The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Population growth must stop > Comments

Population growth must stop : Comments

By Gary Peters, published 12/7/2010

Both population and consumption are parts of the problem - neither can be ignored and both are exacerbating the human impact on Earth.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Curmudgeon,

And this makes it OK to have more people on the planet just because Dr Ehrlich was supposedly wrong, give or take a few years.

What about the devastating effect all these 'better off' people have on the rest of the inhabitants of our piece of rock, you know, plants and animals which live in specialist niches?

Why do we need one more person than is required to advance technology and quality of life for us all? There is no way every person now on the planet can possible enjoy the quality of life they deserve. Do the sums, it is not possible, so why increase the population. When every girl now born in Mumbai or Mexico City can get a University Education if she wishes then you can raise the world population and not before!
Posted by Guy V, Monday, 12 July 2010 2:34:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Guy,

There are two ways to increase population - (a) have more babies, and (b) live longer. Let's suppose that (a) can be avoided in the near future, that ZPG is attainable: actually, since you mention it, if all those girls in Mumbai and Mexico City can get a good education, it's very likely that they will marry later, if at all, have fewer kids, if any and lead highly productive lives.

But they will also live longer, even with ZPG: if those girls live on average to eighty rather than sixty (to over-simplify), as they have every right to do, then the population will increase even with ZPG, perhaps by a third. If they live on average to ninety (ad reductionem ad absurdum), then even with ZPG the population will grow by a half, give or take. You get the picture :)

With ZPG, smaller populations of younger people will then be supporting larger numbers of older people, unless they all are required to pay super and/or the pensionable age is kicked up.

In short, population control has to be thought out very carefully: in ten years, we will be witnessing the catastrophic effects of China's one-child policy, as a cautionary example. ZPG - even more so, population reduction - is a hundred-year project :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 12 July 2010 3:10:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Most of our population increase is caused by immigration. There is nothing hard about reducing immigration.

At the coming election, people who are concerned about population increase can LEGALLY and WITHOUT INVALIDATING their votes, write at the top of both ballot papers "REDUCE IMMIGRATION". If enough people do that - and at last count in was 77% of Australians who wanted immigration reduced - the parties will take note. They are, of course, not bound to do anything but it is believed that Bob Hawke was influenced by the 44% of voters who put NO DAMS FOR THE FRANKLIN on their ballot papers.
Posted by Leigh, Monday, 12 July 2010 4:25:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Guy V - I was asking Peters, not unreasonably, to improve his article. Why should we believe him when he says it will also end badly when every other writer who has stated it will all end badly has been proved wrong, to date? Ehrlich is jut the most famous example. Not only just wrong but completely contradicted by events with resources falling in price in the long run, not rising. (Yes, yes, I know they've been rising in the past few years because of China.) The one exception in oil which is the subject of a cartel.
As for the diatribe about women getting degrees in Mexico, Ehrlich and the others are still wrong, so where is the relevence?
If you are agin population growth then what do your propose to do about it?
Posted by Curmudgeon, Monday, 12 July 2010 6:36:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am quite sure that we can just keep on growing and in the future science will develop artificial environments for us to live that are fantastic. Future man will look and wonder what was the problem. The question is one of quality of life.

Economists certainly have lost the plot with the consume everything and grow, grow, grow mantra. This can hardly be blamed for the over population in the third world where they don,t enjoy our rate of consumption. Education is probably the best chance we have, if we understand the issues maybe we will want to do something about them.

Another point is the never ending push for more and better fertility treatment. I don't deny that this problem causes couples great distress, but in a world that is so over populated it seems arragant of us to treat having children as a right. We could require people to demonstrate their ability to afford children and restrict them to one per family but these tactics have also not worked in the past never mind the screams from the human rights fraternity.

The bottom line is that Australia, at some 22 million is bursting at the seams to cope ecologically and socially. Law and order, education, social identification are just a few of our problems. It is time we seal the borders and concentrate on a sustainable economy that can be supported by a stable population that are not hell bent on consuming every natural resource they can lay their hands on. Maybe some leadership will show the way to the rest of the world.

Of course we could have a good old fashioned world war complete with a bit of genocide. HEY always worked in the past.
Posted by nairbe, Monday, 12 July 2010 8:05:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If resources are really that scarce we could cull a few more roos, emus and wild animals. Of course this article is a joke. We have plenty of land and resources to share with a lot more people than we have now.
Posted by runner, Monday, 12 July 2010 8:40:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy