CM,

In my little playlet I didn't say if Mum and Dad were black or white or any colour in between. You assume I'm saying only white people will be around in this brave new world.

Being in favour of a mass population decrease, as you indicated, supportive of a world figure of 200 million, I did ask you; In your (CM) world how should the overpopulation problem be dealt with? Surely you have a few ideas as how best that, that low figure can be reached. Hummmm.

Dear Paul,

Well obviously, if you want to ensure seeing results immediately, in our own lifetime, then you need to resort to extremist measures. I do not believe that "ends justify the means" - rather that the means are at least as important as the ends, hence I will not support murder. I still support more moderate measures where the results might take a few generations, although Nature (including "human nature") might not be as generous as myself and come up with earlier and more painful scenarios.

Sure, every species will eventually become extinct and homo-sapiens are no exception, but humans are not bisons and survived even at the level of a few millions for thousands of years. Though all is possible, I see no particular reason why the human race may not survive for thousands more years, if not millions (but not at anywhere close to current population levels).

Yuyutsu said "Well obviously, if you want to ensure seeing results immediately, in our own lifetime, then you need to resort to extremist measures... moderate measures where the results might take a few generations, although Nature (including "human nature") might not be as generous as myself and come up with earlier and more painful scenarios."

Answer- Effects to do with the birth rate occur over generations (20-30 years) rather than lifetimes (60-90 years)- so if the appropriate actions are taken a lot can be done over a lifetime due to the effects of compounding. In 50 years India went from 900 Million people (1950's) to 1.4 Billion people (2000,s)- this is well under two generations for a fifty percent increase in population. In 2003 fifty percentage of the population was under the age of 15 years old.

I suspect that Yuyutsu's comment was more due to mental shorthand.

You can in theory- stop a population growing ie zero growth by just stopping reproduction- you don't actually need to kill anyone (as Paul1405 provocatively appears to use to discredit population control measures- straw man tactic)- yes with increased health effectiveness aging will increase but it won't actually produce more people- it may mean that people can work longer- health systems will only be able to support the health systems that their tax base allows. If the governing structures key birth rates to death rates then the zero population growth can be achieved- there are well recognized policies that are implemented in various areas of governing that are able to be used to achieve this- through financial means- tax benefits- etc.

Therefore I believe that Paul1405's objections are based more on his ideology. Strange that Green's support extremely high human populations if their key focus is the environment- therefore it's not.

There are a few movies and books that discuss the issue of uncontrolled population growth- for example "Logan's Run".

Paul1405 seems to use an intentionally naive approach to population modelling to discredit population control measures. One way population models can be misinterpreted is by assuming that the population growth rate doesn't change- but that is mostly able to be controlled by incentives by policy makers- and can be changed at any time.

Obviously a relatively small core group of women (and men) of breeding age from each culture would need to be maintained in order to prevent genocide of families and cultures. This sort of practical thinking about population is uncomfortable for many of us- but this problem is unprecedented.

What ever we do we will need to reimagine our societies at least for a while- some more than others based on past decisions and policies- but if we have to experience pain- let it be so we can remove pain- not just kick the can down the road- but we should keep our traditions and protect our ethnicities and cultures and family lines.

This leads me to a point- at times of emergency relative totalitarianism tends to reign- as in wartime- but communism wants a permanent worldwide totalitarianism (Trotsky's worldwide permanent revolution). Communists seem the ultimate "ambulance chasers". In a sense the best leaders would have less emergencies and their societies should be free-er

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan's_Run
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan%27s_Run_(film)

The City and the Stars- Arthur C Clarke also has implied elements of population management.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_and_the_Stars

http://sciencefictionruminations.com/sci-fi-article-index/sci-fi-novels-about-overpopulation/

Even Plato's Republic discussed overpopulation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_(Plato)

There's good reason why this book is considered number one on many book lists.

Given that the lifespan is increasing by less than 10% per generation it appears to be a factor that can be managed by a 10% birth rate reduction per generation. Very achieveable- but only a start- I'd aim for perhaps double this rate- and correct as required.