November 6, 2007

  • The Most Important Problem: Over Population

     

    Socrates_Cafe

     

    The Most Important Problem

    What is the most important worldwide, national, or more immediate problem we face today that you think we should be able to help solve? How would you solve it?

    ______________________________________

    At the risk of sounding cliche, I believe over population is the most important, worldwide, and immediate problem we face today...

    I'm sure I'll get plenty of people who disagree with this assessment, but since overpopulation contributes to every other major problem we face as a species, it is the root problem which must be dealt with. It is only in reducing our population growth that we will be able to get a handle on the other problems we face... urban crowding, consumption of resources (food, fossil fuels, ozone, etc), war, crime, etc. Over population places extra stress on all these problems and more. Even when we are not thinking about over population, it affects us and every aspect of our lives.

    Though the religious fanatics might rant that we were put here to "be fruitful and multiply," I think if there is a divine being who put down this mandate, it probably thought we'd show a little bit more common sense and not multiply beyond our resources. But since people cannot be trust to educate their children about birth control and some religions even denounce their use (even going into disease and famine stricken countries to tell people that using the birth control the Red Cross has given out will land them in Hell), I propose mandatory sex ed printed on all packages of female hygiene products. That way, as soon as a girl begins menstruating, she'll have the information necessary for keeping her out of a delivery room. I haven't quite thought up what product could carry similar labeling for boys.

    And of course, people could just choose not to reproduce. My mother had three children. Of us all, it's likely my sister is the only one who will have a child. I think people who choose not to procreate for whatever reason should be rewarded for it.  Oh sure, you might think it's easy, being an asexual and all, for me to say that, but having a different sexual orientation does not preclude reproduction. I don't plan to have any children of my body, but I wouldn't rule out adoption some day.

    I don't like thinking about telling people how to live their lives, but it becomes clear when you look at how people are living that they are not thinking of the future at all in their choices. I've actually met people who say they don't care what the future holds or how screwed up they make the earth with their choices because they won't be there. They don't even care how their choices will affect their own children or their children's children, just so long as it doesn't infringe upon their own lifestyle. So in order for these self-centered types to thoroughly enjoy living it up to their fullest, we should reward them for voluntary sterilization, don't you think?

    ZPG (Zero Population Growth) is an idea that has yet to gain popularity outside of science fiction, but stabilization of the population is worth the effort in light of the pressures our population places on the environment and the pressures which the environment in turn places on us. In biology, unchecked growth which consumes all the resources available is followed by a population collapse. Better we should control our own population voluntarily than subject our descendants to deprivation through our own selfish actions.

Comments (13)

  • Do you know that I firmly believe the Republicans and Religious Right are against abortion for the sole fact that they would lose voters...
    Population and ecology was a huge factor in my decision to not reproduce.

    Nice post.

  • if you think about it the wars we get into actually help in the population growth. killing people reduces population. it's not a good thing to kill people but in the scenario of population growth it is a horrible conclusion.
    i don't think people will ever police themselves this way.
    but governments would... governments would sterilize people (ours has already) and it was against the will of those people... and they were given no compensation.
    i think i went along a very dark road of thinking.

  • Selfishness has become as much a part of the problem as over-population, itself. I agree with your view on the whole of this most crucial issue.

    IRC: Blessings for your comment. Although I do not quite see the Tree as being twisted and stunted, clinging to the mountainside, I, at the same time, understand what you are saying in the context of their stationary fate. My premise is merely that if I saw experience as being like a Tree, I somehow lost the message hidden within the leaves, which is mere poetics, given recent shadows. I have always viewed Trees as Memory Keepers, like the breathing Earth their roots thrive on beneath.

    Thanks again for visiting. Be Well~

  • I think your idea for sex ed on feminine products is fiendishly clever. I also agree that overpopulation is a grave issue. Having said that, there are those who (rather than a 'philosophy of scarcity') operate on a 'philosophy of abundance'-- basically feeling that Earth has a lot more resilience than we give it credit for, and that there's essentially always "more where that came from." How would you answer someone who had this opinion that things aren't in fact running out?

    P.S. the idea of enforced sterilization makes me very, very nervous. Can we say artifically enforced heriarchies anyone?

  • "The world is NOT over-populated. More than 97% of the land surface on Earth is empty.... Yes, certain cities are over-populated, of course. Yet the entire population of the world could fit inside the state of Arkansas. So, then, how is the world 'over-populated'? Europe and Japan will be facing under-population crises in the coming decades, even according to UN studies on population." -- Anthony C. LoBaido

    In fact, people do live in crowded conditions, and always have. We cluster together in cities and villages in order to exchange goods and services with one another. But while we crowd together for economic reasons in our great metropolitan areas, most of the world is empty, as we can see when we fly over it. It has been estimated by Paul Ehrlich and others that human beings actually occupy no more than 1-3% of the earth's land surface.

    If you allotted 1250 square feet to each person, all the people in the world would fit into the state of Texas. Try the math yourself: 7,438,152,268,800 square feet in Texas, divided by the world population of 5,860,000,000, equals 1269 square feet per person. The population density of this giant city would be about 21,000 -- somewhat more than San Francisco and less than the Bronx.

