One major reason world population growth cannot be curbed? We not only cannot agree that it should be; we cannot determine how it should be done. There is the risk that the vulnerable among us will be at risk – even for their lives: the sick and elderly and unborn children. Recently in China, a woman was forced to have a late-term abortion and she and the baby both died during the procedure. In Britain there is a housing shortage and one of the remedies suggested was to force old people from their homes and put them in group situations. In our own country, cutbacks in Medicaid are tantamount to the same thing.
Religion is close to the hearts and minds of people globally and their belief system often includes a “go forth and multiply” clause buried somewhere in a holy text. The majority of us cannot truly understand the details of another person’s religion and this makes understanding and compassion difficult. The feeling of “strange” never wears off in their relationship.
Another major reason that population growth cannot easily be cured has to do with another element in our world that could never be either accurately predicted nor controlled, the weather. The effect of weather on food growth is immeasurable. When food is not easily obtained, populations migrate to where it is plentiful.
Economic forces have been a big reason for migrations. These days if you want a job, you have to move to where they are. Migration, migration, migration.
Fertility rates among populations is very important. Some groups have a higher fertility weight than others and when used to increase the size of a group so that it will dominate politically, you finally see the negative side of population growth. This being the case, how could one convince all population representatives in a forum that they should slow their birth rate and allow political domination by a group other than theirs they view as the one with the mission to succeed?
Even were we to achieve a stable population here we would be inundated with people from countries experiencing famine who would be making a mass migration for food.
The future is not a bright one to anticipate. One thing is certain, understanding and cooperation among all global residents must be achieved in order for us all to survive. If not, wars of conquest will ensue. And with an overabundance of people – especially in urban areas as they are now, disease is a factor. It is becoming clearer and clearer with each passing day that population control is the key to future life on this small planet.
roblorinov
October 29, 2011
SH I suspect the way things are going that this will not be a problem in the near future. I think big wars are being planned and that means big death statistics. War is good for economy and population control (elimination) and I think the powers know this and are plottting like moose and squirrel
samhenry
October 29, 2011
Absolutely. WWII was so good to us, yes? Here are Moose and Squirrel and those hapless Russian spies:
James Crawford
October 29, 2011
I’m going to concede your point that differences in population growth rates between disparate groups of people will and in fact are having profound politicaimplications.
However; I’ll take issue with the idea that World population growth cannot be curbed because it already is being curbed. Back in the 1970s when the Limits to Growth people were pushing their snake oil, only a handful of skeptics were willing to look at their scary looking graphs and take note of the mathematical implications. Way back about 1975, the population curve had reached what is called the inflection point at about 3.5 billion people. The inflection point indicates that the rate of population growth rate had reached it’s peak and was starting to decrease. Population growth rates vary greatly and are lowest in the former Soviet bloc and industrialized democracies. An indicator that has even more predictive power than population growth rate is Total Fertility Factor. The average TFC for the industrialized democracies is far less than the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman. Their populations are still growing slightly, but they are getting older. Within the next few decades the populations of Europe, Russian and Japan will implode. Think of the implications of 100 grandparents having only 40 grandchildren. Extrapolation suggests that there will be no Russians, Germans or Japanese left in about 1600 years. The only industrialized democracies that will not suffer a population implosion are those whose people speak Hebrew or English.
The population growth rate in the Third World remains well above replacement level, but it is declining rapidly. TFCs in the developing countries are declining to levelsnot far above replaceent level.
I recommend reading The Birth Dearth or The Empty Cradle for more info.
Sorry to be disagreeable.
samhenry
October 30, 2011
JC – you are not at all disagreeable; you simply disagree. Thank you for this additional information which only underscores my point that there will be an excess of older people subject to excessive demands that they be denied healthcare or any other kind of health services.
I did mention fertility rates but not the curve.
I agree that fertility rates among Europeans and European Americans is such that they are not even replacing themselves. This will end in their becoming extinct probably sooner than you envision.
James Crawford
October 30, 2011
I think the plummeting fertility and aging population of Europe is already making them vulnerable to extinction. Most people have a vague understanding that the demographic transition to below replacement birth rates has resulted in a population imbalance that puts a severe strain on government funded retirement and health care systems. Less obvious is the fact that private retirement funds will plummet in value when there are not enough younger, productive, workers to buy the investment assets. Onerous and confiscatory tax rates will only make the problem worse. This is why the Euro bailout will fail and why Japan will not recover economically from the Earthquake.
