You can save the world right now.

[skjl47]

Hello; I did not find the graphs of population demographics but did find soem demographic information for the USA and China. Seems as of 2014 the USA population is increasing at a faster rate than China.

http://www.indexmundi.com/united_states/demographics_profile.html
USA birth rate 2014 at 13.42 per 1000 population
USA death rate 2014 at 8.15 per 1000 population
yields 5.27 increase per 1000 population from births
net migration rate 2014 at 2.45 migrants per 1000 population
with migration and births the USA has an increase rate of 7.72 per 1000 population
USA population seems to be increasing faster than China
http://www.indexmundi.com/china/demographics_profile.html
China – birth rate 2014 at 12.17 per 1000 population
death rate 2014 at 7.14 per 1000 population
yields an estimated net increase of 5.03 per 1000 population. China does have a very small out flow from migration.

 

[pops]

lol funny. stop having babies and we save the earth! just makes me giggle.

 

[pops]

stop eating meat and we save the earth, stop using petroleum products and we save the earth, stop having babies and we save the earth, stop clear cutting and we save the earth. the list goes on and on. being an apex species we will keep doing all of the above and the earth you say needs saving has no problem taking care of that. and moving on.

 

[skjl47]

lol funny. stop having babies and we save the earth! just makes me giggle.

Hello; I know up front this will be a poor analogy. The issue, for me at least, is not so grandiose as saving the world. Think of overstocking an aquarium. At some point even with filtration and other efforts there can be too many fish to maintain good water quality. We fishkeepers can act as an outside factor and change out the water, do gravel cleaning and such.

As far as I know no outside factor is comming along to change out earths water or do the equivalent of a gravel vac. We will have to make do with what we have.

Also my stance is not for all to stop having babies, just to have fewer. Zero population growth, two per couple on average would have given us a chance to keep things in balance. Those willing could have none and create some slack.

Not save the earth. More like help to keep it a decent place to live. Being laughted at is mild compared to some reactions. I know I am tilting at windmills. The sheer size of the population is ample evidence.

 

[pops]

not laughing at you, just the concept, there are countries trien to have there population increase.
danish for example.
http://nextshark.com/spies-danish-sex-vacation/

 

[pops]

its not just human nature its life's nature to procreate, no mater what it is, its soul purpose. every thing else life does is to that end.

 

[skjl47]

not laughing at you, just the concept, there are countries trien to have there population increase.
danish for example.
http://nextshark.com/spies-danish-sex-vacation/

Hello; I looked at the thread. I did not find the reason behind why they want to increase the population. As a guess only on my part, often the desire for a population increase has more to do with economics and little to no consideration for environmental impact.

Some countries have a much larger number of old people and not many young. The economic issue can be that there are not enough young to support the social systems that the large older population need.

While I do not recall if Japan has such a population increase policy, I am fairly sure Japan has a quite large senior population and a much smaller young population.

 

[pops]

If not guessed already I have a what can be considered a pretty pessimistic view. this is not true, even tho it may appear that way. I see all things as finite. me? you? the world, the solar system , the Galaxy, the universe, its all finite. I have no problems with conservation, its a good thing, for us. same for population control, make it better while here, or at the least sustain it. but in the end, some where down the line the poop is going to hit the fan. and we iant going to make damm deference either way.

 

[skjl47]

its not just human nature its life's nature to procreate, no mater what it is, its soul purpose. every thing else life does is to that end.

Hello; I get and concede the point. That point has been made to me many times. My thinking was and still is that while some species will allow themselves to overpopulate to the point of unsustainability, I am a thinking human with foresight. Humans can project and think about future consquences based on an understanding in the present. We understand the future consquence of not brushing our teeth as a basic example. We humans may be the only species with such foresight and awareness.

Back in the 1970's I was involved in population studies in the wild. It did not take long to extrapolate what seemed likely to happen in the human population. I use reason to override the basic drive of personal reproduction and decided to remain childless. I had no illusions that many others would do the same, just a slim hope that many would have fewer children.

With the understanding that leopards were endangered, one of my phrases has been "I do not want to be remembered as one who wore a leopard skin coat." Meaning that if I am remembered at all, I hope my legacy is that of someone who tried to reduce his personal impact. Being childless may well be the most significant low impact act I have done. Once I had become aware and understood the potential dynamic of human population decades ago, I made the best choice I could think of at the time.

 

[pops]

Having kids, procreation, you bring this up many times, procreation in its most basic purpose is to pass on ones DNA and add it to the pool. with out that there is no evolving. evolution takes place in the transfer or mixing of DNA. by your thinking you have done the greatest thing you can do to have the least impact on the the world. but this makes to contribution to the species or its evolution.