    Another fact: World population growth is rapidly declining. United Nations figures show that the 79 countries that comprise 40% of the world's population now have fertility rates too low to prevent population decline. The rate in Asia fell from 2.4 in 1965-70 to 1.5 in 1990-95. In Latin America and the Caribbean, the rate fell from 2.75 in 1960-65 to 1.70 in 1990-95. In Europe, the rate fell to 0.16 -- that is, effectively zero -- in 1990-95.And the annual rate of change in world population fell from 2% in 1965-70 to less than 1.5% in 1990-95.

    Worldwide, the number of children the typical woman had during her lifetime (total fertility) fell from 5 in 1950-55 to less than 3 in 1990-95. (The number necessary just to "replace" the current generation is 2.1.) In the more developed regions, total fertility fell from 2.77 to 1.68 over the same period. In the less developed regions it fell from more than 6 to 3.3. Total fertility in Mexico was 3.1 in 1990-95. In Spain it stood at 1.3, and in Italy, it was 1.2.

    Official forecasts of eventual world population size have been steadily falling. In 1992-93, the World Bank predicted world population would exceed 10 billion by the year 2050. In 1996, the UN predicted 9 billion for 2050. If the trend continues, the next estimate will be lower still.
    http://www.juntosociety.com/guest/sperlazzo/bs_opm1010903.html

    http://www.boundless.org/2000/departments/your_turn/a0000228.html

    and here is the Population Research Institute

    http://www.theunjustmedia.com/NewWorldOrder/OverpopulationMyths,Facts,andPolitics.htm

  • I would love to adopt a child or two. Move a couple of those unwanted children my way? Abortion is not an ideal answer, and that's why I'd like to help solve the overpopulation problem by taking a few under my wing and reducing the burden on others. Plus, I have a lot of love to give. Hubby and I still haven't really decided on when/if we'll have children. He never knew his own father and his step-father resented him, so he thinks adoption is out of the question. He doesn't want to be that kind of father to someone who isn't his. He refuses to continue that cycle. I totally understand. At the same time, I would feel guilty about having kids of my own. It's tough. I love the thought you've put into this. Good question.

  • When I was born, the U.S. had 123 million people, the world - 2 billion people. Now the U.S. population is 300 million,, the world,over 6 billion - it has taken my lifetime for the U. S. and world populations to triple - and the growth is exponential - meaning it's speeding up.
    World food production and distribution studies have shown that the earth can feed the present population - and perhaps a modest gain, but only if we can get the food to them - something that is not done very well nowadays.
    A couple of facts seem apparent to me - the U.S. was a nicer place when I was growing up, even though we were in the midst of a horrible war. There certainly were not the constraints nor was there the fear we all seem to live with now.
    Kristen's comments about the "myths" of overpopulation are based on mostly inaccurate, out-dated, or misinterpreted data quoted probably to back up a political or religious viewpoint.
    You have all probably sometime during your HS years had or saw a science demonstration where a colony of bacteria, mold, or something was allowed to grow to its limit in a petri dish and saw the die-off that began to occur when the food supply dried up or the dish was overwhelmed by the culture's growth. We live in a giant petri dish with limited resources and even more limited livable area - less than 28% of the entire earth's surface - unless you are very good at holding your breath - like a whale. But than you also have to have something to breath - and the world atmosphere oxygen content is dropping fast.
    What can we do? Become Greener, practice sensible birth limiting techniques, and encourage more agricultural research. We badly need another "Green Revolution" like the one of the fifties.

  • ryc: aww poor child. I hope it was baby teeth

  • Re: insurance; I was a lucky lady to be grandfathered into the military system, so I use USAA for my home insurance, auto insurance, and banking needs. The only problem I have with it is that there's no local branch, but that hasn't ever really negatively affected me. I like a few of the Geico commercials but on the whole, I would never consider choosing them as an insurer. Silly leezard.

  • I dunno wtf you're talking about.

  • ryc:
    dear harmony0stars

    If you read the comments above yours I already explained the plural.

    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the word was God.

    God the Father
    God the Son
    and
    God the Holy Spirit

    And I didnt delete any comments. If a comment you left is missing I dont know what happened to it.
    I don't normally delete comments unless they are vulgar or spam or something of that sort.

    Have a wonderful day.

  • "I haven't quite thought up what product could carry similar labeling for boys."

    Condoms mebbe?

  • RYC: With the sterilization thing, I was referring to one of the comments made to your post. , not to your post itself. I think Kristen's comment is along the lines of the ones I was asking about . . .I'd say that with those statistics, humans need a lot more than physical space. It has less to do with how much space we take up and more to do with how many resources we use . . .and right now, despite the fact we're distributing them badly enough so that people are starving etc. we are using resources so heavily that even if the population continues to grow at the current rate we'll be, in layman's terms, screwed. The "space" humans take up is more than living/breathing space . . .it's space for gardens and farms, for the animals we need to survive and (at this point in history)the factories we depend on and so forth. For relatively small creatures, we use a lot.

    I'm also not planning to have kids, for the same reasons you are. Adoption, maybe-- we'll see how much the mommy instinct kicks in later on :p

Comments are closed.

Post a Comment