I was reading an article about how our government needs to change its fiscal policies to account for an aging population.  In the comments on the story, someone claimed that there is actually a population implosion, a negative growth rate world-wide, and that population overgrowth is a myth.

 

I was unable to find anything in a quick Google search that looked reliable to support this idea.  (one page, the article was used to support anti-abortion laws - like forcing women to bear children is the solution...IF there is even a problem).

 

Is there any science supporting this? 

Views: 296

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

There isn't a negative growth rate world-wide. Population overgrowth is not a myth. In fact, our species is becoming verminous and is chewing up the planet.

Poodwaddle.com

Fantastic clock....thanks for sharing:)

Counterpoint:

http://www.indexmundi.com/map.aspx?v=Birth+rate%28births%2F1%2C000+...

World birth rates are down almost everywhere except West Africa and Afghanistan. The entire developed world is within a point of one-child China (14 births/year/thousand adults), India is running less than double China's birthrate.  There are still a lot of people to feed, and fewer wars to deplete the population, but the rate of growth is slowing.  Yay us.

LOL. it's all racist scheming regards to not enough.. non... wait..
ok. so . women cannot get abortion w/o ultrasound payed for outta their pocket.. in FL at least. NC ACLU fight.. other states with sky daddy lies..

aaaaand. prolly racists policies imho

IF WHEN around the world women can plan their parenthood
who cares if there's not enough people
we like people to be planned and smart for the exploited Earth we live in... ?
Just watched a video the other night but as usual I cannot find it. I was surprised to see that there were about 1 billion people in 1800 and about 2 billion around 1900 and we have added the last 1 billion of the present 7 billion in the last 14 years. It did show a slowing trend in the growth and predicted that the population would level off at about 9 to 10 billion around 2050 due to a number of factors. The U.S. would actually have had a negative population growth over the last half century if it wasn't for immigration. As cultures grow more educated and wealthy  people opt to have fewer children or no children at all. Countries that have no immigration policy at all like Japan are experiencing  population shrinkage .  Some schools are waiting to close when the last remaining children leave.  Some parts of Germany have seen a re-population by wolves and bear because of depopulation.

    I have lived in Germany for about 22 years and I can tell you that there is no re-population of wolves and or bears. There was one bear that managed to wander into Barvaria, but was deemed to dangerous, and was subsequently killed !

I do seem to remember that there was an initiative to re-populate Wolves in the US. Dont know how that worked out.

 

    It's all about stable states, nature has this ability to stabilize itself and humanity is not the exception.

There is a finite amount of resources on this planet, these resources ( even when optimally distributed ) will eventually force a decline in any massively growing population.

This is no secret, but part of the problem is that we, having the luck to have been born in a relative fertile geographical location, have a hard time considering the plight of billions of others.

And its these other billions that will be doing most of the suffering.

But there is also an even bigger problem, we are starting to upend the ecological stable state of the entire planet, and that will galvanize many other problems no matter where we are born.

    Many people for many years have been talking about population declines, we have now recently reached 7 billion.

I must amend my statement, Ive just been informed that there is a group of about 60 wolves living and breading in a conservation area. Where exactly I dont know.

I'm just not all that alarmed about negative population growth in any area. What reason is there for replacement-level population other than caring for the aged? (I could be missing a lot of reasons.) It seems like it will be painful for the generations where the shrinkage occurs, and after that it will just be a smaller population.

 

 

people are like magnets to the cities. i hear 80 perx. of gdp is from cities
maybe factor that in? besides what's with corporations being allowed to put billboards accross kids' lockers; that's like a 'private' thing no? presumed consumer /pupil? odd anyhow ima brain fart outta here
dawkins and ps3 frisbee golf is genius; play it alot and then play real frisbee
It does seem that way, doesn't it.
Pretty scary isn't it?  I bought the DVD on Amazon.  It's not only the "dumbing down", but the degredation of humanity.  Remember the name of the burger joint?

Thanks - I appreciate your input.  Although I grasp that the baby boomers are aging and may be a burden on a smaller next gen, it didn't seem like an actual population implosion, but there does not seem to be a lot of reliable data available.

 

 

 

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

MJ

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service