[AFAIK]

The world has already hit peak child and population growth is due to people living a full life instead of dying at the sensible age of 46 as the OP demands.

Skip to 23:27

[youtube]FACK2knC08E?t=23m27s[/youtube]

[Know It All]

Right, and I said if all the world achieve first world status, it would solve the problem. Really, this should be done through socialism, capitalism will cause refugees and wars.

Look, the easy way to solve the problem is by exterminating old people, and introducing a non voluntary euthanasia program for adults when they get to 70 years old. That isn't going to happen, and neither is socialism. That said, I do agree that capitalism will stand in the way of common sense when it comes to controlling populations.

[One Degree]

The world has already hit peak child and population growth is due to people living a full life instead of dying at the sensible age of 46 as the OP demands.

Skip to 23:27

[youtube]FACK2knC08E?t=23m27s[/youtube]

I watched for a few minutes from the point you suggested. His reasoning has a lot of flawed assumptions. One, it is based upon the assumption the very recent decline in Western birth rates will be the future. There is no evidence to support this. Two, he totally disregards immigration and shows the western world not being affected by growth in Asia and Africa. Both of these assumptions are very naive.

[Know It All]

The world has already hit peak child and population growth is due to people living a full life instead of dying at the sensible age of 46 as the OP demands.

Skip to 23:27

[youtube]FACK2knC08E?t=23m27s[/youtube]

As seen by the eternal optimist. I didn't suggest we all die at the age of 46, although would certainly sort out a few problems. I merely supplied you with a problem, and admitted I don't have an acceptable answer.

[anarchist23]

Look, the easy way to solve the problem is by exterminating old people, and introducing a non voluntary euthanasia program for adults when they get to 70 years old. That isn't going to happen, and neither is socialism. That said, I do agree that capitalism will stand in the way of common sense when it comes to controlling populations.

You would say that. Let me guess. You are young?
I say let's euthanise all that believe in euthanasia and that's after they have slaved in a concentration camp for a decade or two.

[B0ycey]

Look, the easy way to solve the problem is by exterminating old people, and introducing a non voluntary euthanasia program for adults when they get to 70 years old.

Let people make their own minds up with what they want to do with their lives at 70. But you will be adhering your own at advice at 70 right? You're not a hypocrite or are you?

[Prosthetic Conscience]

Sorry, I disagree. The fastest growing population by a mile is the Muslim population, and they don't bother with contraception. The same can be said for Catholics.

But not in all cases. Some majority Catholic countries like Spain and Italy have low birth rates; in the USA

Data shows that 98 percent of sexually experienced women of child-bearing age and who identify themselves as Catholic have used a method of contraception other than natural family planning at some point in their lives

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fa ... 71da81a8b5

In Muslim countries, Iran, Lebanon, Tunisia, and Turkey have a TFR at or below 2.1; it's some others, like Niger, that have the huge rates. So Muslim populations can get their birth rates down a lot, in the right circumstances.

I think there should be a worldwide effort to make all forms of contraception free for users (including condoms - stopping the spread of diseases is their extra benefit), and this is something it's worth the developed world paying for in developing countries. Girls' education must also be encouraged; when they have a decent prospect of a career, they put off marrying, or marry and use contraception (the growth is in countries where single mothers are still rare). Again, there are plenty of other benefits to this.

Even if this starts to work, the existing demographics will mean an increasing world population for decades, and there's no way to say "all countries must sort out their own population problems". There will be famines, and wars, and refugees. No country need have a 'shortage' of young people; just remember that immigrants, especially refugees, are pretty powerless, and they don't affect a country in a major way unless they are literally colonising it. So if a country thinks there's an age imbalance, let in some immigrants.

[Know It All]

Let people make their own minds up with what they want to do with their lives at 70. But you will be adhering your own at advice at 70 right? You're not a hypocrite or are you?

You conveniently copied and pasted what you wanted. I followed that up with "but it's not going to happen". I was making a point, and that point is that the answer to the problem is not palatable, just like socialism.

[AFAIK]

The solution is to promote family planning and to make contraception and abortion available and affordable. Bangladesh has achieved a significant reduction in its fertility rate by using these voluntary measures.


@One Degree
Why would future generations of Europeans choose to live in poverty with 6 children rather than in prosperity with 2?

[One Degree]

@One Degree
Why would future generations of Europeans choose to live in poverty with 6 children rather than in prosperity with 2?

I have no way of seeing into the future, but perhaps social welfare programs will create the incentive. The point is the current trend has no historic precedent and therefore very little should be inferred from it. We can only guess.

[Suntzu]

Fact is population is increasing at an unsustainable rate. When I was born in 1947 U.S. population was around 150,000,000, word population around 3,000,000,000. Today it is 330,000,000 and 7,000,000,000. China went from a 3rd world country to a superpower in a couple of generation by controlling its population growth.

