Human population growth - fun fact
Discussion
REALIST123 said:
No it doesn’t feel like that.
A huge piece of agricultural land nearby is about to be included in the County Plan as a site for gravel extraction for the construction industry. Smack in the middle of arable crop growing land.
Population growth is the root of just about all of our ‘modern’ problems. But it just seems non PC to openly say so.
Not only that, we continue to subsidise and encourage it. You couldn’t make it up.
Are we short of potatoes?A huge piece of agricultural land nearby is about to be included in the County Plan as a site for gravel extraction for the construction industry. Smack in the middle of arable crop growing land.
Population growth is the root of just about all of our ‘modern’ problems. But it just seems non PC to openly say so.
Not only that, we continue to subsidise and encourage it. You couldn’t make it up.
There's certainly a land squeeze in SE England and around other developed cities but that does not mean there's an overall shortage of land any more than charging £5 for a latte in Covent Garden indicates a shortage of coffee.
Nickgnome said:
Johnniem said:
Has anyone mentioned yet what will happen to world population when the cure for 'the big C' is found? Or will we, the first world nations, make it too expensive for the rest of the world to afford?
Suggest you look at the linkCancer is not in the top 3.
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/t...
Johnniem said:
Nickgnome said:
Johnniem said:
Has anyone mentioned yet what will happen to world population when the cure for 'the big C' is found? Or will we, the first world nations, make it too expensive for the rest of the world to afford?
Suggest you look at the linkCancer is not in the top 3.
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/t...
Heart Disease and Stroke are eminently preventable for many.
Many cancers are also life style related.
The global population is completely sustainable if the distribution of wealth was more equitable. The likely topping out of growth at about 11bn should be entirely manageable.
Nickgnome said:
The global population is completely sustainable if the distribution of wealth was more equitable. The likely topping out of growth at about 11bn should be entirely manageable.
Are you willing to drop your standard of living to the current global mean? Then drop it again as population grows further?ChevyChase77 said:
I don't understand Labour's position on wanting an open door policy then moaning about lack of affordable houses. If you're going to keep demand high for housing, then prices will stay high.
I doubt whether, judging by the caliber of their front bench, Labour have the slightest clue what they are actually angling for there. Utter f
kwits.Four Litre said:
This explains why -
Driving on the roads is a total misery nowadays!
Everything is sold out!
You have to book anywhere decent 100 years in advance!
The end is night I tell ye!!!
I forsee a time when days out will be rationed...Driving on the roads is a total misery nowadays!
Everything is sold out!
You have to book anywhere decent 100 years in advance!
The end is night I tell ye!!!
'...your application for 'A Family Day Out at Legoland' is refused. From our records we note that the FourLitre family visited CentreParks in the summer.'
JuanCarlosFandango said:
Are we short of potatoes?
There's certainly a land squeeze in SE England and around other developed cities but that does not mean there's an overall shortage of land any more than charging £5 for a latte in Covent Garden indicates a shortage of coffee.
We are not short of potatoes, and in the UK never will be - we can simply buy it from abroad and pay more than 99% of the rest of the world can afford. There's certainly a land squeeze in SE England and around other developed cities but that does not mean there's an overall shortage of land any more than charging £5 for a latte in Covent Garden indicates a shortage of coffee.
Elsewhere, there are people in the world starving, and the growth in population is putting huge pressure on the planet to feed us - be that by clearing savanna or rain forest, or by harvesting fish from the oceans. Industrialised agriculture has done wonders at feeding increasing numbers of people over the last 75 years, often using unsustainable and environmentally poor methods and chemicals. This growth in production cannot be sustained while at the same time protecting the environment and animals we co-exist with. We need better, more sustainable methods of feeding ourselves, and I suspect that will involve more bio engineering and genetic modification, because simply clearing more land is not the best solution.
The growth in human population at this rate is neither desirable nor productive.
Fastchas said:
Four Litre said:
This explains why -
Driving on the roads is a total misery nowadays!
Everything is sold out!
You have to book anywhere decent 100 years in advance!
The end is night I tell ye!!!
