Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Other
  3. General Discussion

Are there too many people on earth?

posted
Total Posts
28
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii
Just to remind you that we were ~2 billions on earth in 1924, which means that the population has more than quadrupled during these 100 years. If it keeps going, we will be more than 12 billions in 2124, so it would means that, for example, the Indian and Chinese populations will be overcrowded and that immigration will be an integral part of our lives to fill areas with fewer people.

But haven't we already reached the limit of people we can accommodate on earth?
Last edited by anaxii , edited 2 times in total.
Dementedjet
236 posts
Joined December 2020
Dementedjet
I guess the limit has not yet been reached so this generation would still be good for a few decades

The problem is that if I told my plan to solve overpopulation, I would be called a 'bad person'

The plan is effective tho
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii

jrjin228 wrote:

I guess the limit has not yet been reached so this generation would still be good for a few decades

The problem is that if I told my plan to solve overpopulation, I would be called a 'bad person'

The plan is effective tho
A World War III, perhaps?
Dementedjet
236 posts
Joined December 2020
Dementedjet

Anaxii wrote:

jrjin228 wrote:

I guess the limit has not yet been reached so this generation would still be good for a few decades

The problem is that if I told my plan to solve overpopulation, I would be called a 'bad person'

The plan is effective tho
A World War III, perhaps?
More like feeding pitbulls named "Cupcake"
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii

jrjin228 wrote:

Anaxii wrote:

jrjin228 wrote:

I guess the limit has not yet been reached so this generation would still be good for a few decades

The problem is that if I told my plan to solve overpopulation, I would be called a 'bad person'

The plan is effective tho
A World War III, perhaps?
More like feeding pitbulls named "Cupcake"
...Oh ☠️☠️☠️
Ryu Sei
2,898 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei
Yes and no. Yes, if you look at some countries where population density is really high. No, if you look the overall average of population density.
Patatitta
1,244 posts
Joined February 2020
Patatitta
what
emajakolic
262 posts
Joined February 2023
emajakolic
I have no idea lol
Nanofranne
692 posts
Joined May 2018
Nanofranne
It's like asking ants a question are there too many ants on earth.

no idea
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii
The answers are not that deep hmmmmmmm
Rezq Gokou
1,396 posts
Joined April 2022
Rezq Gokou
no, you have more posts than the amount of people on Earth
Last edited by Rezq Gokou , edited 1 time in total.
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii

Rezq wrote:

no, you have more posts than the amount of people on Earth
Yeah we are only 9k on Earth of course
UPR
722 posts
Joined October 2018
UPR
No there aren't, there are too many people in specific areas, but not globally. Like everytime I hear this I remember the fact that 2/3rds of the US alone is not inhabited by huge population centres.
Kaaruumii
843 posts
Joined November 2021
Kaaruumii

Nanofranne wrote:

It's like asking ants a question are there too many ants on earth.

no idea
one ant is too many
Kobold84
Global Moderator
1,250 posts
Joined September 2013
Kobold84
Not really, the Malthus' theory was proved to be incorrect times and times again. The population growth rates are slowing down everywhere, yes even in African countries, so even though you see an overall population increase in these countries, its tempo is slowing down and is not going up any time soon. Say, there used to be 100 (random number) population surplus (more babies than dead people) each day in 2000. Then this number went down to 90, then to 80, etc. Now that it's 10, the population is increasing, sure, however not by much. And as the technology advances in Africa, it will be decaying all the same. European, American and some Asian countries have already passed this stage long time ago, and you see a declining birthrate. Same thing is going to happen in Africa.

And China and India? They have decaying population growth rates since like 90s. Unless we get another technological leap, the population is not going to change that much in 100 years. And if the leap does happen, then that means our technology will be on the level to support this population number, which is also nothing to worry about.
UPR
722 posts
Joined October 2018
UPR

Kobold84 wrote:

Not really, the Malthus' theory was proved to be incorrect times and times again. The population growth rates are slowing down everywhere, yes even in African countries, so even though you see an overall population increase in these countries, its tempo is slowing down and is not going up any time soon. Say, there used to be 100 (random number) population surplus (more babies than dead people) each day in 2000. Then this number went down to 90, then to 80, etc. Now that it's 10, the population is increasing, sure, however not by much. And as the technology advances in Africa, it will be decaying all the same. European, American and some Asian countries have already passed this stage long time ago, and you see a declining birthrate. Same thing is going to happen in Africa.

