Slog
News & ArtsMonday, August 3, 2009
Life Whatever, Overpopulation.
Posted by Eli Sanders on Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Via Sullivan, who also provides some links to more recognizable takes on planet-imperiling people multiplication.
1
Caught part of Glen Beck's awful awful radio show during my morning commute in which he was linking Obama's Science "Czar" John Holdren (lots of emphasis on the czar term) with Ehrlich's mad science of forcing abortions and sterilizations on Americans...
2
Yes, but the video fails to mention that if everyone in the world used as much in the way of natural resources as we do in the U.S., we'd need three more plant Earths. It’s not how many people; it's how much we trash the environment.
another cute little video...
http://www.storyofstuff.com/
another cute little video...
http://www.storyofstuff.com/
3
I'm guessing this video is made by some anti-contraceptive fundamentalist group who wants to convince us the world has plenty of room. Looks like they're changing their story about the entire-world-can-fit-in-Texas myth. They used to claim that the entire population of the world could fit into Texas if everyone lived in the same density as Manhattan. Now they're claiming everyone in Texas would have "a yard", no size of said yard mentioned. Also no mention of where these crammed Texans are going to grow their grain, make textiles, educate their children, earn incomes, shop for groceries or just amuse themselves.
4
Are these people mad? They are half right, the story of the orginal overpopulation myth is true, but to bust through the predicted limit of humanity, the industrial revolution happened. We got more efficient at growing, producing, putting people to work etc.
And really, the industrial revoluation either coincidentally, concurrently, or conjuctively occured when the supposed massive societal breakdown was supposed to happen.
But that trivial proposal of turning texas into one big suburb and everything is going to be ok and we can go on as normal.
Technology might actually be keeping up with population growth, but I'm not willing to bet the farm on it.
Who pays for that stuff?
And really, the industrial revoluation either coincidentally, concurrently, or conjuctively occured when the supposed massive societal breakdown was supposed to happen.
But that trivial proposal of turning texas into one big suburb and everything is going to be ok and we can go on as normal.
Technology might actually be keeping up with population growth, but I'm not willing to bet the farm on it.
Who pays for that stuff?
5
I don't see how anyone can deny that we are overpopulated when 500 million people live in perpetual starvation.
6
If you'll allow me to to shoot the messenger - that video was produced by the "Population Research Institute." Here's who they claim to be:
"Our Mission PDF Print E-mail
Debunk the myth of overpopulation, which cheapens human life and paves the way for abusive population control programs
Expose the relentless promotion of abortion, abortifacient contraception, and chemical and surgical sterilization in misleadingly labeled “population stabilization,” “family planning,” and “reproductive health” programs.
Defund these programs by exposing the coercion, deception, and racism inherent in them.
Emphasize that people are the most valuable resource on the planet, the one resource we cannot do without.
Promote pro-natal and pro-family attitudes, laws, and policies worldwide.
Encourage programs to help the poor become agents of their own development."
http://www.pop.org/
"Our Mission PDF Print E-mail
Debunk the myth of overpopulation, which cheapens human life and paves the way for abusive population control programs
Expose the relentless promotion of abortion, abortifacient contraception, and chemical and surgical sterilization in misleadingly labeled “population stabilization,” “family planning,” and “reproductive health” programs.
Defund these programs by exposing the coercion, deception, and racism inherent in them.
Emphasize that people are the most valuable resource on the planet, the one resource we cannot do without.
Promote pro-natal and pro-family attitudes, laws, and policies worldwide.
Encourage programs to help the poor become agents of their own development."
http://www.pop.org/
9
Awesome how it doesn't account for the infrastructure required to supply every family with a house and yard.
10
@5 - there has always been a proportion of the world population that lives in perpetual starvation. As the total population grows, so does that segment. It hardly goes to show that we're overpopulated.
@4 - I'd bet the farm on it. If I am wrong, though, that farm would be worth a lot of money.
@4 - I'd bet the farm on it. If I am wrong, though, that farm would be worth a lot of money.
12
It's basically true. All attempts to control the population of undeveloped countries have failed. But some of the efforts to turn undeveloped countries into developed ones have worked, proving it is possible. And once a country becomes developed, the population levels off. And incidentally, urban, industrial populations begin consuming fewer resources as they live more densely.
So poverty is solvable, some of the time. Overconsumption of resources seems to be solvable. Making people in poverty have smaller families? Not doable. So quit trying to do the one that doesn't work and to the ones that can work.
The thing about suburban houses in Texas is stupid but overpopulation, they way it's usually framed, is a myth.
So poverty is solvable, some of the time. Overconsumption of resources seems to be solvable. Making people in poverty have smaller families? Not doable. So quit trying to do the one that doesn't work and to the ones that can work.
The thing about suburban houses in Texas is stupid but overpopulation, they way it's usually framed, is a myth.
13
i love how they are like: "do the math"....... ummm....actually, you are the one proving the point, so YOU do the fucking math and cite your sources. It would be hilarious if a PHD was doing his or her dissertation and after a short introduction with cute graphics were like: "do the math! Thank you and goodnight"
14
Pointing out nut cases as a way of proving your point? I don't think so. And in all those years many millions of people have starved to death and starve to this day. This is the kind of crap produced by the catholic church.
