.

 

ya, economy is gonna be screwed but since there is technology and automation, the smaller younger generation will be able to support the larger older population I think.

 

and the bed sheet is quite clean pic quality isnt the best. :D

[Singh bling]

20 hours ago, mishra said:

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

If 1 child policy was so successful then why they are now back with 2 child policy?. China is still most populated nation on Earth. there is no reason for them to go back to 2 child policy unless they are below a billion

[zen]

52 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

^bro what about the next 200 years? The fall can still be drastic from yr 2100 to 2200. Did u know that effective fertility rate (after taking gender gap etc. In account) of China had been1.08-1.25 babies per couple in last 5 yrs. One of the scholar predicts that Chinese population is gonna be 600 million by yr end -

 http://en.yibada.com/articles/137309/20160702/scholar-predicts-china-s-population-would-be-below-1-billion-by-2100.htm

 

The trend of crashing TFR has been the same in Japan, korea, Europe , Thailand etc and the same factors are at play ( women empowerment, technology etc.) Even in urban india, TFR is 1.8 and getting lower. The higher average of 2+ is only due to rural households where it is declining equally fast.

 

So overpopulation has stopped being a problem. World doesn't think about overpopulation anymore.

2100-2200 is hard to predict as there are numerous factors including how much we suck the planet and available energy/resources 

 

Overpopulation is a problem because we may be reaching a peak of what the planet can sustain. Post that the laws of diminishing returns could kick in .... which is why we have to be careful about saving the planet for future gen

Edited September 8, 2016 by zen

[gattaca]

Japan started allowing more immigrants because of declining population.  Very interesting to see how the future looks like. But what Random Guy is quoting is very true the fertility rates have fallen drastically. 

[Adi_91]

14 hours ago, gattaca said:

Only people who couldn't survive in India will go Phoren. But people are a big asset you are underestimating power of people. Indians(NRIS) can now help with foreign policy.

Matlab?

[zen]

23 minutes ago, sarchasm said:

Malthussian mistake that has been debunked again and again. 

 

Also, if India becomes as resource efficient as Israel in agriculture, it can comfortably sustain twice its current population and have spare for export. So what's this overpopulation problem again?

Debunked by whom? UN projects 11B people by 2100. Ind is going to be the most populous country. May after 200 years, overpopulation may not be in issue, but what happens b/w now and 2100 is the key 

 

If IF and BUTS were pots and pans, there would be no thinkers. If we can farm in moon, what number can we sustain?

[zen]

This thread has inspired me to create the theory of "no problems" 

 

City X suffers from acute air pollution and traffic situation. The roads are mostly 2 lanes. In the last few years, the city has seen economic growth leading to migration from nearby areas to the city. Because of the economic growth, average household income has gone up as well. The future looks promising for the city. 

 

However, the above situation has led to a) increase in population of the city, b) more cars on the roads as more and more people with increasing income are driving 4 doors vehicle. This in turn has negatively impacted the traffic situation and air pollution level (as many of the vehicles emit a lot of greenhouse gases). If the situation continues, it could lead to severe health related issues for the citizens of the city as well as acute traffic problems that could threaten to bring the city to a standstill. 

 

To solve the problem, the government had appointed the "no problem" committee. Below are the findings of the committee: 

 

a) Because of the drop in fertility rates, the population is going to decrease considerably by 2178

b) New technology including floating vehicles and multilevel roadways are expected to be the norm by 2187

c) All vehicles are expected to be zero polluting by the year 2160

 

Considering the above, the committee sees no problem with the current situation in the city. As the problems will automatically start getting solved in the 22nd century. All that citizens have to do now is carry on with their lives as the future from 2160 onward is bright

 

 

Edited September 9, 2016 by zen

[randomGuy]

10 minutes ago, zen said:

This thread has inspired me to create the theory of "no problems" 

 

City X suffers from acute air pollution and traffic situation. The roads are mostly 2 lanes. In the last few years, the city has seen economic growth leading to migration from nearby areas to the city. Because of the economic growth, average household income has gone up as well. The future looks promising for the city. 

 

However, the above situation has led to a) increase in population of the city, b) more cars on the roads as more and more people with increasing income are driving 4 doors vehicle. This in turn has negatively impacted the traffic situation and air pollution level (as many of the vehicles emit a lot of greenhouse gases). If the situation continues, it could lead to severe health related issues for the citizens of the city as well as acute traffic problems that could threaten to bring the city to a standstill. 

 

To solve the problem, the government had appointed the "no problem" committee. Below are the findings of the committee: 

 

a) Because of the drop in fertility rates, the population is going to decrease considerably by 2178

b) New technology including floating vehicles and multilevel roadways are expected to be the norm by 2187

c) All vehicles are expected to be zero polluting by the year 2160

 

Considering the above, the committee sees no problem with the current situation in the city. As the problems will automatically start getting solved in the 22nd century. All that citizens have to do now is carry on with their lives as the future from 2160 onward is bright

 

 

 

Bro, Since you brought overpopulation, people told you that TFR is already nearing 2.1 and will go below it as well.

 

Air pollution, traffic situation has nothing to do with the fact that India has almost the same population as China with 1/3rd land area. There needs to be more cities, better planning etc. But There is no lack of resources or land.

 

You seem to be confused and Sarchasm has been quite correct on this topic...Also, its not like the world is not working on technological solutions like renewables, electric vehicles etc. Within a decade or two, use of coal and petrol may well be history you know.