World Population Growth

[Rococo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If economic booms continue in industrialising counries we can expect world population growth to eventually fall below replacement levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain this idea more please?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true for some countries in Europe, but my guess is that we are centuries away from falling below replacement levels on the world level.

[Boris]

Jeff - There is a strong inverse correlation between income and population growth.

You might also want to read up on James Watson (the daddy of DNA) and his views on the issue.

[Boris]

Time Bomb

Finding a cheap cure for diarrhea I think really helped to screw things up in Africa. Now with infant mortality plunging there is all of a sudden a huge strain on resources. We were fortunate pass on advanced cultivation technology to Africa. This helped some but for whatever reason it has not been enough to lift their standard of living to the point where most Africans don't feel the compulsion to over breed. Also look at the growth rates for the Middle East and Persian countries. Think of all the disenfranchised young males and you start to understand how an organization like Al-Qaeda can become so powerful.

[Rococo]

[ QUOTE ]
Jeff - There is a strong inverse correlation between income and population growth.

You might also want to read up on James Watson (the daddy of DNA) and his views on the issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you suggesting that the OP would agree with Watson, or that you agree with Watson? I hope not.

Watson article on race

[Jim14Qc]

[ QUOTE ]
If economic booms continue in industrialising counries we can expect world population growth to eventually fall below replacement levels. This has already occured in parts of Europe (France is the key example).

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't France have one of the highest birth rates among western European countries? Your point's still valid though, immigration is what keeps population rising in the western world.

Regarding OP's idea that there is too much population for resources, there's an economist named Thomas Malthus who predicted that early in the 20th century and that's been proven wrong consistently. Over the past ~15k years, agricultural technology has always been able to rise to meet demand for food. Famines experienced in the 20th century were not due to world lack of food, but to unequal distribution. There is nowhere near a lack of food today on a worldwide scale, only a lack in certain extremely poor areas that is not due to worldwide scarcity. It can also be assumed that agricultural progresses (think GMO's among others) will be able to keep up with further population growths.

Evolution isn't limited to bodily capacities. Obviously humans have an extremely developed mind (compared to other species) and medicine is a product of that mental evolution. Medicine doesn't stop evolution, it's a product of the process.

Overall I don't think your theory is much different from Malthus', you might want to read on its refutations (I'm sure there are many online).

[Boris]

Rococo - excluding the "black employee" comment, Watson's views are simply a more refined version of the OP's thesis. I don't know if Watson is correct or not.

[Maulik]

If, and this is a stretch, most of the world becomes an industrialized and economic growth begins or continues, they'll require a lower replacement rate to subsist. The theory situates that poor families have larger birth rates to ensure they'll have a caretaker at the age of retirement which acts as their pension.

[blinden84]

I have a modest proposal for you.

[Maulik]

A larger concern should not stem from whether the planet has sufficient resources to meet population needs but whether the strain on meeting population growth will cause a "shock" on the planet whether it's a permutation of an organism which wipes out a type of grain. Of all the types of grains in the world which there are probably several thousand only about forty as grown to feed the population.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
Wealthy countries are already shrinking if you ignore immigration/emigration.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that absolutely can't be ignored, IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
A United Nations report expects world population to begin to decrease naturally after 2075 after reaching a maximum of fewer than 10B people.

[/ QUOTE ]

I skimmed that, but did not see - what do they (or you) mean by "naturally"?