I forsee a time when days out will be rationed...Driving on the roads is a total misery nowadays!
Everything is sold out!
You have to book anywhere decent 100 years in advance!
The end is night I tell ye!!!
'...your application for 'A Family Day Out at Legoland' is refused. From our records we note that the FourLitre family visited CentreParks in the summer.'
otolith said:
Nickgnome said:
The global population is completely sustainable if the distribution of wealth was more equitable. The likely topping out of growth at about 11bn should be entirely manageable.
Are you willing to drop your standard of living to the current global mean? Then drop it again as population grows further?t conditions where people live in actual poverty. Unless you have the money and singular political will of the Gulf States to try and build a future (and even in those countries, once you're away from the shiny stuff, you're back to very low standards of living), you'd be on a hiding to nothing.Condi said:
We are not short of potatoes, and in the UK never will be - we can simply buy it from abroad and pay more than 99% of the rest of the world can afford.
Elsewhere, there are people in the world starving, and the growth in population is putting huge pressure on the planet to feed us - be that by clearing savanna or rain forest, or by harvesting fish from the oceans. Industrialised agriculture has done wonders at feeding increasing numbers of people over the last 75 years, often using unsustainable and environmentally poor methods and chemicals. This growth in production cannot be sustained while at the same time protecting the environment and animals we co-exist with. We need better, more sustainable methods of feeding ourselves, and I suspect that will involve more bio engineering and genetic modification, because simply clearing more land is not the best solution.
The growth in human population at this rate is neither desirable nor productive.
Well it's very productive. The fact that the vast majority of the human race is better fed, housed and clothed than at any time before despite having many times the population proves it is.Elsewhere, there are people in the world starving, and the growth in population is putting huge pressure on the planet to feed us - be that by clearing savanna or rain forest, or by harvesting fish from the oceans. Industrialised agriculture has done wonders at feeding increasing numbers of people over the last 75 years, often using unsustainable and environmentally poor methods and chemicals. This growth in production cannot be sustained while at the same time protecting the environment and animals we co-exist with. We need better, more sustainable methods of feeding ourselves, and I suspect that will involve more bio engineering and genetic modification, because simply clearing more land is not the best solution.
The growth in human population at this rate is neither desirable nor productive.
If we carried on growing at that rate indefinitely then it would be a problem but this isn't happening and won't happen.
From all the evidence I can see the best way of ensuring this doesn't happen is to carry on spreading development and the education and choices it brings to more of the world's population.
Lord.Vader said:
Mrr T said:
LordGrover said:
The growth is alarming.
Do you believe humans contribute more towards climate change on this planet than the star we orbit?
JuanCarlosFandango said:
Condi said:
We are not short of potatoes, and in the UK never will be - we can simply buy it from abroad and pay more than 99% of the rest of the world can afford.
Elsewhere, there are people in the world starving, and the growth in population is putting huge pressure on the planet to feed us - be that by clearing savanna or rain forest, or by harvesting fish from the oceans. Industrialised agriculture has done wonders at feeding increasing numbers of people over the last 75 years, often using unsustainable and environmentally poor methods and chemicals. This growth in production cannot be sustained while at the same time protecting the environment and animals we co-exist with. We need better, more sustainable methods of feeding ourselves, and I suspect that will involve more bio engineering and genetic modification, because simply clearing more land is not the best solution.
The growth in human population at this rate is neither desirable nor productive.
Well it's very productive. The fact that the vast majority of the human race is better fed, housed and clothed than at any time before despite having many times the population proves it is.Elsewhere, there are people in the world starving, and the growth in population is putting huge pressure on the planet to feed us - be that by clearing savanna or rain forest, or by harvesting fish from the oceans. Industrialised agriculture has done wonders at feeding increasing numbers of people over the last 75 years, often using unsustainable and environmentally poor methods and chemicals. This growth in production cannot be sustained while at the same time protecting the environment and animals we co-exist with. We need better, more sustainable methods of feeding ourselves, and I suspect that will involve more bio engineering and genetic modification, because simply clearing more land is not the best solution.
The growth in human population at this rate is neither desirable nor productive.
