Controlling the Population Bubble

[CaptainDangerfield]

Recently I visited the Adelaide Zoo and was surprised by the number of animals facing extinction. In one of the areas there was a population clock which increased by 2-3 people every second and another clock whick showed natural habitat reducing every second.

With the earths population approaching 6.9 Billion and with oil, fresh water and native/agricultural land in decline is there anything that can be done? I can think of a few rather extreme ways to reduce or maintain the current population but a government would be voting themselves out of office if they even mentioned them.

For mine the next 10 years will very important for our future if we don't do something about it now then it maybe too late to do something about it in the future. Is it already too late?

Thoughts


BTW I am a Labor voter who has lost all faith and confidence in the party mainly due to their obssession with population growth. A 50% population increase in the next 20 years, surely they are joking.

 

[NTRabbit]

The places in the world where population will increase the most in the next decades are beyond control. Our population increase "goals", or limits if you think that way, are quite modest in comparison.

There are three options when it comes to reducing population in a given area - conflict, disease, or colonisation. In other words, a hard reduction, or a soft reduction by sending it somewhere else.

The alternative is to increase the rate of technological advancement in the fields of energy, waste reduction and processing, fresh water filtration, and materials research to facilitate the creation of increasingly dense, and tall, urban environments. Unfortunately this country refuses to turn away from increasing urban sprawl because of the deluded obsession with the "great Australian dream".

 

[rayven]

Captain dangerfield,

If you seek answers to your question you probably will find it if you study animals this planet has seen make plague porportions previously, the paragraph will be the same but the sentances different.

Some clued on people who predicted decades ago where we would be at reckon we have past the point of no return. Greenpeace use diesel powered boats to harrass Japanese whalers in the southern ocean for a political purpose(generates big donations, good publicty) in a mass waste of a recource, if we keep wasting recources on something as trivial as that in the bigger picture, we won't have a enviorement let alone whales.
Our goverment uses recource guzzling 4wds in its traffic section of SAPOL chasing road users who break the law in urban enviorements, yet put on our bills that we have to pay more for our utilities because of climate change(they believe energy wastage is the biggest single contributer to climate change).

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Unless we can limit population growth all the energy saving strategies in the world will amount to zero. That's one of the reasons I don't believe the Labor party, and the Greens for that matter, actually give a damn about the environment. How can a goverment champion environmental strategies like conserving water, driving to work etc when they want to increase the countries population by 50%. Which will have a bigger impact on the environment.

This all leads me back to my original question, how do we control the population buble :

1) Drastically limit food, energy, water consumption in the 1st World? I watched a doco recently where it stated for the next 100 years the earth could support a population of 16-18 Billion people if we all consumed the same as the average Indian.Whereas the world could only support 1.5-2 Billion people for the next 100 years if we consume the same as the average American.

2) Birth control - One child families

3) Age restriction ie 75 years of age. Good luck with that. All abit sc-fi I know but who knows in 50 years if we keep going like we are, desperate times, desperate measures.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

The places in the world where population will increase the most in the next decades are beyond control. Our population increase "goals", or limits if you think that way, are quite modest in comparison.

There are three options when it comes to reducing population in a given area - conflict, disease, or colonisation. In other words, a hard reduction, or a soft reduction by sending it somewhere else.

The alternative is to increase the rate of technological advancement in the fields of energy, waste reduction and processing, fresh water filtration, and materials research to facilitate the creation of increasingly dense, and tall, urban environments. Unfortunately this country refuses to turn away from increasing urban sprawl because of the deluded obsession with the "great Australian dream".

I believe the majority of Australians don't want to see the Urban Sprawl increased, unfortunately our goverments don't feel the same way.

 

[NTRabbit]

I believe the majority of Australians don't want to see the Urban Sprawl increased, unfortunately our goverments don't feel the same way.

If the market wasn't there for it, the developers wouldn't spend their time and money bribing new land releases ever further north and south out of the relevant levels of government.

It's easy to point the finger at corrupt governments and land developers, but they don't do it because the houses stay empty, do they?

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

If the market wasn't there for it, the developers wouldn't spend their time and money bribing new land releases ever further north and south out of the relevant levels of government.

It's easy to point the finger at corrupt governments and land developers, but they don't do it because the houses stay empty, do they?