And China and India? They have decaying population growth rates since like 90s. Unless we get another technological leap, the population is not going to change that much in 100 years. And if the leap does happen, then that means our technology will be on the level to support this population number, which is also nothing to worry about.
Kobold the scholar frfr
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii

Kobold84 wrote:

Not really, the Malthus' theory was proved to be incorrect times and times again. The population growth rates are slowing down everywhere, yes even in African countries, so even though you see an overall population increase in these countries, its tempo is slowing down and is not going up any time soon. Say, there used to be 100 (random number) population surplus (more babies than dead people) each day in 2000. Then this number went down to 90, then to 80, etc. Now that it's 10, the population is increasing, sure, however not by much. And as the technology advances in Africa, it will be decaying all the same. European, American and some Asian countries have already passed this stage long time ago, and you see a declining birthrate. Same thing is going to happen in Africa.

And China and India? They have decaying population growth rates since like 90s. Unless we get another technological leap, the population is not going to change that much in 100 years. And if the leap does happen, then that means our technology will be on the level to support this population number, which is also nothing to worry about.
So we are not too overcrowded yet, even though it looks like we're too much because of global inequalities
cyanideiscyan
64 posts
Joined January 2023
cyanideiscyan
even if a technology leap does happen, would it even alter the population growth rate by much? since the mortality rate is already very low
ig if life expectancy goes up by a significant amount
Reyalp51
962 posts
Joined April 2021
Reyalp51
We will be stagnated in 10 billion so who cares
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii

Reyalp51 wrote:

We will be stagnated in 10 billion so who cares
Who said that?
cyanideiscyan
64 posts
Joined January 2023
cyanideiscyan

Anaxii wrote:

Reyalp51 wrote:

We will be stagnated in 10 billion so who cares
Who said that?
UN projected human population to stagnate at 10.4 billion in 2080.
It really depends on the research, some says it will stagnate at like 9 billion in 2050 ish while some say it will do so past 2100 with 13 billion people or so. There are way too many factoe to take into account here so just get the bracket i guess.

edit: link https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/wpp2022_summary_of_results.pdf
Last edited by cyanideiscyan , edited 1 time in total.
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii

cyanideiscyan wrote:

Anaxii wrote:

Reyalp51 wrote:

We will be stagnated in 10 billion so who cares
Who said that?
UN projected human population to stagnate at 10.4 billion in 2080.
It really depends on the research, some says it will stagnate at like 9 billion in 2050 ish while some say it will do so past 2100 with 13 billion people or so. There are way too many factoe to take into account here so just get the bracket i guess.

edit: link https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/wpp2022_summary_of_results.pdf
Thx for the source!

It's crazy that we don't really have a clear source of what's going to happen a hundred years from now
cyanideiscyan
64 posts
Joined January 2023
cyanideiscyan

Anaxii wrote:

cyanideiscyan wrote:

Anaxii wrote:

Reyalp51 wrote:

We will be stagnated in 10 billion so who cares
Who said that?
UN projected human population to stagnate at 10.4 billion in 2080.
It really depends on the research, some says it will stagnate at like 9 billion in 2050 ish while some say it will do so past 2100 with 13 billion people or so. There are way too many factoe to take into account here so just get the bracket i guess.

edit: link https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/wpp2022_summary_of_results.pdf
Thx for the source!

It's crazy that we don't really have a clear source of what's going to happen a hundred years from now
i can't even see what i'm doing in 2 years lol
anaxii
15,000 posts
Joined December 2022
Topic Starter
anaxii

cyanideiscyan wrote:

Anaxii wrote:

cyanideiscyan wrote:

Anaxii wrote:

Reyalp51 wrote:

We will be stagnated in 10 billion so who cares
Who said that?
UN projected human population to stagnate at 10.4 billion in 2080.
It really depends on the research, some says it will stagnate at like 9 billion in 2050 ish while some say it will do so past 2100 with 13 billion people or so. There are way too many factoe to take into account here so just get the bracket i guess.

edit: link https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/wpp2022_summary_of_results.pdf
Thx for the source!

It's crazy that we don't really have a clear source of what's going to happen a hundred years from now
i can't even see what i'm doing in 2 years lol
Same XD
Jangsoodlor
Jangsoodlor

Anaxii wrote:

So we are not too overcrowded yet, even though it looks like we're too much because of global inequalities
Inequalities nowadays is more about wealth concentration. I.e., "The rich got richer but the poor got poorer, and it's harder for the poor to get richer". As of now we produced more food than we could eat.
Last edited by Jangsoodlor , edited 3 times in total.
StudioGuma
42 posts
Joined September 2023
StudioGuma
“Overpopulation” is a buzzword used to, at worst, justify ecofascism. The real problem is the largest portion of resources being owned by the smallest portion of people.
Last edited by StudioGuma , edited 2 times in total.
Koga Tomoe
21 posts
Joined November 2022
Koga Tomoe
Overpopulation in some countries so maybe
m i g i
67 posts
Joined November 2019
m i g i
I believe so but who knows \o/
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 28