15
Everyone can have a "house and a yard" in Texas if every 10 people get 1/4 of an acre. No room for roads or crops though.
I did the math.
I did the math.
17
" but the video fails to mention that if everyone in the world used as much in the way of natural resources as we do in the U.S."
So the answer is, keep the rest of the world in poverty.
So the answer is, keep the rest of the world in poverty.
18
that's an interesting prediction about population levels decreasing for some unstated reason in a few decades. considering that even the darkest years of the black plague couldn't curb human population growth, that seems like a bit of wild speculation.
although if resources were properly managed this planet could provide for and maintain more people then we have now, that doesn't mean the earth could handle an unlimited number of people. managing population now is taking on a problem before it becomes a serious issue. you know, like foresight and stuff. calling over population a myth is a no win proposition.
although if resources were properly managed this planet could provide for and maintain more people then we have now, that doesn't mean the earth could handle an unlimited number of people. managing population now is taking on a problem before it becomes a serious issue. you know, like foresight and stuff. calling over population a myth is a no win proposition.
19
EVRY DEAD HOOOMAN IZ ONE LESS WASTE OF AIR THAT I HAVE TO INSULT/EXPEND ANGER ON.
THE COOT KITTYZ WILL INHERENT DA EARF.
THE COOT KITTYZ WILL INHERENT DA EARF.
20
Andy_Squirrel
Do the math argument ... we are ok FOR NOW!
Society hasn't crumbled ... yet
We have enough food in theory, if it was properly distributed to feed the planet
What the little cartoon fails to address is the amount of nonrenewable fuels and resources to create enough materials/food/housing/transportation to make modern society possible.
None of us in this thread seem to be morons. I'll even admit that some the Population Research Institute's agenda is admirable.
Will technology keep up with the growth of population? Probably, we are spending ass loads of money to try to make it happen. Will I bet the farm on it? Most likely no. Because if i lose that bet. Sure the farm would be valuable, but something tells me the law would not apply and keeping it would become a little more chalenging.
Do the math argument ... we are ok FOR NOW!
Society hasn't crumbled ... yet
We have enough food in theory, if it was properly distributed to feed the planet
What the little cartoon fails to address is the amount of nonrenewable fuels and resources to create enough materials/food/housing/transportation to make modern society possible.
None of us in this thread seem to be morons. I'll even admit that some the Population Research Institute's agenda is admirable.
Will technology keep up with the growth of population? Probably, we are spending ass loads of money to try to make it happen. Will I bet the farm on it? Most likely no. Because if i lose that bet. Sure the farm would be valuable, but something tells me the law would not apply and keeping it would become a little more chalenging.
21
@2 But not everyone uses as much as we do, so we're all good.
Please see comment 5. There's a huge amount of people making up for the fact that I just ate a Mondo Burrito for lunch.
Please see comment 5. There's a huge amount of people making up for the fact that I just ate a Mondo Burrito for lunch.
23
We should cut off aid to all 3rd world countries that refuse to allow education about birth control, force sterilize people from long lines of indigents (say, 5th generation), and ban all artificial human conception. If you can't or won't have children the natural way, adopt. No more tax credits after the 3rd child (exceptions made for multiple births and children already born).
24
Educate women and work for women's rights if you want to reduce birthrates. It works every time (in the aggregate, not always for individuals, of course). The single best way to deal with overpopulation is to educate and empower women. Once they are regarded as something other than walking wombs, most choose to limit the number of offspring they produce.
25
@24 I like your line of thinking. Economic opportunity for women is causally linked to reduced birthrates. But don't go overboard like the Japanese, you can actually run out of people.
I've never really liked the message of the population control crowd. They seem like they're standing up for mother earth and all, but when you look at what they say, it's usually "There's way to many brown, black, or yellow people over in those poor countries. There ought to be fewer of them."
I've never really liked the message of the population control crowd. They seem like they're standing up for mother earth and all, but when you look at what they say, it's usually "There's way to many brown, black, or yellow people over in those poor countries. There ought to be fewer of them."
26
@24, you laid out a vital piece of the puzzle. I'd put that side by side with denying developmental aid to countries who refuse to allow education about birth control.
27
@18,
It's not supposed to decrease; it's supposed to level off at about 9 billion people by the end of the century. Population growth is already slowing, and it's not due to plagues, famines, or wars. (In the long run, those things result in population growth as the survivors overbreed to make up population losses. See: the post WWII baby boom.) It's supposed to level off as the world develops, people get more access to medical care/contraception, and parents no longer need to have tons of babies to ensure that some survive to adulthood.
But anyone who claims that population growth isn't/can't be a problem is deluding themselves. We have finite fresh water and (so far) energy. If we fail to conserve sensibly or find new sources as our population continues to increase, we're going to have big problems, and that doesn't even include problems associated with soil erosion, desertification, and increased sea levels.