Who controls the annual national migrant intake of approximately 260,000, you, I or the government?? I would have thought the government is 99% responsible for urban sprawl. Obviously we pay a small part but a very small part. If you stop population growth now then you put a halt to urban spawl and can therefore conserve much needed agricultural and native land.

 

[rayven]

Unless we can limit population growth all the energy saving strategies in the world will amount to zero.

Our specie's requirement for energy has not peaked yet, our population is heading for about 9 billion, thats an increase of 2 billion from now (some rekon 2 billion is the absolute max this planet can sustain full term)

That's one of the reasons I don't believe the Labor party, and the Greens for that matter, actually give a damn about the environment.

Oh they know whats going on, they just operate in a system that can't cope with humans needing to be reigned in! They are confined to a bunch of rules, abit like a full forward being legislated against marking.
Money and power rules in politics , two things that never have gotten on with animals and eco sytems and enviorements!

How can a goverment champion environmental strategies like conserving water, driving to work etc when they want to increase the countries population by 50%.

For a goverment to get a decent credit rating, they need to a have a buisness plan, living sustinable and curbing energy use (which curbs taxes collected) does not offer creditors very much confidence in seeing that there loans can be repaid, thus the goverment has to show where they are going to be able to pay back the loan.
It is that simple. ( was a good SBS doco on the expansion of 7/11 stores in america and relates to this principle)

Which will have a bigger impact on the environment

Last time this world entered global warming it was to combat an ice age(no rain,no trees, no way of cleansing c02), that lead to the sought of eco systems we have/had, this time we have those eco systems already but are entering global warming because we humans used to much c02 to quickly, this could go anywhere as there is no precedent, no evidence of global warming in these conditions we have now.

This all leads me back to my original question, how do we control the population buble

Plenty of ways to do it, just no will power.Probably a good dictator or two is required!

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Plenty of ways to do it, just no will power.Probably a good dictator or two is required!

Thats the thing, there are plenty of ways to do it but they are all are quite extreme and any government that chose to implement would be voted out of office. That being the case, then it's more our fault than our governments.

 

[rayven]

Thats the thing, there are plenty of ways to do it but they are all are quite extreme and any government that chose to implement would be voted out of office. That being the case, then it's more our fault than our governments.

No man has any less liberty or freedom than the man who thinks he is free

A democracy is only a democracy if its citizens are informed

Some of the things touched on in this thread very few actualy are aware of, even are unaware how to acess this information. We have a choice of voting for arthur or martha only, we live in a society that labels anyone different, that punishes its citizens rather than educates them. Educated citizens make educated decisions, makes people in power more likely to be accountable for thier actions.The easier, the cheaper the lifestyle/standard of living, the more time for educating yourself, more time for standing up for your rights, your childrens rights, your neigbours rights, more time to get to know them, more likely to question goverments,orginizations,groups, media.


Our goverments pay us to have children, its called the baby bonus, we also get tax incentives, have quite significant paranting payments and single parent pensions and now paid maternity leave, we are being encouraged to multiply.
Go to munno para,Norlunga, gawler, kapunda, port pirie or whyalla and have a look at some of the families multiplying there relying on centerlink. Whats really cruel is that various charitable orginizations are then funded by our goverments to aid these people further (not just almost free child care) but with social support, job search providers (that basicaly just keep them inside the requirements to recieve benifites), food vouchers and clothing and such. It really is a terrible situation. Then theres SAHT, WHA and others providing em roofs.

How confusing must this be? we read about the chinese and some europeans seeking to curb the population because of various over population issues, but then our goverments push us to breed as fast as we can?

 

[rayven]

This pretty well sums up our goverments role in overpopulation.

http://www.familyassist.gov.au/payments/family-assistance-payments/baby-bonus/

You'll find all the links you need on that page to educate yourself on all the payments available to whoever breeds.

They say change starts from the top!

 

[smoovy]

The whole of the world's economy is based on ever increasing growth. You don't have to be too clever to work out that eventually, at some point, growth cannot be sustained any longer. Unless of course we somehow manage to populate another planet.

Capitalism as an ideology has a shelf life. There needs to be another way to prosper without growth. If you can think of it, give Dick Smith a call and he will give you $1M

http://www.dicksmithpopulation.com.au/

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

The whole of the world's economy is based on ever increasing growth. You don't have to be too clever to work out that eventually, at some point, growth cannot be sustained any longer. Unless of course we somehow manage to populate another planet.

