Never mind. I'm an idiot.

It should also be noted that wealthy countries are having issues of plateauing or declining population, due to more families having ~2 kids, give or take 2, leaving a larger or just as large older population to younger.

And really, Malthusian thinking has been wrong so many times, largely because it ignores technological growth, and assumes static trends.

Well, let's say we were able to travel 1,000 times the speed of light. It would still take us 75 years to get outside of the galaxy.

Just use The Warp, it's a helluva lot faster than going FLS travel. The only problem is that there's a 99% chance anyone driving through it will end up being food for the Chaos Gods, especially since we don't have Webways or Navigators yet.

I hear Mars may make promising real-estate via some terraforming, eh?

In any case, we still have plenty of space on earth and technology can do wonderful things... but at this exponential rate of population growth, it will have to be faced sooner or later.

Overpopulation won't be a problem in the United States or Canada. People might think it is because both countries allow for far too many resources per person, and eventually we won't be able to do that. A large portion of America's growth is from immigrants and immigrants reproducing like they are still in their homeland.

The much, much larger problem is that all the world is industrializing. There is a universal increase in demand for energy and a shortening energy supply. That should limit population growth more than anything. I don't even consider overpopulation a problem at this point.

logically yes, but peoples six drives are not driven by logic. people will continue to use what they do not have, the growing crisis of debt around the world and per citizen in the united states is undeniable proof of that.

I've been thinking about that for years and years. The media rarely seems to like to discuss the overpopulation issue in any depth, preferring to tell people that driving electric cars will save the world. Less consumption/alternative energy etc. helps/is a wise course to start on (imo), but the more population increases, the more consumption increases despite conservation. If nothing else, water may be a problem eventually. I don't mean just drinking water, either - all our mass industry depends on huge amounts of water during the production processes. Blue gold....

It'd be nice if we could get out into outer space (for resources or to colonize, or both) and solve the issue that way, but being a pessimist in that regard (the Universe is a REALLY HUGE place and we can't even "easily" get to Mars yet) I think we'll find a way to decrease our population on our own long before that...eg, mass starvation as food supply chains breakdown, or perhaps a few disease pandemics. The question is, will there be enough resources for those remaining to survive for centuries more afterwords. No one can really say...

I'm getting a t-shirt with this on it.




6.999.999.999
&
me








space. It's where the growth market is!

Im assuming this is a clever anology at basically saying people are lazy.

But i like said anology because it's true. Any shortage anywhere...nothing is gonna be done about it >>.

The way I see it, cannibalism is the only solution.

And the Gospel of Flesh is born. Heed my words, disciples of Moloch. Listen not to that gospel, and pass not your children through the fire. Instead, go peacefully when your time has come, and struggle not.

nope.

















zombies... it'll be mother natures payback

The rate of population growth stabilised in the late 1960s and is currently predicted to peak at 9 billion in the year 2050.


Aye, and another statistic I read said that if you put Texas and one other state together, you could fit the entire population of Earth into those two states with comfortable living space.

Of course, our ideas of "comfortable living space" might vary. I live on a landmass "slightly smaller than Oregon" with a population of 62 million people, most of whom are crowded into the south-east of the main island. The nearest city to me has a population density equal to metropolitan New York, and that's not even the most densely-populated bit: the capital has 14 million people in its metropolitan area. Yet this hyper-concentrated island reserves 23% of its landmass for arable farming and was energy self-sufficient until about five years ago (we now import slightly more than we export). Such concentrated populations don't feel claustrophobic because there's so much green space - so yards (gardens) are tiny and houses are packed on top of each other, but you're rarely more than a mile from open countryside or parkland, even in London.

If population was, itself, cause for concern, we would not be in the top 10 wealthiest nations on Earth - and crowded Monaco would be a post-apocalyptic wasteland.


