You humans are the #1 cause of loss of life to biodiversity and you pesky humans are also the leading cause of pollution. The ONLY way for humanity to survive for the next century is to embrace education and use technology for the better good. Humans who contribute to waste by a factor of 18 times more than they contribute to cleaning up should be euthanized. Also repeat violent criminals should be honorably euthanized as well. Parents should have 2 children, if they do not produce a male the first two times then they can go for a 3rd, but after that no more babies, unless the parents can prove that they are well beyond their means in the ability to support the family.
I believe we need to limit the population on planet Earth to 10 billion. Not because of oil and gas usage, but if food usage. Oil and will be replaced by electricity by 2025 if the electric trend continues. But food is a different story; according to studies, the uppermost population limit is 10 billion, anything past that number will result in feeding problems. Today though, food is not a problem. The reason why people think that it is, is because of Africa. Because Africa has food growing difficulties because of the planet heating up due to the CO2 we release in the atmosphere while driving gas cars, whichs heats there crop fields. But as I stated earlier, gas cars should be replaced by 2025 if the electric trend continues. Humanity will not stop at this number; if everything continues as planned with the space program, we should begin colonization of the planet Mars by 2050 (the first landing should occur by 2035). That is well within our lifetimes! Since Mars is about half the size of Earth, then Mars should be able to hold just under 5 billion people. Which brings up the population to nearly 15 billion! It it will continue growing as we reach out for the stars.
There is no longer any use for high populations as we move into a post industrial society. It's childish to presume that all people are born with the right to reproduce. These are ideas from a more primitive, selfish society of greed and assumed self importance. It's time for people to grow up. We're owed nothing, we owe everything to this blue planet.
If human population keeps increasing, more people can be born. Water, food and other natural resources will be harder to get because there are more people. If we don't limmit the population people might starve because more people will need more food and other resources. There might be a fight for food, water, space, clothing and some other things.
Name for me a single thing that would improve if the world population increased to 9 billion. Name for me 100 things that would improve if world population settled at 1 billion. I find it infinitely easier to honestly answer the second question. Would you seriously sacrifice everything for a misplaced sense of freedom?
We don’t have enough food to sustain higher populations meaning that if we didn’t control the population we would run out of food quite quickly. So if you think 'NOPE we shouldn't control' think about the fact that we would run out of food too quickly if we didn't control.
The fact is that a major reason why the world is overpopulated is that too many people do not realize the effects too many people have on the planet. If people, especially women, were better educated, then they could understand why a large population is bad in the long term. With better education, women also would have more opportunities to learn and have jobs, which could lead to them not having as many children.
Families used to have many children because:
a) Many of them would die from sickness, and
b) More children meant more hands for farming
Nowadays, infant mortality rates are low and families don't need more children to make money. Having more than 2 children isn't necessary anymore. If we let the population grow anymore, there will be mass famines in the future.
We can't put an end to the Sickness. .That would mean our own extinction and no one wants that , But we have to control it to a point where we can all continue with our lives without Killing our Host!!!
Lets Face it We Are The Problem
There is no need for large families. There is no need for x billion number of people. We need to focus on improving our technology and research, education, getting in a world government so all the countries are ran equally, reducing our population, putting more wild space between ecologically friendly homes and improve our healthcare tenfold AND WE MUST MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE WHO CONTRIBUTES TO OUR SPECIES. Those should be our aims.
This is not a war. This is the brink. If we cannot dramatically reduce our population then our world as humans is going to crash,
The technology exists now to immediately help, but it is expensive and only the rich can afford it. We have the technology to power our homes independently and clean our air.
Money is old now AND IT IS FAILING because it is becoming too common and too many people earn too much while contributing very little. We should be classed more on our contributions to society to give us our social status, not how much money we have.
If money did not exist and your contribution was highly valued in your society (bearing in mind a society of less people) and you were asked to give a helping hand building a home for a homeless person, would you say yes? Or would you slam the door?
We need to pull together as a species on this subject. If we do not choose now it will eventually be forced by nature herself.
It is not just ourselves as people that are ruining our planet. It is also our farms, our livestock and (sadly) even our pets.
