Hells Awaits the Overpopulated Earth

[ChimneySweep]

Climate change and global terrorism are often cited as being “the biggest challenge facing humanity going into the 21st century”.

They aren’t - there’s something bigger.

Overpopulation

Too many people, not enough resources. No one seems capable of stopping the rise in human numbers, so all we can do is sit back and watch the nightmare unfold. I shudder to think what the world will be like in 100 years’ time…

But anyway, the reason for starting this thread. I want to know why people think we’re so incapable of curbing our numbers. I think it’s primarily because politicians and other leaders are reluctant to say to their people: have fewer or no children. It would be a short-term vote loser.

[Michael_Bloxham]

There hasn’t been a push for population control because we haven’t really seen the effects yet. And when we do see the effects, then perhaps the earth will tend to sort itself out (as the lack of resources will begin to effect the world economy, increasing famine, wars, etc.). However, we may be soon at the stage where humanity does not have to limit itself to only one planet…

[ChimneySweep]

Very true. By the time the “collective mind of the people” realises what’s going on, we’ll be up to our eyes in shit.

I sympathise with your Gaia-esque comment that the world will sort itself out. The bad news is probably that the space-colonisation age will probably come after all this, so won’t be able to prevent it.

[Mastriani]

@ChimneySweep

Very true. By the time the “collective mind of the people” realises what’s going on, we’ll be up to our eyes in shit.

I sympathise with your Gaia-esque comment that the world will sort itself out. The bad news is probably that the space-colonisation age will probably come after all this, so won’t be able to prevent it.

We have no means, and aren’t even close to discovering, a form of propulsion that makes space colonisation anything but Emo dreaming fantasy.

Three thoughts:

1. Some people, and I’m holding my tongue here saying "some’, serve no purpose, and just don’t need to exist.

2. Eugenics.

3. Parental licensing.

[ChimneySweep]

If only well-meaning, über-powerful aliens would come here and impose those things, Mastriani…

[Mastriani]

@ChimneySweep

If only well-meaning, über-powerful aliens would come here and impose those things, Mastriani…

LMMFAOROTFLMMFAO … classic retort, priceless, mio amico. =D>

[Dan1 (Dan~)]

@ChimneySweep

If only well-meaning, über-powerful aliens would come here and impose those things, Mastriani…

They’re too smart to waste time on trying to solve the self-caused problems of humanity. Loving and helping a race only because they are stupid and destroying their planet, isn’t really reason, or intelligence. It’s anthropocentric altruism. It’s hollywood all over again. A big group of “innocent” assholes causes doom, then one hero goes up to save them all from themselves. Yah right…

[Mr_Predictable]

Overpopulation will be self-regulating, so there nothing to worry about. Also, the human intellect does take care of this. There’s plenty of countries with declining populations, and many report that they’d rather enjoy material goods than a family, I’m thinking Italy here. So, people know about the struggle for resources in their own lives and choose not to have children.

[ChimneySweep]

We’re still on a wavelength, mia amiko Mastriano

Dan: I think they would, because they’d see we’re worth keeping because of the things we can produce. Plus they’d probably like life for life’s sake.

MrPred: That sort of argument probably reassures lots of people, saving them from having to worry about what’s actually happening. You’re right that certain peoples react properly to overpopulation (such as the Italians and the Spanish and French too to an extent), but most don’t. Most of the third-worlders are still breeding like rabbits, utterly unmoved by the global situation. These are the major culprits here.

We should applaud the Chinese for implementing the one-child rule. If only more countries would.

[Mastriani]

@ChimneySweep

We’re still on a wavelength, mia amiko Mastriano

Dan: I think they would, because they’d see we’re worth keeping because of the things we can produce. Plus they’d probably like life for life’s sake.

MrPred: That sort of argument probably reassures lots of people, saving them from having to worry about what’s actually happening. You’re right that certain peoples react properly to overpopulation (such as the Italians and the Spanish and French too to an extent), but most don’t. Most of the third-worlders are still breeding like rabbits, utterly unmoved by the global situation. These are the major culprits here.

We should applaud the Chinese for implementing the one-child rule. If only more countries would.

Yea, let the chants begin; “Sweep, Sweep, Sweep” … you said it again before I had to …

Say, are you busy for the next … hrmmm … 4 - 8 years? I have a job opportunity for you here in America … you’ll like it, high profile, decent pay, and everyone is a hooker.

You want to try it, you know you do.

[Mr_Predictable]

@ChimneySweep

We’re still on a wavelength, mia amiko Mastriano

Dan: I think they would, because they’d see we’re worth keeping because of the things we can produce. Plus they’d probably like life for life’s sake.

MrPred: That sort of argument probably reassures lots of people, saving them from having to worry about what’s actually happening. You’re right that certain peoples react properly to overpopulation (such as the Italians and the Spanish and French too to an extent), but most don’t. Most of the third-worlders are still breeding like rabbits, utterly unmoved by the global situation. These are the major culprits here.

We should applaud the Chinese for implementing the one-child rule. If only more countries would.

Yes, but children in the third world die more quickly, and that’s why their parents have them. So, just like in the rich nations, people have an instinct for what they need to do.

You’re concerned about something that many instinctively manage.

[ChimneySweep]

In the “absolute third-world” yes, a lot of them do die off, but in the median countries, particularly the near eastern ones, they all have huge families that don’t die out young. And let’s not forgot all the third-worlders who live in the west, who have their large surviving families there.

Going back to your opinion on the matter, when do you expect human numbers to start “gently falling”, as presumably they ought to?

[Mr_Predictable]

@ChimneySweep

In the “absolute third-world” yes, a lot of them do die off, but in the median countries, particularly the near eastern ones, they all have huge families that don’t die out young. And let’s not forgot all the third-worlders who live in the west, who have their large surviving families there.

Going back to your opinion on the matter, when do you expect human numbers to start “gently falling”, as presumably they ought to?

It will be right when resources are stretched to the limit, or just beyond the limit. Too many resources will not be used because that will not be possible.

[Aidan_Mclaren]

Hell is here!

[Murex]

@ChimneySweep

Climate change and global terrorism are often cited as being “the biggest challenge facing humanity going into the 21st century”.

They aren’t - there’s something bigger.

Overpopulation

Too many people, not enough resources. No one seems capable of stopping the rise in human numbers, so all we can do is sit back and watch the nightmare unfold. I shudder to think what the world will be like in 100 years’ time…

But anyway, the reason for starting this thread. I want to know why people think we’re so incapable of curbing our numbers. I think it’s primarily because politicians and other leaders are reluctant to say to their people: have fewer or no children. It would be a short-term vote loser.

Yes, this topic doesn’t have enough attention. Not many people even know this will soon be a big problem. I have brought it up many times in discussion. It won’t be a problem until it’s too late.

As for a solution, I have a variety, but most would make me seem like a Neo-Hitler.

[ChimneySweep]

@Mr. Predictable

It will be right when resources are stretched to the limit, or just beyond the limit. Too many resources will not be used because that will not be possible.

Hold up, guv! Aren’t we already in a situation where resources are overstretched? I’d be interested to hear what a full-time charity worker would say about this!

Murex: I know what you mean. Join the club…

[Kriswest]

There is actually alot of resources left to be able to sustain a large population through the climate change… the only real dillemma is who is going to divide it up. And how do you get people to let go of their stuff. Sorry, I don’t see those that have, giving up to those that have not in a precarious situation… that goes against survival. Um and I will not let go of my resources to help unless I know you and you give fair exchange.

[lodinkinni]

Well, to take another view, overpopulation in and of itself is not completely horrible, provided that you’re increasing the size of third world populations, or the lowest class of a first world populace.

The main problem would be if those people were to gain first world status, and with it the wasteful attitudes that we first world citizens have. Indeed, if you were to read the book Collapse, by Jared Diamond, you’d see a lot of arguments that its not the increase in population, so much as the increase in individual consumption that seems to be causing the major environmental problems often equated to overpopulation. For example: China’s overpopulation has been something thats been a problem for generations. However, it wasn’t until that population moved forwards, using coal as its main source of energy, that it started to affect the environment in truly devastating ways. Indeed, Linfen, the heart of China’s coal industry, has been named one of the top ten most polluted spots in the world, while historical china had never had that harsh of an impact on its environment.

Now, why do I bring up pollution, instead of resource consumption? Simple: Resource consumption can always be regulated, and reduced to fit current production. Pollution, however, has the ability to STOP a site from producing for a good long while, or, in the case of nuclear or toxic materials, can stop it from producing permenantly. This reduces resources much faster than a bunch of mouths…and, when this first world status increases the expectations of food and waste, that also increases the consumption of resources, as well as their destruction.

So my proposal is this: Stop outsourcing, and stop giving third world countries money and food. Maybe even send over a few plague victims (the government won’t do this, so if you are or know a plague victim, send them in! Do your civic duty!), or introduce small pox—it worked against my ancestors, after all.

On the front of the first world countries, well, we’ve had something of a success with mass murderers and other deviants taking out a portion of the populace in the past, when we haven’t had bloody wars to do it for us, but right now, we have a pansy war going on, and no one with enough guts to start killing people on this side of the ocean, so we’re pretty much screwed. (Again: Do your civic duties: eat babies.)

So, thats my take on things. Take it lightly, take it seriously, but please, just take the rambling away from me. Tschüs!

[ChimneySweep]

I’d overlooked the consumption issue, so thanks for bringing it into the thread.

Of course, fuel usage aside, everyone needs a certain amount of food and space to live, so the energy factor doesn’t replace but adds to the problems already mentioned.

We westerners should keep quiet about the distribution, KW

[Mr_Predictable]

@ChimneySweep

@Mr. Predictable

It will be right when resources are stretched to the limit, or just beyond the limit. Too many resources will not be used because that will not be possible.

Hold up, guv! Aren’t we already in a situation where resources are overstretched? I’d be interested to hear what a full-time charity worker would say about this!

Murex: I know what you mean. Join the club…

No, that’s what they say on TV, but where’s the evidence?

The west is still turning out tons of products and the power’s still on. In the third world such stuff has never been developed, so you can’t say they’re going without, because they never had it to begin with.