These days, I hear so often people panicking about overpopulation. Among the lectures I attend professors in up to three courses (ECON 221, ECON 211, and EOSC 114) freak out as to how fast world population is growing and how soon we will run short of resources to upkeep us all.
My Econ 211 professor told me last month that our population reached 7 billion now. "That means we've got another China within the past few decades".
So my question is: Why do we have overpopulation ? And furthermore, will that really bring us all to doom ?
Here's my logic: in most economically developed countries, the trend nowadays is to have few children, if not none, per married couple. Many couples actually decide not to even have children, and many others just want one or two children. In my case, most couples around me in the three places I've lived in (Seoul South Korea, Vancouver, BC, Canada, and Geneva, Switzerland) want at most two children. The reasons can extend from personal preferrence to economic issues.
It takes two children per couple to keep a population growth rate of 0.
Of course, you will tell me that such is not the case in developing countries, and that birth rates are far greater in the Third World. And this is where I also think is the problem.
So here's another follow-up question: Why do these people keep giving births ?
Even in developed countries, having two children presents to be an incredible economic burden. So for these people, if they have several children, I'm just lost for words. What are they thinking ?
In effect, I'm just arguing the Malthusian trap here.
If every person in a less developed country were 1. Engaged to one person of the opposite sex only 2, had two or less children per couple then the people will benefit from not only a huge uplifting of economic burden, but will also contribute to slowing down the rate of population growth. Furthermore, even the countries' GDP might increase, since there will be far less people to treat for Malaria and other deadly diseases.
Here's one more thing to consider. If less developed countries are the ones contributing to overpopulation (although I am aware that India plays a huge part too - I'm leaving China out because they have that one-child policy going now), then the problem of overpopulation is also an issue that will be concentrated in the less-developed countries, right ? In a globalization-perspective, the stable population in developed countries will barely suffer since they will just import the resources from less developed countries and just maintain their own resources to a consistent level.
Does this mean doom will be unleashed only in less developped countries, the (partial) cause of the issue ?
Please enlighten me
Edit: Here's something else I don't understand. Clearly the developed countries have things to learn from, like the culture of being engaged to only one person. This culture has been adapted by other cultures even though this used to be contrary to their original customs (e.g. Japan), because it is a useful aspect of western culture. Why are the developed countries so stubborn and do not adopt these customs themselves ? We always hear about promoting education to these people, but where is the result ?
I know that my grand parents had 11 kids so that if one kid failed to be good at life, they could fall back on another. Turns out their first kid, my mother was the most successful.
Edit: Not kidding though, thats really why they had 11 kids. My grandpa participated in the Vietnam War under the CIA to sabotage the NVA/vietcong cross borders. He had two originally in Laos, but when the opportunity was given to travel to the US, he had as many kids as he could so he could potentially be rich.
To put this into perspective, its too general to answer since theres so many factors but then it comes to the question of morals... And thats not a very desirable discussion on the forums. :/
Read the national geographic that came out yesterday instead of speculating stuff. There is a huge article (it's front page too) explaining why the problem is poverty and the way we consume, not over population.
Here's the thing. A lot of couples in third world countries live on farms, or have a lot of work needed to be able to survive. More children = more workers. That and the death rate of infants is much higher in third world countries. The reason we have population growth isn't neccessarly more kids being born, it's people living longer and in better condition.
when a large amount of the male population was away from home/loved ones. less chance to have kids. Also things like the plague would come around every few hundred years and wipe out a fair amount of the population in certain areas.
There is no overpopulation. There's plenty of room for everyone. Plus as countries become industrialized the birth rate drops. Eventually population will slowly cap out. The best way to ensure this is to start modernizing.
On February 08 2011 17:00 Disregard wrote: To put this into perspective, its too general to answer since theres so many factors but then it comes to the question of morals... And thats not a very desirable discussion on the forums. :/
I understand, but it might not have been so desirable for professors in lectures either. I don't understand why you try to discard this post from the 'General' section of the forum. Life isn't always pleasures.
I think the main problem is not so much the number of people that are on Earth but the fact that people are using up so much energy and resources to a point where sooner or later, we (and certainly our grandkids and so on) will not be able to live like we are now.
On February 08 2011 17:01 MrRicewife wrote: Read the national geographic that came out yesterday instead of speculating stuff. There is a huge article (it's front page too) explaining why the problem is poverty and the way we consume, not over population.
Do you have a link? Unfortunately not everyone can subscribe.
I find it hard to believe that the number of people isn't a problem though. Of course if everyone lived like wild animals and died at 15 we wouldn't be overpopulated, but since we try to improve our lives we put massive stress on the environment. There is only a certain extent to which we can be "green" while also enjoying modern comforts. Hopefully we will get better at that anyway.
It seems as though a lot of lower class people here in the US have a lot of kids for some reason. My mom works at a free clinic, and some 19 year old keeps coming in for a check-up, and he has a girlfriend and with 4 kids :/ 3 of them are his. I have no idea how you end up with 4 kids at the age of 19 but at least he works to support them. My brother also has 5 kids and i think he is 26 or something.
In countries without old-age pensions or superannuation it's very common for couples to have many children so that when they're old and can't look after themselves then they have more people to look after them than those that only have a few. In effect it's because of a poor economy and/or lack of monetary planning that causes people to have more children. I guess it wouldn't be as much of a problem if people were properly educated about finances, but a poor economy somewhat prevents that too. So I guess its all just a part of the cycle of poverty.
Let's put it this way, if you were super poor and had nothing to pass your time with (ie TV, internet, etc...) after work, what do you do? Sex.
No seriously. There was a study that found that birth rates of developing nations went down when TVs were introduced 'cause they had other stuff to do than just sex. If I come across it I'll link it.
On February 08 2011 17:01 MrRicewife wrote: Read the national geographic that came out yesterday instead of speculating stuff. There is a huge article (it's front page too) explaining why the problem is poverty and the way we consume, not over population.
I assume this is the article to which you were referring. If not, I have to tell you, the problems they talk about are numerous, which include overpopulation, are all very foreboding to the casual reader like myself, and none of it is being talked about outside of pieces like these. It highlights just how ignorant most of the world is to these problems.
You are asking the wrong question. The question is why people get less children.
If you ask woman in countries with high birth rates why they get so many children they have no answer. If you ask them how many children would be ideal they have no answer. It is as if they don't realize sex and getting pregnant are related. They have sex and children just keep happening, despite options for birth control being available.
There's also this nice story about someone in Africa learning the woman of a village how to put a condom on a banana. So that person comes back a year later and they all have children. So she asked why they didn't use a condom. They said they did. They had all put a condom on a banana, but apparently that hadn't worked.
Then it's just a question of the exponential function. In the most primitive tribes war used to be the no.1 cause of death. Not famine. Hunter gatherers had no problem with food at all. They also didn't have to work. They would just hang around doing nothing and it would only take them a little time to get food. These tribes killed each other in wars. Why no one can explain. They don't even know themselves. There's no reason to fight over property or land, as they don't have that. Apparently the reason is just to get revenge.
So when we get into the agricultural revolution you suddenly get huge famines. One period you would have a lot of food and population would explode. There would also be no wars. Then they would have a bad harvest or a war and they would die at huge numbers. When almost everyone has to produce food and you get just as many children as you can feed, when a war breaks down and no food at all can be produced, you get extreme famines.
As for overpopulation, if we had way way less people we would all be a lot richer. The earth is limited. Why do we need even 1 billion people? Would we really be worse off with only 20 million world wide? What would be the problem of that?
If you think about what the ideal population would be I think it would be a lot less than what we have now. We can only hope we can limit climate change, increase food production, avoid major wars and somehow hope that the fashion of getting less children, which does really seem to be just a fad, somehow catches in those parts of the world.
I heard this story before about overpopulation and how it's supposed to be a problem. So I did some research into it. According to my research the reason why there seems to be a problem is how humans function.
Example take a twelve room house imagine that it represents the earth. put one person in it they have free reign of the entire thing. Then add another person say a woman that's his wife. Still plenty of room. They have a daughter, she wants a place where she can have privacy there's only 11 rooms where the husband can go. Add another two people call them a different couple well they can't share as they are different people. So we divided the house in half six rooms a piece but one family has one room where the husband can't go.
Basically if there's was no countries nor anyone wanting more that want they need overpopulation would not be a thought in our minds.
1st world countries are definitely more to blame than 3rd world. They may have larger families but it's because of the reasons already stated; labor force/lack of education, etc. We don't have any excuse for what we do, we know better and do it anyways.
A good example of why we're screwed: Remember those awesome Sun Chips bags that were 100% Biodegradable? Ever wonder why you don't see those anymore? Oh, that's right. They pulled all but one kind because they got to many customer complaints about the new "green" bags were 'too loud.' I'll admit they were definitely louder and made a distinct sound but come on 'MERICA. Come on.
EPT
