Don't let anyone forget that we also depend on the younger to support
the aged in their dotage.
It is just that we have a more bureaucratic system to deliver the same result.
As it is a financial system, we risk very difficult times with pensions.

However, birth control is unlikely to act quick enough to avoid a very
high level of starvation. China is currently having significant social
problems with some 100s millions of unmarried men because of the one
child policy which caused the death or abortion of females.

Josephus your shot at Ludwig is wrong and uncalled for.
Of all posters he is on record for the concerns I put here.
Snake well said as is the truth for Banjo and Lexi.
Given our population [let us please not get in to climate change] in 1750, was 1 Billion.
And stands at 7 Billion now, given if we slam the breaks on population growth hard right now, we will still reach 9 Billion in less than 300 years from that date.
Proving we are in trouble,I do not think under our current system we can control births.
Further too many, as has been said do not wish to.
Question, given the growth time from 1 Billion to 7 Billion, no maths genius me,when will we double current population, and then double again?
Are we content to count our selves and loved ones as survivors in what ever reduces population?
If we in this one country can not resolve boat people troubles, how will we tell mums and dads to limit child numbers? ,and make it work.
Is it not plan silly to pay mums to have children who will live in times of food shortages so bad they may die of starvation.
Banjo, this will get me kicked about but it always has taken tough choices from tough men and women to survive.
A two children law for the west, no social welfare for a third ever.
Not tax breaks for any family breaking that law 5% increase in taxes.
No aid or loans of any nature or help for ANY country not signing up for two child policy in third world and ANY country.
Without effort and results , laugh if you wish, we will one day have a world dictatorship and see our freedoms die.
Current view growth is good is foolish and clearly untrue a day just has to come that ends population growth, be it war famine or disease.
We do not want that surely

I did it! getting old read first page then posted!
Went back read the lot lets be clear I blame no single nation, we can, if you wish, say how good the west is.
But let us not forget the fact we consume much more than our share.
The answer is in acting as one not devision.
I believe the population growth is stunning by the year 2100.
And we doom our selves if we do not do the maths and consider that.
I came up within average population growth rate of just over 450.000 a year but remembered it is not true .
Growth increases each year,maths was not strong in my years at school passed emptying rubbish bin and handing out free milk with flying colors.

Belly,
I think you are right unfortunately. Iran and Thailand have shown the way but all too late for many in some countries. should have begun 30 years ago and even now some are reluctant to see the solid evidence. Religions are to blame also.

You and I may not see the end result of over population but our decendants will. There will come a time when limits by law will have to be placed on births. The baby bonus has to be the silliest idea ever and now no government would be game to get rid of it. We continue high immigration in Aus again to our peril all the while reducing our most productive land. That is stupid

Glad I won't be around when the devastating losses really occur

There is a graph of population and oil production.
The graph for oil starts in the late 1800s and rises expotentially to
today. On the same graph is world population, it tracks oil production EXACTLY !

The reason is that prior to oil energy for food production was sourced
from animals and for a short time previously, from steam powered
machines such as traction engines.
As people moved into industry and towns and oil powered farm machinery
became common food production became cheaper and farms much larger.
This enable more children to lead healthier longer lives and the
population tracked the oil production.

As oil production gets more expensive and difficult to produce, food
will become more expensive and the worlds population will compete
with their wallets for food.

The population level will follow the oil production decline.

There is one possible way out of this, if an alternative energy
source with the equivalent energy density can be found.
The chemists are telling us that this is impossible. Are they right ?

Bazz,
As the cost of food production rises it will have an effect on how much food aid western nations will be able to give to countries in famine. Add to this the declining harvest from our seas.

In the 'great famine' in China, which was as recent as 1960, it is estimated that 40-50 million died and that only lasted a few years. People ate all sorts of things in effort to stay alive, bark, grass and even dirt. Canabalism was not unheard of and human placenta is considered a delicasy in some parts. I could not comtemplate eating animal placenta let alone that from humans. Hunger changes how we view foods.

Makes one wonder just when the world will wake up and see the problem.

I can easily see why China is aquiring farmland in Aus and Africa.

I believe such death rates will be frequent occurances in some countries.