Have you ever thought that there are way too many people on the planet? Like seriously, dude, please. 7 billion? There needs to be an international birth control law or something. So that people like me will have an excuse for not having children.
There are definitely too many people on Earth - it might not look like it considering its surface, but there are simply not enough resources for all of us at the pace we consume them.
I haven't yet seen any kind of convincing statistical analysis leading to a conclusion that the earth is overpopulated. You hear people say that a lot, but a popular catchphrase or narrative never is enough to convince me something is actually true. The fact that there are people starving on the planet isn't really evidence of overpopulation either as there can and have been people starving for the entirety of earth's history. What always strikes me as odd is the times I come across people that will insist the earth is overpopulated, but will also tell you that genetic manipulation of foods or scientific work toward making plants/animals more plentiful or drought resistant are evil things we should not be pursuing. Seems like if you're genuinely concerned about the former, you'd naturally be less antagonistic to the latter.
"Fixing" overpopulation if it is even an issue either means less population or more resources (or more yield from the same resources). Obviously the former is a problem as it's going to be pretty Orwellian to head down that road. The latter is something lots of organizations are pursuing currently but they're often met with resistance (often uninformed or misinformed) from the very countries/populations that don't currently need the goals those organizations are working toward. Too often I find myself wanting to say something like, "Sorry fellow American who doesn't have any trouble finding something to eat, but if it makes that crop their working on able to survive better or produce more nutritious output in areas that are frequently susceptible to drought or food shortages, I don't care too much if you think they shouldn't be doing it."
tl;dr - I'll bite on the whole overpopulation assertion when there's serious data to indicate it's a significant problem. Until then I'll be in support of efforts to expand the existing food/water supply or make such go farther. I'll probably never go for reproduction quotas or anything like that though.
Thank you for your opinions. I can say that I agree for the most part, but there are scientific entries about the resources getting insufficient each day, especially water. We (our generation) won't likely to see it but the shortage in a certain amount of time seems inevitable. Anyway, I have a simple approach: "If it doesn't have any effect on me, let it be." So this could be applied here as well.
I know resources are scarce (most notably as you said water) in specific areas, but that's not a global shortage. If the question is whether the planet is overpopulated, then localized resource scarcity does not indicate a global strain. It just means that specific area or region may be populated beyond what can locally be supported.
I've always thought that overpopulation is the true cause of the troubles we met across in the world. But controlling the birth? No, we do not have right to do that, I'm also opposed to abortion. These are the seamy side of life and we have to face up to these difficulties of life in order to live it.
Well, infect some portion of the world with a virus, which has the possibility of mother-to-child transmission.
It would eventually kill the infected person ("control the death") and it's more unlikely, that the person will procreate ("control of birth").
:D
But still, both virus or person can't control it XD.
Infected person absolutely will be death, but did infected person "can" give birth ? assuming how "long" they can live when they already infected and have enough time to give birth.
Well, even a person or a virus can kill or reproduce so much they want, still they can't control it. They cannot make birth more higher than death and vice versa, or even make it equal.
It has been said that everyone on earth could fit into Texas with a decent amount of room, however the quality of life would not be so good... since we would need 10x that much space for all of the farms etc. required to sustain it all.
Well, isn't this an interesting fact. I believe Texas wouldn't be the most suitable place for people to live, considering the climate and whatnot, but still, if it ever comes to that, we shall see :P
Great game, but it's a shame that they never properly discounted it. Maybe it would have had more owners by now. Also they never bundle it, which is a mystery to me, because their previously game (ARES) was in 4 bundles.
Thanks for this rare chance. :3
Not too many yet, if they divide it evenly over the globe... :P
But yes, I'm waiting for the first fresh water war...
Comment has been collapsed.
There are definitely too many people on Earth - it might not look like it considering its surface, but there are simply not enough resources for all of us at the pace we consume them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Here come the "population control" conspiracy theories now........
Comment has been collapsed.
this
Comment has been collapsed.