You hit the nail on the head by citing the political implications of varying birthrates. Japan is so xenophobic that immigration is all but forbidden which results in a labor shortage that was forcing them to export industries even before the earthquake nuked their power supply. Europe has until recently eagerly welcomed immigrants. The African and Arab immigrants have a different religion, different customs as well as their own political perspectives and allegiances. The newcomers are breeding so much faster than the natives that the most popular name for newborn boys in some European countries is Mohamed. Aside from the imperialistic grab for oil, the Libyan operation was retribution for Daffy Gadaffy expediting the flow of immigrants which he stated would destroy European civilization. Perhaps the Europeans could reduce the flow of immigrants by ceasing the practice of literally burning the Third World’s food for their fuel?
samhenry
October 30, 2011
Good points all, JC
I have a friend who lives in Bath in Britain. She said when you go into London it is a changed place with the Brit stores having been replaced by ones from the Middle East.
Anglo-Saxons will simply have to increase their fertility rate but they are so far behind the curve now it may be too late.
Who would have ever thought that “invasion” could come so peacefully and overwhelm us so soon?
Saddest of all, the landscape will be changed with buildings such as mosques being constructed and parish churches being bulldozed by Muslims to make way for a mosque (I wrote about that).
In future, we may see the sacking of our museums to destroy our historic and cultural artifacts. If the Taliban can blow up the colossal buddhas what else can they turn their talents to?
A bleak future for Anglos. Of course, China is positioning its population throughout the world so current “title holders” to immigrants who are to be feared will be replaced in future themselves.
The Morb
October 30, 2011
LOL !!! Good one Sam !!! …
samhenry
October 30, 2011
Why hello my Morb. I appreciate your appreciation. Love ya!
James Crawford
October 30, 2011
The British are boasting that there women are having more baby’s.
This isnt as reassuring as it should be because British women are having more baby’s because they have discovered African and Arab men.
samhenry
October 30, 2011
Oy – where did you read this?
James Crawford
October 31, 2011
It was intended as a joke, but there is truth to it. At the risk of being perceived as a race baited, I’ll provide some references.
Below is a link to a wikipedia article that is exceptionally well referenced.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom
Two salient statistics are that 86% of the population are “White British” while only 64% of children born are classified as “White British.” While there is a difference in birth rates between native “White British” verses the still relatively small number of immigrants, the difference is not that great. The female immigrant population would need to have a phenomanally high birth rate. The birth rate difference presuming no interracial births is
(36/14) / (64/86) = 2.57 / 0.744 = 3.5 to 1
Almost no country on earth has a birth rate or TFF high enough for the small immigrant population to account for such a high percentage of the births if all babies that were not classified as “white British” had been born to immigrant women. A significant fraction of the babies that aren’t “white British” must be born to “white British” women.
Keep in mind that there are a number of articles ad studies “debunking” the “myth” that a disproportionate percentage of births in various European countries are to muslims. The common flaw is that they examine the ethnicity of the mother without regard to the father.
Of course this reminds me of my joke about WW-II resulting in an entire generation of French men being sired by Germans. It is crude but true.
DarcsFalcon
November 1, 2011
A few years ago, just for giggles, I figured out that if you took the total area of TX and divided it into quarter-acre plots (the average lot size of middle class homes around here for a family of 4), that you would have more than enough land in TX alone to put the entire world population there, with 4 people per quarter-acre plot. That leaves all the land in the rest of the planet for food. I thought that was pretty astonishing. I don’t think we’d have any probably sustaining the population we have if we used the land we have more productively. I think we could support lots more people.
samhenry
November 1, 2011
The only problem here is arable land. There is lots of land but little arable land and for water – fresh potable – even less.
Try going back over maps with the arable land and water resources built into the equation and report back!
James Crawford
November 1, 2011
By arable land I presume you include irrigated land. The California San Juanqin and Imperial vallies used to unproductive. The Imperial valley was desert while the San Juanqin was dry grass land fit for little more than grazing. Remember the TV show “The Big Valley”? These lands were transformed into some of the most productive crop land in the world by irrigation systems. The San Juanqin valley produced ten percent of national ag revenue.
Then a malignant moron issued an executive order to close down the pumps that supplied the irrigation water during the critical months because of some stupid fish that no one had heard of and had been doing fine in spite of the pumps. Interestingly, the pumps providing water to cities stayed on because the population had voted for the malignant moron.
One can argue that only a few wealthy farmers suffered economic loss and that their immigrant laborers can find other work. However; if the malignant morons continue to destroy irrigation systems the arable land will decrease until there simply isn’t enough food to feed a population of 7 billion. This threat is magnified by the idiotic idea of burning the Third World’s food for the First World’s (mostly Europe) fuel. The European environmentalists are literally hiring African Governments to drive people off their ancestral lands so than it can be transformed into biodiesel plantations.
Yea, I know I’m beginning to sound like a bleeding heart liberal.
samhenry
November 1, 2011
JC – anymore bleeding on this site will result in banning or, at the very least shunning and the cutting of your beard. LOL Good points per usual from you and only from you because being in agriculture you bring that history and perspective here. Bleed on.