Are We Knowingly Living a Lie?

[BaehrTKD]

Read the research and you'll see why Birth rate matters.

You're looking at "are we growing or shrinking"?
I'm looking at: "how many of us are there"?

A small birth rate doesn't matter if nobody dies. Also, 8 billion grows faster than 1 billion with the same birth rate.

"We're using up (and/or destroying) natural resources faster than nature can replenish them.": To begin with this has nothing to with population and everything to do about greed and money. Reducing the population won't stop these resources from being exploited in harmful ways. As a matter of fact the resources that you are describing are often in areas where the human population is significantly smaller.

Bigger population = more resources needed to keep it going. Those resources have to come from somewhere.

Also, bigger population = more resources being extracted. You need people to exploit those resources.

"We're also killing off just about every other animal species in the process by taking their habitat for our own.": This ignores a lot of things that occur like " The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been successful in preventing extinction for 99 percent of the species that are listed as endangered or threatened 1." and things like

"Another way in which humanity is saving animals is through the creation of wildlife sanctuaries and national parks. These protected areas provide a safe haven for animals to live and thrive without the threat of human interference 2"

We're creating zoos and parks, but that is just a fraction of the original land those animals had before we got here.

As far as people needing space apart from other humans.. That's also not true. Humans are not rats, so I don't know why you would compare the our socialization to rats. Here's how much humans like their space.

1. We crowd and pack ourselves into sporting events.
2. We crowd and pack ourselves into holiday events.
3. We crowd and pack ourselves into restaurants
4. We crowd and pack ourselves into entertainment complexes (Movies, Casinos, Amusement parks, Night Clubs, Beaches, Concerts, vacations. etc.)
5. We crowd and pack ourselves into schools and colleges.
6. Some of us crowd and pack ourselves into work spaces, weddings, and birthdays. and religious events)

Those are all short term events, not permanent things. Others are unavoidable and people are not doing it by choice (#5). Getting an education means being in a crowded school. Can't avoid it.

My bet is the smaller the population the easier it is for warlords to take over. I used to be on the front line of an effort to life enrichment programs to one of the most dangerous areas in Baltimore City. Population was clearly not the reason why people were killing each other.

You can't look at it in isolation. One city like Baltimore is not representative of the world. Think big picture.

The general trend is that people get angry when they can't get away from the hassles and headaches of other people. (On the road, in apartment buildings, bad neighbours, etc.)

 

[BaehrTKD]

That is such grim picture you paint and yet so familiar

How would it be grim? It's heaven on earth. People pay MILLIONS of dollars to have that lifestyle today.

I read your initial post and I agree with most of what you said. However, people still aren't making the connection between our population and all of the problems they identify. (Can't blame them really. The media has been told not to talk about this issue because it's "bad for business".)

Everything else (electric cars, recycling, meat, etc.) is a red herring designed to distract people from the root cause of the problem.

So here's my prediction:

• Electric cars will be made mandatory
• Meat will get banned
• Recycling will be mandatory
• Paper will be eliminated

... and after all that is done, the following will happen:

• Population will increase
• Pollution will increase
• Waste will increase
• Electricity consumption will increase (buy shares of electric companies if you haven't already)
• More natural resources will be destroyed to meet demands

In other words, all of your efforts will be in vain. All of your lifestyle alterations will have no impact whatsoever other than allowing the human population to be bigger than it currently is.

 

[Gyakuto]

I agree that overall global population increase is the issue: too many people, insufficient resources to service them.

Why is population increasing? Who is encouraging people to have children? What is their motivation given the ’insufficient resources’ part of the equation?

 

[Gyakuto]

Not sure how you got this meaning. Let me clarify. In short if there has to be various checks and balances, and redundancies in plan to make it more difficult to do evil things. If you don't do things like this then people will have no resistance against the bad things they would do. This is why I don't mind laws and regulations. It defines what's going to be allowed and what isn't. It's the only way you can hold someone accountable.


If you do some research on this you will see that this is a more effective way than creating a policy to force people to have fewer or no kids. Policies such as that will bring more problems than solve. China learned this the hard way.

The environment in general does a good job in managing the populations. You may not like how it does it, but it works in a way that causes fewer issues.

I recommend doing a google search about "fewer women are having babies"

May I attempt to distill your overall thesis into a succinct statement since I think it’s being lost in minutiae. Please correct it if I am in error.

You believe, that the ‘world’ is able to handle it’s population changes (you don’t believe global population is increasing) and in a ‘Gaia Hypothesis’/homeostatic sort of way, it will adjust things to regulate everything to keep conditions favourable to humans and life in general? We needn’t worry, we should carry on living our lives as we are and we needn’t do anything particularly radical to intervene.

Is that about right @JowGaWolf?

 

[BaehrTKD]

I agree that overall global population increase is the issue: too many people, insufficient resources to service them.

Why is population increasing? Who is encouraging people to have children? What is their motivation given the ’insufficient resources’ part of the equation?

The answer is money.

We have essentially off-shored baby production. India and China do it fast and cheap, and then export people to the rest of the world.

The local governments avoid the burden of child care and the education costs. They get working age citizens for free.

Look at the issue at the US southern border. Notice that there hasn't been any desire from government to close the border? Who benefits from all those people coming here? Large companies do. They just doubled their workforce and lowered their salaries. The government does (more taxes being paid). You and I don't benefit however. You and I have to give something up to allow them to come. We have to give up our land. We have to give up affordable housing and pay more to live. We have to pay more for food. etc....