If we carried on growing at that rate indefinitely then it would be a problem but this isn't happening and won't happen.
From all the evidence I can see the best way of ensuring this doesn't happen is to carry on spreading development and the education and choices it brings to more of the world's population.
- in the developed world through retailers and consumers throwing out unused food; and
- in the developed world through a lack of harvesting machinery, transport link and cold chain infrastructure to move food from fields to markets.
Both are solvable through education and investment.
Either those that believe there are too many humans on the planet, or those that believe we can go on churning out humans, and this will have no effect on the Earth, will be proven right in the end. And in this, it is only time that will tell who was right, and who was wrong.
The only ones who are duplicitous in this, are those who on the one hand believe that it is humans who are affecting the planets climate, (not forgetting cutting down square miles of rain forest every day, or destroying habitats and the species in them, and hoovering fish out of the sea, and dragging more not less minerals including oil out of the ground, etc etc, all to meet the demands of the already colossal, and still (despite the verbal gymnastics some want to apply) growing global human population,
I don't want to see a single ER protestor, or Greta Thunberg type bleating on about the planet and its climate, unless they make comment on who they believe is causing all the problems they bleat on about, and what for, because as we have been told none of this has any effect on the planet.
I would certainly not expect any of those who believe that we can churn out humans as we are doing, to make any comments whatsoever about the Earth and its climate, and (saving) the planet for our children, because as far as they seem to be saying, we can continue churning out billions more humans, and this will not be a problem, If that is the case, then great, because it means we can carry on doing exactly what we are doing ad infinitum, and all will be well. Who Knew it?
The only ones who are duplicitous in this, are those who on the one hand believe that it is humans who are affecting the planets climate, (not forgetting cutting down square miles of rain forest every day, or destroying habitats and the species in them, and hoovering fish out of the sea, and dragging more not less minerals including oil out of the ground, etc etc, all to meet the demands of the already colossal, and still (despite the verbal gymnastics some want to apply) growing global human population,
I don't want to see a single ER protestor, or Greta Thunberg type bleating on about the planet and its climate, unless they make comment on who they believe is causing all the problems they bleat on about, and what for, because as we have been told none of this has any effect on the planet.
I would certainly not expect any of those who believe that we can churn out humans as we are doing, to make any comments whatsoever about the Earth and its climate, and (saving) the planet for our children, because as far as they seem to be saying, we can continue churning out billions more humans, and this will not be a problem, If that is the case, then great, because it means we can carry on doing exactly what we are doing ad infinitum, and all will be well. Who Knew it?
Pan Pan Pan
I think you have created a false choice there.
What about those like me who believe that we won't go on churning out more and more people precisely because we are developing?
Or even that the best way to ensure we don't churn out more people is to encourage greater and faster development?
I think you have created a false choice there.
What about those like me who believe that we won't go on churning out more and more people precisely because we are developing?
Or even that the best way to ensure we don't churn out more people is to encourage greater and faster development?
Here in Australia, we have circa 26m people. But, we can easily sustain 126m, possibly even more. We're incredibly underpopulated, just 1.45 minutes out of our cities and you won't see human structures for hours and hours.
Yes, a large proportion of this countrie's centre is unliveable but so much of our temperate coastline is empty as well.
We've some infrastructure issues that need addressing, but overall we need at least 100m more people and our land can support it.
Thankfully though, our government has some pretty stringent rules on who can emigrate to us, the rule of thumb being they must be productive and contributing members of society.
In summary, I'm not worried about population growth from a selfish point of view, for my children nor my grandchildren. We're self-sustaining, have effective natural borders and a stable society.
Yes, a large proportion of this countrie's centre is unliveable but so much of our temperate coastline is empty as well.
We've some infrastructure issues that need addressing, but overall we need at least 100m more people and our land can support it.
Thankfully though, our government has some pretty stringent rules on who can emigrate to us, the rule of thumb being they must be productive and contributing members of society.
In summary, I'm not worried about population growth from a selfish point of view, for my children nor my grandchildren. We're self-sustaining, have effective natural borders and a stable society.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff