Will Over-Population become a threat to Civilization?

[Empirica]

THE MIGRATION CHALLENGE (PART 1)
Nope, can't imagine why. Your question is valid.

I (for one) happen to disagree with you. But, that's no "big deal".

lol wut

Oh, you're not joking. Then you have a really cool signature, did you make it yourself? If you did, you should be proud because I think it's really well done.

There isn't an over population problem. The problem will be shortly as people in the third world catch up to the first world they will procreate far less than they do now, to a point were they will be as we are in the first world, we dont procreate enough. Most 1st world countries right now are loosing population aside from what population they import. Russia, Germany, and Japan being prime examples.

The human lifespan is increasing with every new medical breakthrough while large scale epidemics appear to be under control for the most part and the threat of global thermal-nuclear war is hardly a threat due to the realization of mutual assured destruction.

A declining birth rate could slow the threat of over-population but would only delay the inevitable; unless of course the planet gets hit by some global sterilization pandemic.

How can anybody believe overpopulation is not a threat? It may be a few generations away; but it absolutely is real.

WHAT'S SO WRONG?
Who cares what percentage of the population they are. The point is that they DO exist and NOT what do we do about it on the international level. Since there is nothing that can be done there.

The issue thus devoles to what can we do about rampant Income Disparity in the US given that upper-income taxation never ever should have been touched by Ronald Reagan who started its decline during his administration.

In fact, what was necessary then (but did not happen) was to close even further the loopholes that permitted the explosion of upper-incomes.
ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

What we have above thusly is the Rich-man's Plow, that is, the mechanism that makes some families Filthy Rich. Why "filthy", because it aggregates the rich into a select group of families who benefit selectively from lower applied-tax-rates.

What's so wrong about that? Nothing if the US had death-taxation with which the government applied confiscation above a certain level of total Wealth. The remainder - after Federal death taxation - of an individual's Wealth would befall whomever they pleased. But, the US DOES NOT HAVE SUCH DEATH TAXATION.

So What does that "mean" effectively? First and foremost that more Wealth would return to where it was first generated by the market-economy. That is you-and-me. Howzat?

Namely our entire population that would benefit from the extra-funding to provide, for instance, National Healthcare Services (and nearly free Tertiary Education). Some upper-income families that inherited their riches would "play around" with less than 20% of the "family wealth" generated by their parents.

No big-deal that - aside from the fact that it is a key element of Societal Fairness!

MY POINT
Income Fairness is a national objective that deserves Real Consideration

Only in the US of A, which still hasn't understood political undercurrents and their evolution.

Socialism once existed and was proven inoperable. Why did it fail?

Because it assumed that the government would replace private-enterprise and produce all goods/services. Which was silly nonsense, but one has to understand the original issues from which Socialism was born.

Wow Lafayette; :blink: all this sounds very much like the words of a devout follower of Karl Marx?!

This is one of my favorite quotes:
"Socialism is like the weed that will never be satisfied confined along the farmer's fence line;
it forever seeks to multiply and spread until it dominates the garden and consumes the crop"~Hogtrash

We "live and learn" ...

Not quite Lafayette.....Actually; "we live and forget".

Which is why the fleeting promise of a Socialist Utopia will forever reanimate and once again repeat its beautiful story of a wonderful life to gullible dreamers who imagine a world in which all their wants and needs are provided with little or no sacrifice.

These eager believers are overwhelmingly the poor, society's losers, the inexperienced young, and the wealthy elitists whose fortunes came too easy and early in life.

 

[Empirica]

Define "overpopulation". Too many people speaking spanish at the supermarket where you shop?

"Speaking Spanish"?! Seriously Lafayette?! You're lowering the bar to a "racist" argument?!

My definition is: When the number of people increases to a level that degrades the quality of life in the US.

And don't ask me how many is too many because when we reach the point of "degradation", it's way too late to fix.

So the only solution is to begin a drastic reduction in immigration/refugee numbers immediately if not sooner!

Why do these people want to come to the US? Yes, for a job that will sustain them.

Why can't their own countries provide them the necessary jobs? THAT IS THE KEY QUESTION.

I don't see how any of this is pertinent to the subject of "US overpopulation".

Scientists are paid to be interested in "subjects" within which they have a certain knowledge.

So, it is no wonder that they pronounce when they feel they have a cogent point-of-view to share with the general public. Typically, their POV is interesting even even if one disagrees with it.

That is called "debate" and it usually works to stimulate an exchange (except when some are reduced to one-liner sarcasm as a rebuttal) ...

You either agree with the POV of the scientists or you don't.

But if you don't, you should have some very good reasons which you can validate.

 

[jamesrage]

Mahatma Gandhi: "Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's needs, but not for every man's greed"
Top 20 Most Inspiring Mahatma Gandhi Quotes of All Time

Pew Research Center: "Today’s scientists are more likely than the general American public to be concerned about population growth"
Scientists more worried than public about world?s growing population | Pew Research Center

What say you!

Wars, diseases, and advancement in farming and other food production, advancements in seawater desalination facilities and other technologies will void the concerns of overpopulation.

 

[Mustachio]

The human lifespan is increasing with every new medical breakthrough while large scale epidemics appear to be under control for the most part and the threat of global thermal-nuclear war is hardly a threat due to the realization of mutual assured destruction.

A declining birth rate could slow the threat of over-population but would only delay the inevitable; unless of course the planet gets hit by some global sterilization pandemic.

How can anybody believe overpopulation is not a threat? It may be a few generations away; but it absolutely is real.

Watch the UK show "Utopia." It's perfect for you. A more direct piece is a Masters of Horror episode called "The Screwfly Solution," which is actually based on a novel(?) from 1977. You'd enjoy both, especially Utopia, which actually portrays your point of view as not 100% evil and insane.

Unless you only care about the United States and want to shield us from an otherwise-global catastrophe stemming from overpopulation. Which would make you a sociopath.

 

[Lafayette]

And don't ask me how many is too many because when we reach the point of "degradation", it's way too late to fix.

Define "degradation" before using the term!

Degradation in Healthcare, for instance, happens because the US has a generalized private-based healthcare service that charges outrageous prices covered by high-cost insurance.

Which most of your "migrants" cannot afford. Neither can US-born (non-migrants) afford it, for that matter. So the problem of insufficient high-cost healthcare needs fixing generally in the US (and by the Federal government), and not just because of migrants!

PS: An immigrant is someone who assumes the nationality of another country. Till then, they are migrants.

So the only solution is to begin a drastic reduction in immigration/refugee numbers immediately if not sooner!

I agree that no non-American should enter the country without a legal document (called a passport) obtained before-hand and who presents the valid migration-document upon entry. That rule is applicable in most nations on earth because of international agreements made a long, long time ago.

And if they do not have such a document, whoever hires them should be fined severely ...

 

[Lafayette]

The human lifespan is increasing with every new medical breakthrough while large scale epidemics appear to be under control for the most part and the threat of global thermal-nuclear war is hardly a threat due to the realization of mutual assured destruction.

No, it isn't in the US. In fact, it is diminishing for Americans in comparison to other countries with decent National Healthcare Services. See infographic here.

Will you get your information straight before blathering-in-a-blog ... !

 

[Lafayette]

Wow Lafayette; all this sounds very much like the words of a devout follower of Karl Marx?!

Your ignorance of the rudiments of a Social Democracy is showing. (Note the words "capitalist mixed economy" as an integral part of its definition!)

Get your damn facts straight BEFORE you print the usual nonsensical aspersions/sarcasm of the Rabid-Right that have no basis whatsoever in factual evidence ... !

Note also that more than 500 million individuals in the EU have adopted prudent National Healthcare, whilst the US have barely half their population (of 320 million) covered at much higher-cost private healthcare insurance.

 

[LosAngelesAngel]

~ Sure . Especially being the intelligence level is dropping with each generation and the more educated western civilization is choosing not to procreate while the impoverished uneducated population increases.
Good thing global roast & toast is coming soon to wipe a lot of us out before we run out of room ! :applaud:fueltofir

 

[Waddy]

We already consume 1.5 times the resources the planet can sustainably support. Over population is more dangerous than CO2. Sadly, our prosperity is dependent on growth. It isn't relevant that global population may level off, we are past that tipping point. Several other posters have mentioned most of these same facts, and there is no getting around them.

 

[distraff]

Mahatma Gandhi: "Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's needs, but not for every man's greed"
Top 20 Most Inspiring Mahatma Gandhi Quotes of All Time

Pew Research Center: "Today’s scientists are more likely than the general American public to be concerned about population growth"
Scientists more worried than public about world?s growing population | Pew Research Center

What say you!

I've been to China where there is major overpopulation. Civilization doesn't end but it does result in a large underclass with a lot of competition to get what we in the west take for granted.

 

[calamity]

It depends on where you live. For the most part, it’s already a problem everywhere except the US and Canada. Too many people, not enough stuff, too much garbage.