Capitalism as an ideology has a shelf life. There needs to be another way to prosper without growth. If you can think of it, give Dick Smith a call and he will give you $1M

http://www.dicksmithpopulation.com.au/

Good on Dickie, one of the few in the public eye who is couragous enough to state the obvious. I saw him on that horrible show the "7pm Project" and it was almost like they were trying to imply he was racist. It always suprises me when the lefties shout racism when there is talk about limiting immigration yet they are supposedly the champions of the enviroment. You can't have both.

 

[Nardz]

For a doomsday prediction indicator, one needs only look as far as Tunisia, Algeria & Egypt. All riots about food prices, wanting governments to subsidise food.(and ultimately lead to the toppling of the 20+ year reign of the Tunisian dictator/president) The prime minister of Pakistan recently had to accept petrol and food subsidsing programs in order to maintain government. With population increases, even the slighest downturn in the economy for the developing world could be a disaster. Unfortunately there is no solution. Food crisis's are going to become more common.

Just makes you appreciate the little world we have here in Adelaide.

the goings on in egypt has absolutely nothing to do with population growth, and more to do with the corrupt regime that has been in power for 29 years...

 

[Peter Doherty]

Isn't this a 'New World Order' thing?? They want to drastically reduce population.

 

[Nardz]

Nardz im not going to claim to be a foreign relations expert, but the troubles in Africa/middle east have a direct link to the food crisis.


Why is it that only now we are seeing riots against 20+ year dictatorships. The social unrest caused by higher food prices has caused the resentment and frustration with the governments to spill over.


In september 2010 the UN warned that Egypt was facing a food crisis

egypt has been facing a food crisis for most of the past 20 years. it is not caused by overpopulation, it is caused by gross mismanagement. the government has been corrupt for longer than most can remember. the wealth is spread amongst those already wealthy, with little or no investment in the rest of the population. egypt barely has a middle class, it's the filthy rich, the rich, then the dirt poor.

why is this happening now? consider it like a dormant volcano.. the lava is always there.. its just a matter of time before it erupts. it's likely that they've seen what happened in tunisia and found inspiration. perhaps also the wikileaks stuff that has come out in recent times has opened a few eyes as to what their government is actually up to and aggravated people even more..

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Isn't this a 'New World Order' thing?? They want to drastically reduce population.

It seems someone forgot to tell the Labor party this.

 

[KUNG FU]

I think you are confusing way too many issues into one.

Urban sprawl, population control, resource depletion and flora & fauna extinction are different issues. Admittedly there definite is overlap, but this kind of thinking leads to 'golden bullet' solutions which often ignore the complexity of the issues

I actually believe in increasing Australia's population largely through predominantly skilled immigration. I disagree with the baby bonus and family tax benefit, but the maternity leave scheme is commendable because there is commensurate support for the child rather than a mere incentive to procreate. The economic imperative for a stable population growth is obvious - there are already considerable gaps in our job market, especially in the service sector as our population ages. And I don't think that a growing economy & national population precipitates more environmental damage. On the contrary, we are better equipped to manage the environment and make meaningful change. We just choose not to. There's plenty of space, we just need to plan better cities and more satellite cities. For a continental nation, we seem to be way too densely populated into just 5 cities. On the other hand, within these cities there has been far too much opposition to high density living, especially as demographically we are living in smaller groups than ever before - too many single Gen Yers or baby boomers living an hour out of the CBD with minimal public transport on a quarter acre block, when they should be living in units and apartments that councils relentlessly disapprove of. Also, Australia have plenty of food and energy resources. Water is an issue admittedly, but the technology is not beyond us, it just requires some clever infrastructure - my parents place is 100% self-sufficient and it only cost about 4 grand outlay.

On the other hand, there is definitely a need for humanity to reduce its impact of the Earth - but that's a whole other can of worms.

 

[KUNG FU]

There was an excellent program on ABC radio this afternoon, better articulating the ideas I touched on.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bydesign/stories/2011/3123445.htm

I also found this article by the interviewee in that program, if you're into words rather than sounds

http://www.australiandesignreview.com/response/20648-The-Density-Debate-Adam-Haddow