It's not supposed to decrease; it's supposed to level off at about 9 billion people by the end of the century. Population growth is already slowing, and it's not due to plagues, famines, or wars. (In the long run, those things result in population growth as the survivors overbreed to make up population losses. See: the post WWII baby boom.) It's supposed to level off as the world develops, people get more access to medical care/contraception, and parents no longer need to have tons of babies to ensure that some survive to adulthood.
But anyone who claims that population growth isn't/can't be a problem is deluding themselves. We have finite fresh water and (so far) energy. If we fail to conserve sensibly or find new sources as our population continues to increase, we're going to have big problems, and that doesn't even include problems associated with soil erosion, desertification, and increased sea levels.
28
@ 25,
If those black, brown, or yellow people are constantly starving to death or dying from malnutrition related causes or overcrowding, then there are to many people in those countries. Most of the countries in the northern hemisphere suffer from the opposite problem. Not enough births, which is why they're allowing the overflow from the south to move in. But even migration can't keep up with countries that practice no family planning and the average woman is pregnant every 2 years from age 14 to menopause (or death).
If those black, brown, or yellow people are constantly starving to death or dying from malnutrition related causes or overcrowding, then there are to many people in those countries. Most of the countries in the northern hemisphere suffer from the opposite problem. Not enough births, which is why they're allowing the overflow from the south to move in. But even migration can't keep up with countries that practice no family planning and the average woman is pregnant every 2 years from age 14 to menopause (or death).
29
In terms of what the earth could provide for they could (shaky) be right but they make no mention of what the environment can support.
And, as others have alluded, WHY is the population going to flatten/stabilize in 30 years? Why hasn't it so far.
Oh, I watched a cute youtube video and it told me population isn't to be worried about... makers of movies like this want you to check your mind at the door and take a big gulp of cool-aid!
And, as others have alluded, WHY is the population going to flatten/stabilize in 30 years? Why hasn't it so far.
Oh, I watched a cute youtube video and it told me population isn't to be worried about... makers of movies like this want you to check your mind at the door and take a big gulp of cool-aid!
30
This video reeks of bullshit. Good discussion here, though.
What we really have is a problem of distribution.
#28
Whooooooaaaa you need to clarify what you're talking about with the "too many brown people, too few northerners." Just how many more white people (I assume you're talking about white people) do we need, exactly?
And you do realize that having a large number of children is a safety net for old age. America experienced a significant drop in our birthrate after we achieved social security, one of many social safety nets we afford ourselves.
Also, people from "the south" move to developed countries for economic opportunities, not because of a lack of room. Urban centers in poor countries are just growing denser and denser because of structural readjustments and meddling from established economic powers dismantling subsistence farming in rural areas.
What we really have is a problem of distribution.
#28
Whooooooaaaa you need to clarify what you're talking about with the "too many brown people, too few northerners." Just how many more white people (I assume you're talking about white people) do we need, exactly?
And you do realize that having a large number of children is a safety net for old age. America experienced a significant drop in our birthrate after we achieved social security, one of many social safety nets we afford ourselves.
Also, people from "the south" move to developed countries for economic opportunities, not because of a lack of room. Urban centers in poor countries are just growing denser and denser because of structural readjustments and meddling from established economic powers dismantling subsistence farming in rural areas.
31
who needs evidence when you have cool graphics?
my favorite (implied) fallacious argument:
"Some guy who claimed that overpopulation would be a problem thought that poor people should be killed. But that's ridiculous! Therefore overpopulation is a myth."
my favorite (implied) fallacious argument:
"Some guy who claimed that overpopulation would be a problem thought that poor people should be killed. But that's ridiculous! Therefore overpopulation is a myth."
34
Okay, world fertility in 2000-2005 is at 2.65 children per woman; which is only slightly over replacement rate, which is half what it was in 1950-55. That is an enormous reduction in birthrate. If we can keep up women's status and education, it will drop further, probably below replacement rate; and there is no need at all for any coercive measures. This is why the world population will start dropping in about forty or fifty years. The tricky part is going to be supporting the aged while the population drops back down to a level where it stabilizes.
My data comes from the UN report:
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/p…
It is a myth that there are countries where every woman pops out a baby every two years, or is even expected to, the most fertile regions of the world today have about five kids per woman, and that is expected to drop by half by 2050.
My data comes from the UN report:
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/p…
It is a myth that there are countries where every woman pops out a baby every two years, or is even expected to, the most fertile regions of the world today have about five kids per woman, and that is expected to drop by half by 2050.
35
None of this addresses the fact that we dont' have enough fossil fuel to indefinetely meet the demand the people we have NOW.
Nor does it address the fact that global society sustains itself on keeping consumption of the US up and every where else down.
Maybe I'll just man up and say, I like my lap top, my motorcycle, my gasoline, and my cheap food. I like my gym too and my high calorie diet.
What are we going to do when the rest of the world wants what I have (and is pretty damn meager compared to most Americans.)
Nor does it address the fact that global society sustains itself on keeping consumption of the US up and every where else down.
Maybe I'll just man up and say, I like my lap top, my motorcycle, my gasoline, and my cheap food. I like my gym too and my high calorie diet.
What are we going to do when the rest of the world wants what I have (and is pretty damn meager compared to most Americans.)
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (35) RSS