Each household should be permitted only one or two children.
We have to see the bigger picture.
60% of UK wildlife is declining. I didn't notice before, but now I do. There has been an incredible drop in wildlife in my town over the past five years.
We can't just halt the population, it needs to be reduced and humans may have to interfere with nature to bring it back since we have done so much damage.
I want my child to have a bright and natural future. Not surviving in a concrete matrix.
Imagine what a better life there could be with more environmentally friendly technology, nature and less people.
I do not agree with limiting population growth. It is wrong to me You are basically telling people that they can have a certain amount of kids. What if people want a big family? That is something many people of the world want and it is wrong to tell them they cannot.
No government or any other such ruling body should limit human population growth. Having children is a cherished moment in one's life, and so long as the individuals having children are responsible parents, they should not be restricted from having them. In addition, many of the results attributed to overpopulation such as resource strain and pollution are really the result of neglect, carelessness, and greed on the part of other humans. Instead, governments or similar ruling bodies should advocate better decision making. In addition, studies show there is a correlation between education and a lower birth rate. More education and a lower birth rate is a solution that benefits multiple parties rather than just one or a few.
In our modern world, freedom is highly regarded. Having children is a freedom that should not be deprived from people. However, it is true that the unimpeded growth of human population is created enormous problem.
Since limiting human population growth is ethically unjust, thus wrong to legalize, we can only limit human population growth through social methods. If government resources are put into spreading scientific info to the general public, and encouraging people to think of environmental implications of their lifestyle when making decisions, I think a portion of people would actually refrain from having big families, or choose to adopt instead.
Since we all know how much media affect us, I also wish more TV shows like Bones would surface (or similar influence in media), instead of ones like Vampire Diaries or those reality TV shows. Bones has been great at raising odd topics of society, especially at touching those topics from a delicate objective viewpoint. It inspires thought while delivering entertainment.
Mandel thought an overpopulation crisis would happen about a hundred years ago. It didn't. Technology always keeps up. Even famines aren't caused by overpopulation/not enough food. They're caused by economics and the fact that many governments don't have a social safety net in place to deal with problems like this and some can't afford it. Talking about overpopulation makes it easy for people to dismiss problems like world hunger. The fact is we could abolish world hunger by the end of the year if wealthier nations came together and agreed to it.
If overpopulation were to be achieved, it will either A) not be a problem, or B) cause many people to eventually die because of there is no way for the people to live a sustainable life since the population limit has been supposedly exceed. A) if it is not a problem there is no need to control it. B) In that case there is still no need to control it because it will ultimately control itself. even though there is suffering from route B) there is still suffering caused by controlling it.
There is no good, legal way to do so. The only effective way, would be to institute a limit on how many children you can have, which is a violation of human rights. If I wish to have only one child, thats my right. But it's also my right to have 10 children, if I so choose. The government should not be in the population control business. They have no right to tell me or anyone else how many children we can have.
Population growth is mainly occurring in the developing world. If the developed world were to help them generate wealth and spread it around, population growth would not be a major problem. Education is also key.
This isn't to say we should harm the environment, or anything of the sort. We simply need to make sure that people being born get what they need.
No government or any other such ruling body should limit human population growth. It is against the athical, we can avoid limit the human population by limit on how many children each people can have. Moreover, there are many countries suffering due to the low population in their country. If there are many populations, each countries' government can set a rules.
A government or other authority can not impose limits to human rights. That being said I do agree with population control. There are ways to enact these limits without the authoritative restraints. We should make all forms of birth control easily accessible and free. It is much cheaper to pay for a pregnancy prevented than to pay for an accident. We should also stop giving tax benefits for having a child. In that same spectrum we need to end assistance to families. If the family has too many kids, let them all starve or learn to live off the land. We need to get back to survival of the fittest.
It includes abortion and killing children, which is crime! If giving birth to a child that is illegal, killing them and aborting their future is a larger crime. Where do you see humanity. Also 50% of the land on earth is covered up with human, what about the other 50? Also to control the population, proper education is needed to provide but can the world bare to educate people? No, so no sense in blaming people for giving birth to a illegal or third child.