 

[JowGaWolf]

May I attempt to distill your overall thesis into a succinct statement since I think it’s being lost in minutiae. Please correct it if I am in error.

You believe, that the ‘world’ is able to handle it’s population changes (you don’t believe global population is increasing) and in a ‘Gaia Hypothesis’/homeostatic sort of way, it will adjust things to regulate everything to keep conditions favourable to humans and life in general? We needn’t worry, we should carry on living our lives as we are and we needn’t do anything particularly radical to intervene.

Is that about right @JowGaWolf?

It's not what I believe. It's what's the data is showing. The data is showing that population is growth is slowing down.
Article date:2020
"A major new study published in the Lancet medical journal suggests falling fertility rates mean nearly every country could have shrinking populations by the end of the century, and warns of a "jaw-dropping" impact on societies." Source:

Seven countries with big (and small) population problems

A look at seven countries facing dramatic population changes - and how they are tackling the problem.

www.bbc.com

According to the article above "Countries need a fertility rate of about 2.1 births to maintain existing population sizes."

Multiple sources and research have similar forecasts.. It's not about what I believe, it's about what the data is showing.

You believe, that the ‘world’ is able to handle it’s population changes

Yes I believe that there are many things in this world that kill humans which has the effect of decreasing the population dependent on the birth rate. There is only one way to increase the population but many ways to decrease it. "If the water is flowing out faster than the water coming in, then the water level will drop." If the rate of dying is faster than the rate of birth then the population will drop. Pandemics, war, old age. According to the article 35% of Japans population is approaching 100 which means they are expecting to have a large population drop in the next few years. Those deaths on top of other causes of death will contribute to the decline.

According to the research, People are having fewer children and are having those children at a much older age. If the world is sustaining the population now, then it only makes sense that it will sustain the population with the forecast being a decline in population. This and advances in natural resource management allows people humans to do more with fewer resources.

and in a ‘Gaia Hypothesis’/homeostatic sort of way, it will adjust things to regulate everything to keep conditions favourable to humans and life in general?

Nature always seeks balance. It may not be the balance that people like but it's a balance. That helps to make life possible. What I understand is not the Gaia Hypothesis . The Gaia Hypothesis makes an assumption that everything is working on behave of the biosphere. My understanding is that you'll contribute to the biosphere even if you don't want to. If you drop food on the ground than some other organism will make use of it. If you poison the ground, then people die from that, the more people that die from it the fewer people there will be, either until no people exist or until people learn not to poison the ground. A good example of this is would be the Dust Bowl in the 1930's It did not make things favorable to Humans. The concept that but it drove humans out and the area recovered because human learned how to use better farming practices.

We needn’t worry, we should carry on living our lives as we are and we needn’t do anything particularly radical to intervene.

I have never said that we don't need to worry. You will not find that statement in any of my posts. None of my posts say this nor does it suggest it. As a matter of fact, I specifically highlight the dangers of trying to make changes to the environment or the population without understanding the big picture of how things are connected. People end up doing a knee jerk reaction and as a result causes a change that brings more problems than good.


Just a bit of information. I used to work at the Gwinnett Environmental Heritage Center, doing environmental tours and creating environmental base education program for the Gwinnett County school system and the general public,

More information about where I used to work.

Gwinnett Environmental & Heritage Center - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Gyakuto]

The answer is money.

We have essentially off-shored baby production. India and China do it fast and cheap, and then export people to the rest of the world.

The local governments avoid the burden of child care and the education costs. They get working age citizens for free.

Look at the issue at the US southern border. Notice that there hasn't been any desire from government to close the border? Who benefits from all those people coming here? Large companies do. They just doubled their workforce and lowered their salaries. The government does (more taxes being paid). You and I don't benefit however. You and I have to give something up to allow them to come. We have to give up our land. We have to give up affordable housing and pay more to live. We have to pay more for food. etc....

I thought various religious orders were going to be cited.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Why is population increasing? Who is encouraging people to have children? What is their motivation given the ’insufficient resources’ part of the equation?

Are you guys even trying to research this stuff?

The population of developing countries has been increasing rapidly over the past few decades. According to the United Nations, the world’s population growth has become increasingly concentrated in developing countries, with almost all the growth happening in developing economies, mainly in Asia and Oceania and Africa1. The reasons for this growth include early marriages among the youth, reduced civil wars and natural calamities, lack of availability and knowledge of contraception and family planning, high infant mortality rates, so parents have more children in the hope that some survive2, and the persistence of high levels of fertility in many countries3. Faster population growth in developing countries makes addressing the climate emergency all the more urgent1. While fast population growth in developing countries presents many challenges, it can also be a source of new economic opportunities1.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Look at the issue at the US southern border. Notice that there hasn't been any desire from government to close the border? Who benefits from all those people coming here? Large companies do. They just doubled their workforce and lowered their salaries. The government does (more taxes being paid). You and I don't benefit however. You and I have to give something up to allow them to come. We have to give up our land. We have to give up affordable housing and pay more to live. We have to pay more for food. etc....

This explains everything now. This and the fact that you aren't even bothering to research the things that you have an interest in.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

NOTICE TO ALL:

Thread locked pending staff review of political discussion after reminder.

___________
Gerry Seymour
MT Moderator
@Gerry Seymour