[Know It All]

[quote="Prosthetic Conscience"]But not in all cases. Some majority Catholic countries like Spain and Italy have low birth rates; in the USA


In Muslim countries, [url=http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2013/demographics-muslims.aspx]Iran, Lebanon, Tunisia, and Turkey[/url] have a TFR at or below 2.1; it's some others, like Niger, that have the huge rates. So Muslim populations can get their birth rates down a lot, in the right circumstances.

I think there should be a worldwide effort to make all forms of contraception free for users (including condoms - stopping the spread of diseases is their extra benefit), and this is something it's worth the developed world paying for in developing countries. Girls' education must also be encouraged; when they have a decent prospect of a career, they put off marrying, or marry and use contraception (the growth is in countries where single mothers are still rare). Again, there are plenty of other benefits to this.

Even if this starts to work, the existing demographics will mean an increasing world population for decades, and there's no way to say "all countries must sort out their own population problems". There will be famines, and wars, and refugees. No country need have a 'shortage' of young people; just remember that immigrants, especially refugees, are pretty powerless, and they don't affect a country in a major way unless they are literally colonising it. So if a country thinks there's an age imbalance, let in some immigrants.[/quote]

=======================

Firstly, if those Catholics are breeding like rabbits, they are either celibate or mock Catholics. Unless of course, they have got the rhythm method down to a fine art. Muslims will breed at the rate necessary to take over the earth, but that's another subject for another day.

A lot of what else you say I agree with, however it's not that simple. I totally agree that young people should be using contraception both population and health reasons. Unfortunately they have been encouraged to do so for years, and if anything they are more stupid now than they ever have been. The lack of morals in most civilized countries has justified the promiscuous and irresponsible actions of many young people. In the UK condoms are readily available free of charge from family planning clinics, but this has failed to solve the problem. Anyway, the overpopulation problem tends to involve the old rather than the young. I hope you don't think I am picking on old people, because I am not that young myself. The fact is that younger people are more productive, and older people tend to cost the economy lots of money. Sad but true I am afraid.

Allowing in immigrants doesn't solve the world problem, it just moves people from one country to another to relieve employment issues. That certainly isn't the answer. Famine will do very little to alleviate the problem, because as soon as one baby dies the mother just replaces it with another. Wars hardly go anywhere to reducing the problem, because unlike the 2nd world war a very tiny % of the worlds population is at risk.

Ideally the heads of all countries should sit down and discuss the issue, but because of financial constraints this will never happen. Like I said in my opening thread, I know the problem, but I really don't have the answers

[B0ycey]

I have no way of seeing into the future, but perhaps social welfare programs will create the incentive. The point is the current trend has no historic precedent and therefore very little should be inferred from it. We can only guess.

The current trend in Europe is a reduction in birth rate. It's something like 1.6 per couple. The increase in global population is due to people living longer not birth rates. But their is only so many medical advancements that can occur so in a generation or two this will no longer be a factor. That is why it is predicted that the world population won't pass 11billion.

[Know It All]

@One Degree
Why would future generations of Europeans choose to live in poverty with 6 children rather than in prosperity with 2?[/quote]

Yes, why, but they do, and that's why the worlds population is growing at the rate it is. Please click on the link in the original thread, and you can see exactly how fast this is. Whilst it is a World calculator, the European population is growing very quickly, albeit mainly through extended life and immigration.

[One Degree]

The current trend in Europe is a reduction in birth rate. It's something like 1.6 per couple. The increase in global population is due to people living longer not birth rates. But their is only so many medical advancements that can occur so in a generation or two this will no longer be a factor. That is why it is predicted that the world population won't pass 11billion.

This is simply not true. Asia, Latin America, and Africa are all still producing at above replacement rates. Only the advanced nations are not and they are absorbing the populations from the areas that still are. How is there a solution in this?

[B0ycey]

This is simply not true. Asia, Latin America, and Africa are all still producing at above replacement rates. Only the advanced nations are not and they are absorbing the populations from the areas that still are. How is there a solution in this? :?:

The current birth rate globally per couple is 2.5. But every year this stat is reducing. Why? Because most people want more from life than a large family. Why struggle to provide for six children, when you spoil two? My own life is testament to this. My wife wanted four children before we married. After the second, she quickly changed her mind. So I have two.

[MistyTiger]

One way to control this is just let women have abortions.

The rightists are afraid of becoming a minority though so they want more white babies born each year.

[Suntzu]

Abortion laws have little effect on abortion rates. Mexico, where abortion is illegal, has an abortion rate higher than the U.S.

[One Degree]

The current birth rate globally per couple is 2.5. But every year this stat is reducing. Why? Because most people want more from life than a large family. Why struggle to provide for six children, when you spoil two? My own life is testament to this. My wife wanted four children before we married. After the second, she quickly changed her mind. So I have two.

2.5 with double the worlds population in 140 years. Based upon past trends, it is more likely to double within 50 years.

[Suntzu]

Let the undeveloped world reach range capacity. Keep them out of the civilized world.