Not ruminating ttbn, that's your thing.

I'm talking about factual circumstances that have happened and proven what I report! I didn't make this economic rationale up. The Chinese were once the poorest and most overpopulated nation on earth.

The one child policy dealt with some of that, but economic growth was all that was required and saw the end of the one child policy. And Chinese leaders begging parents to have more.

Similarly, Malaysia, Hong Kong and India, to name some of the most obvious used economic growth to achieve similar outcomes only EFFED by Muslims, who just wanted to be top dogs without the Entreprenurial genius of the resident Chinese.

And only succeed in stuffing it up because they thought all they need do was take over. And not have to do the hard yards that are needed in all successful enterprise.

I get that you like most commenting here are an economic illiterate.

Most of what you contribute is highly opinionated verbal vomit.
Alan B.

Alan

You can talk about whatever facts you like. There is absolutely nothing you can do about any of the things you ruminant about here. No matter how much you, I and others, bang on and express opinions, nothing has changed, and nothing will change. Only people with power and influence can make changes, and they are not taking any notice of us, particularly now, with the worst PM and government since the Whitlam days.

Unless you use the internet just as a therapy to get things off your chest, you will be permanently disappointed.

The tardiness of the human race is at least interesting.
The collective view is slow to change.
It was slow to accept the ideas put forward by Copernicus?
More than forty years ago we knew about global warming, but only now is there a stirring in the ranks.
And with the problem of over-population?
Will we wait till there is standing room only?
Whatever happens, I am sure that 'tardy' humans will deal with it.
Eventually.

Kudos Indyvidual

Malthus and Galton?

Australia's 'best demographer' Jack Caldwell outlined a generation ago 'He worked on many areas of demographic theory, including the importance of education and the status of women in determining demographic change'

This was promoted further by Prof. Hans Rosling ie. longevity of older generations, staying in the data longer, hence, driving population growth.

Well documented in science journalist Fred Pearce's (2010)'The Coming Population Crash and our Planet's Surprising Future' http://tinyurl.com/mrsfuch7

Focus on fertility, but only two nations with +ve trends Georgia and Israel (WB), larger nations' rates are declining, and like China well below replacement and India following; Indian demographer Sanyal saw this over a decade ago, but UNPD still saw growth for high end of century headlines?

Locally Tanton Network NGO SPA focus upon NOM (UNPD) net OS migration described as 'immigration' suggesting permanence, but not. It captures all border movements, expanded without notice to 12/16+ month rules 2006, more international students, who then sometimes spike both NOM and population.

It's temporary churnover of net financial budget contributors to support more oldies in retirement, becoming the fastest growing cohort; not permanent migration program of 190K p.a.

Bricker & Ibbitson in 'Empty Planet: The Shock of Global Population Decline' claim mid century peak, followed by decline; commented about UNPD & Paul 'Population Bomb' Ehrlich as being 'conservative'; 'The World's Shrinking Population' https://youtu.be/SYZPTaV-RcQ?si=QCO5KCl2tsf5N5U1

Why is population growth such an issue? Because it's a dog whistle via Tanton Network (shares donors with Kochs in US).

Dec. white nationalist John 'passive eugenics' Tanton colleague of Ehrlich at ZPG (using faux science constructs like 'limits to growth'), admired the white Australia policy, visited and hosted by SPA.

For a recent potted history see Binkowski of US KPBS in (2022) 'Eugenics, Border Wars & Population Control: The Tanton Network'

https://unicornriot.ninja/2022/eugenics-border-wars-population-control-the-tanton-network/

I am less concerned with the material or even the environmental aspects of the problem - they do exist but science can probably find answers to those.

My main concern is about the resulting reduction in the value of life due to the ensuing regimentation.

In order to sustain larger numbers of humans, one must arrange them in tight rows, columns and levels, one must make more and more rules so they don't step on each others' toes, one must turn them into numbers.

So even if there is enough air, water, food and living quarters for everyone, even of reasonable quality, life cannot be worthwhile when everyone has to be practically the same.