I haven't yet seen any kind of convincing statistical analysis leading to a conclusion that the earth is overpopulated. You hear people say that a lot, but a popular catchphrase or narrative never is enough to convince me something is actually true. The fact that there are people starving on the planet isn't really evidence of overpopulation either as there can and have been people starving for the entirety of earth's history. What always strikes me as odd is the times I come across people that will insist the earth is overpopulated, but will also tell you that genetic manipulation of foods or scientific work toward making plants/animals more plentiful or drought resistant are evil things we should not be pursuing. Seems like if you're genuinely concerned about the former, you'd naturally be less antagonistic to the latter.
"Fixing" overpopulation if it is even an issue either means less population or more resources (or more yield from the same resources). Obviously the former is a problem as it's going to be pretty Orwellian to head down that road. The latter is something lots of organizations are pursuing currently but they're often met with resistance (often uninformed or misinformed) from the very countries/populations that don't currently need the goals those organizations are working toward. Too often I find myself wanting to say something like, "Sorry fellow American who doesn't have any trouble finding something to eat, but if it makes that crop their working on able to survive better or produce more nutritious output in areas that are frequently susceptible to drought or food shortages, I don't care too much if you think they shouldn't be doing it."
tl;dr - I'll bite on the whole overpopulation assertion when there's serious data to indicate it's a significant problem. Until then I'll be in support of efforts to expand the existing food/water supply or make such go farther. I'll probably never go for reproduction quotas or anything like that though.
Comment has been collapsed.
I need to study on this text to improve my english. Well written. ^^.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you for your opinions. I can say that I agree for the most part, but there are scientific entries about the resources getting insufficient each day, especially water. We (our generation) won't likely to see it but the shortage in a certain amount of time seems inevitable. Anyway, I have a simple approach: "If it doesn't have any effect on me, let it be." So this could be applied here as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know resources are scarce (most notably as you said water) in specific areas, but that's not a global shortage. If the question is whether the planet is overpopulated, then localized resource scarcity does not indicate a global strain. It just means that specific area or region may be populated beyond what can locally be supported.
Comment has been collapsed.
I recently read that 10% of people who have ever lived are presently alive now.
That's amazing!
Comment has been collapsed.
I've always thought that overpopulation is the true cause of the troubles we met across in the world. But controlling the birth? No, we do not have right to do that, I'm also opposed to abortion. These are the seamy side of life and we have to face up to these difficulties of life in order to live it.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can't control the birth and death, that mean you can control life.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, infect some portion of the world with a virus, which has the possibility of mother-to-child transmission.
It would eventually kill the infected person ("control the death") and it's more unlikely, that the person will procreate ("control of birth").
:D
Comment has been collapsed.
But still, both virus or person can't control it XD.
Infected person absolutely will be death, but did infected person "can" give birth ? assuming how "long" they can live when they already infected and have enough time to give birth.
Well, even a person or a virus can kill or reproduce so much they want, still they can't control it. They cannot make birth more higher than death and vice versa, or even make it equal.
Comment has been collapsed.
i vote for this one
Comment has been collapsed.
Not way too many but we're consequently getting there ...
Comment has been collapsed.
+1
Comment has been collapsed.
It has been said that everyone on earth could fit into Texas with a decent amount of room, however the quality of life would not be so good... since we would need 10x that much space for all of the farms etc. required to sustain it all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, isn't this an interesting fact. I believe Texas wouldn't be the most suitable place for people to live, considering the climate and whatnot, but still, if it ever comes to that, we shall see :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Great game, but it's a shame that they never properly discounted it. Maybe it would have had more owners by now. Also they never bundle it, which is a mystery to me, because their previously game (ARES) was in 4 bundles.
Thanks for this rare chance. :3
Comment has been collapsed.
I think this game is pretty cute... and fun. It was on sale at one point for $5 when I picked it up, though. Wish it sold better.
Purchased: Jun 11, 2015 @ 9:45pm
So Many Me - $4.94
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, that's overpopulated, we will travel to other planets one day. HOPE!
Comment has been collapsed.
Too many? Nope. Give more people WORLD. Yes.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know if there are too many people, but there are too many irresponsible people, that is for damn sure.
Comment has been collapsed.
We are in the same boat: I also don't want kids
Comment has been collapsed.