Human beings are extremely lazy - all our ingenuities have been necessity-based, but we've proven over and over that we can adapt to anything when the need arises. You just need a tipping point, and the problem is almost self-correcting. Example: I'm suddenly noticing more solar panels on rooftops and electric cars these days.

I really don't think there's much to worry about.

Humans are the worst parasites on this planet :sadvaultboy:

The problem will sort itself out. When there arent enough resources, people will die, then we will have a balence eventually.

Now non renewable resources on the other hand. We are [censored] when it comes to those. But I have no problem. I honestly hope humanity dosent make it to other planets, much better that we are contained here.

This.

If we can't figure out how to live peacefully on this planet with nature and others, not to mention we don't know everything about this planet how can they expect life on another planet to be any better...Mad Scientist Buffoons

Actual it would be cool to go to Titan, Saturns moon, or the Great Red Spot.

Aye, overpopulation isn't nearly as big a problem as "some people" (can't go any more detailed than that on this forum ) would have us believe. I read in the paper (NRC Handelsblad) this weekend that 'only' 1 billion people are suffering from a lack of food, while over 1,5 billion people are overweight. Makes you think, doesn't it?


That won't be a problem if we sacrifice the elderly to Khorne, solving the population ageing in one stroke! :hehe:

Space isn't a big problem and there's some growing room when it comes to food (if you're willing to go largely vego and possibly eat vat-grown fungi), but water will be increasingly difficult to supply. Desalination can only do so much before you start getting patches of sea that are too salty, so efficiency is very important and cleaning up waste water may become unavoidable (not that there's any real reason to avoid it in the first place... as I recall, it actually comes out cleaner than the stuff in reservoirs ).

That's the absolute basics covered. However, if the entire world (or even just China + India) is to have a high standard of living -that is, equal to what most of us here have- there will be a massive increase in demand for everything. Iron, energy, medicine... not all of these are things we can just make more of or find more of (cost effectively, anyway).

But the biggest issue, as far as I can see, is that we will likely reach a point where we don't grow any more. Then we can let out a sigh of relief and loosen out belts a bit, until we remember that we've got a growth-based economic system. The whole thing is a great big complex pyramid scheme, really. I doubt it'll suffer a sudden collapse (from this cause, anyway :rolleyes:), but it will reach a point where it just has to change, if it doesn't along the way :shrug:.

Apologies to anyone who actually knows anything about economics and stuff :hehe:.


I call it "Applied Laziness" :happy:.


Or get them to build a space elevator... made of their fallen comrade (internet old geezer points if you remember that thread).

Another World War or Black Plague seems likely. Of course if it's a world war, it may go nuclear and kill everyone.

Not all life on earth, that is just typical arrogant human thinking. You could blow earth to pieces and still some micro-organisms might survive on the pieces of it and inhabit the planets they fall to :hehe:

But the fact is (if i remeber said fact correctly :blush:), Earth can support only 3 billion people living on first world standards. Colonising Mars might be a viable solution within few hundred years, but there's no way humanity ever leaves this solar system. Space is just too big, and the speed of light, which is impossible to reach, is ridiculously slow.

Eventually we will be living on other planets anyways so nothing to worry about =]

I really [censored] hate statements like these.

Are you going to do something about it, or just sit at your computer, do nothing, [censored], and wallow is self-loathing while continuing to be the problem? You focus on the bad, there will only be bad, and you deserve to continue living in a bleak existence. Just don't spread your sunshine my way.

I'd say more like 5-7 yrs

What a way to take something to heart :poke:

Yes I'm going to do something about, right now I'm campaigning for Prime minister and when I'm successful I'm going to.....Yes because I would be telling you my plan :confused:
Nahh I'ma sit at this computer, flick between this and work, yawn, and kick back and relax.
I don't focus on the "bad" I see the truth in the whole human species, including other. Every living thing on this planet evolved from a parasite so turn round and attack me for saying it is just plain arrogant and ignorant.
Name the amount of good humans have done, so much so that it out ways the bad thing by a good big margin.